The manufacturer could have prevented it by supplying a vehicle capable of avoiding collisions. I certainly understand the owner/operator having some form of l

The manufacturer could have prevented it by supplying a vehicle capable of avoiding collisions. I certainly understand the owner/operator having some form of liability insurance based on usage, but an at-fault collision shouldn't be the responsibility of the owner or operator, nor should it affect their rates. That fault lies entirely with the manufacturer, or maybe eventually the subsystem supplier. Thinking about it, I'd not be terribly surprised if it plays out with manufacturers successfully lobbying to avoid any liability, and insurance gets pooled among owners of specific Level 4 autonomy subsystems. Maybe the best we can hope for would be an equitable split of liability between the manufacturer (who controls the behavior) and owner (who controls the level of usage).