Self parking cars and the law
Discussion
Where does the law stand on the issue of cars that can park themselves? I forget who, but one car manufacturer is running an ad campaign at the moment with the strap line "Look, no hands".
I know that driverless cars will require a change in the law through the Road Traffic Act, but this is not quite the same. There is plenty of evidence of drivers being prosecuted for not being incontrol of their vehicle, like eating an apple for example, so if we were to park our cars with the "Look, no hands" option fitted, what would be the reaction of a passing policemen. Are any laws being broken? If so, are the manufacturers guilty of promoting an illegal act?
Over to you, PH lawyers.............
I know that driverless cars will require a change in the law through the Road Traffic Act, but this is not quite the same. There is plenty of evidence of drivers being prosecuted for not being incontrol of their vehicle, like eating an apple for example, so if we were to park our cars with the "Look, no hands" option fitted, what would be the reaction of a passing policemen. Are any laws being broken? If so, are the manufacturers guilty of promoting an illegal act?
Over to you, PH lawyers.............
The person sat in the drivers seat - is the driver, so responsible for anything the car might do. Don't see a self parking car accident as anything different from, say, splashing a pedestrian by driving through a puddle.
Well, that is my take, and I'd hope the courts will see it that way. Suppose the parking car hits a pedestrian, and the guilty party is the car manufacturer. So the pedestrian has to sue, say, Mercedes for an incident they had no control over. Not going to happen, is it?
Well, that is my take, and I'd hope the courts will see it that way. Suppose the parking car hits a pedestrian, and the guilty party is the car manufacturer. So the pedestrian has to sue, say, Mercedes for an incident they had no control over. Not going to happen, is it?
I'd have thought that something like a DWDCA charge would be in order. The driver has a responsibility to oversee the actions of the automated system and override it when necessary. No different to cruise control and running into the back of someone because you didn't touch the brake pedal.
Slidingpillar said:
Suppose the parking car hits a pedestrian, and the guilty party is the car manufacturer. So the pedestrian has to sue, say, Mercedes for an incident they had no control over. Not going to happen, is it?
Gun manufacturers in America have been sued, as the gun they built, was used to kill someone. I can see the same happening, if a pedestrian is killed, while the car is self parking.
Fully automotmus out of car self parking systems would fall under the same category as driver less cars. So not currently legal.
"App" based self parking where you still control the throttle and brake are no different conceptually to the current systems so you as the driver would be deemed to be in control. Anyway most of these systems have various safeguards that disable automatic movement if for example the parking sensors believe that the car is about to hit something.
"App" based self parking where you still control the throttle and brake are no different conceptually to the current systems so you as the driver would be deemed to be in control. Anyway most of these systems have various safeguards that disable automatic movement if for example the parking sensors believe that the car is about to hit something.
Slidingpillar said:
True enough, but they sue anyone in America. McDonalds for serving coffee that burns your legs? Kching!
If you look into that case properly, you might find that the lady was actually morally correct for taking the action she did.As for self parking cars, as has been said above, they only do the steering bit. Throttle and braking are still the responsibility of the driver.
Jimmyarm said:
If you look into that case properly, you might find that the lady was actually morally correct for taking the action she did.
As for self parking cars, as has been said above, they only do the steering bit. Throttle and braking are still the responsibility of the driver.
I looked at the case. It's daft. Hot coffee is hot.As for self parking cars, as has been said above, they only do the steering bit. Throttle and braking are still the responsibility of the driver.
Kawasicki said:
Jimmyarm said:
If you look into that case properly, you might find that the lady was actually morally correct for taking the action she did.
As for self parking cars, as has been said above, they only do the steering bit. Throttle and braking are still the responsibility of the driver.
I looked at the case. It's daft. Hot coffee is hot.As for self parking cars, as has been said above, they only do the steering bit. Throttle and braking are still the responsibility of the driver.
I went to a seminar, hosted by a major component supplier, about the benefits and limitations of all these semi-autonomous systems. So park assist, active cruise control, the thing that stops you wandering out of lanes etc. The car makers are acutely aware of the liability issue and is why all these systems currently require driver input and supervision. They are carefully designed so that liability still sits with the driver. All of these systems could be more autonomous than they are, but they are holding back for that reason, we were told.
They didn't cover what would happen in the future with autonomous vehicles, but based on what they said, I imagine there is lot of work being done to find a way to keep the liability with driver.
They didn't cover what would happen in the future with autonomous vehicles, but based on what they said, I imagine there is lot of work being done to find a way to keep the liability with driver.
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff