3 ms·
You’re the lawyer. Is there case law to support this? I ask not to mean “citation required” but because I would be very interested to read it. I don’t know if
by zaroth 8y ago
You’re the lawyer. Is there case law to support this? I ask not to mean “citation required” but because I would be very interested to read it.
I don’t know if and how much Tesla can disclaim responsibility for the crash based on warnings written into the UI and user manual and TOS.
For example, I’m fairly certain that autopilot systems on boats do not absolve the Skipper of liability if a boat crashes, and suing a small craft autopilot systems manufacture for maintaining (or not maintaining) a set course into a collision would be laughable.
I would also say, if we can’t ship self-driving capabilities without some way of managing and constraining the inherent liability, we will miss out on saving 10s of thousands of lives just because we can not save all the lives.
- FireBeyond 8y agoAutopilot systems on (small) boats neither have, nor advertise, nor imply that they have any form of collision detection, let alone avoidance. Tesla on the other hand describes its system as being safer than human drivers at avoiding accidents.
- gamblor956 8y agoYes, just break open a 1L torts treatise and there are dozens of cases. The difference between autopilot on a boat and Tesla's Autopilot is a matter of agency/autonomy. Boat and plane autopilots mostly just go in a straight line--they make no decisions. Tesla's autopilot functions autonomously from the driver--and that, legally, makes all the difference, because it can make different decisions from what the driver would do. The driver still bears some responsibility for their failure to oversee and correct TA, but TA bears direct responsibility. The analysis would be different if TA was just a glorified cruise control or lane-keeping system.