2 ms·
Inevitably, one of the autonomous vehicle companies, eventually, will. Therefore letting the aggressive, reckless drivers build up a sense of immunity and exci
by sounds 6y ago
Inevitably, one of the autonomous vehicle companies, eventually, will.
Therefore letting the aggressive, reckless drivers build up a sense of immunity and excitement seems like a Sun Tsu move to me.
When the camera-covered car has its first day in court, it may be that all the cases are filed at once (by that company, and Waymo may not be the first to pull the trigger on the lawsuits).
Statute of limitations in California is a bit tricky, but just as a baseline, assume this Sun Tsu-esque company collects evidence for 5 years. Judges may actually look favorably on the company waiting to make sure their cases can be decided en masse. Of course, the media will be all over it.
- kortilla 6y agoThat doesn’t really make sense. The cases wouldn’t be able to be decided on in mass. The court would still need to review each incident individually so dumping them into the court system all at once is an asshole move.
- sounds 6y agoIt's not clear-cut, no, and I am not a lawyer, but mandatory authority (vs. persuasive authority) in California basically means that the plaintiff's lawyers could actually file all the cases at the same time. And then get a judge to view that as a favorable move, not asshole at all. (To be honest, I think any hostile move such as a lawsuit is an asshole move, so I think I'm agreeing with you?) They wouldn't need to claim the cases were grouped together, just that the inevitable appeal would be more likely to be found binding if the cases were all still being adjudicated. Or something like that. No court case is a slam-dunk.