Regarding Autonomous Accidents

The advent of self-driving cars (AV cars) requires thoroughly examining accident liability. Potential faults of drivers, manufacturers' responsibilities, and software developers’ ethics will require a redefinition of obligations concerning legal, financial, ethical, and technical responsibilities. This seemingly straightforward question opens up a complex web of legal, ethical, and technical considerations that require meticulous examination.

Courts have historically adapted to novel product liability questions and are expected to do so for autonomous vehicles (Villasenor). In comparative negligence systems, determining fault involves evaluating the actions of all parties in an accident to allocate blame and affect compensation. In pure comparative negligence, each party’s compensation is reduced by their percentage of fault, allowing recovery even if they are up to 99% at fault. Modified comparative negligence systems, using either a 50% or 51% Bar Rule, set a threshold where a party must be less at fault than others combined to recover damages (McDuffey and Wilson).

For the case of AV cars, we need to determine the legal, financial, ethical, and technical aspects of liability when we calculate the “at fault” liability of each party involved. Liability for potential issues with autonomous vehicle technology may shift from the operator to the technology's manufacturer. Defining flaws in automated systems and determining liability is complicated due to the involvement of different stakeholders in the supply chain. Courts will likely face more cases based on software defects rather than traditional mechanical defects (Villasenor).

Driver:

Over 90% of driving accidents are due to human error. Removing human drivers should significantly reduce these accidents (Villasenor 15). In situations with significant risks, such as traffic, ethical considerations cannot be separated from moral and legal responsibilities (Nyholm and Smids). Current research stops with an abstract principle that only requires technology to protect human rights while lacking specific solutions for moral dilemmas and conflicts of interest.

Manufacturer:

The advancement of vehicle automation is anticipated to shift the responsibility for preventing accidents from the driver to the manufacturer. In the United States, product liability is governed by common law and Article 2 of the Uniform Commercial Code, which pertains to the sale of goods, as opposed to federal product liability law (Reynolds 269).

Software Developer:

Software product liability claims are usually rooted in strict liability, negligence, breach of warranty, or misrepresentation. Sometimes, these claims can combine more than one of these legal elements (Reynolds 269).

Under strict liability, manufacturers and sellers can be held legally responsible for harm caused by defective software, even if not negligent. Claims under U.S. common law and the Uniform Commercial Code may encompass strict liability, negligence, breach of warranty, or misrepresentation. Defendants can invoke defenses such as supervening events and the government contractor defense. Statutes of limitations necessitate the prompt filing of lawsuits following an injury (Reynolds 269). Specific state statutes safeguard original manufacturers from liability for defects resulting from third-party aftermarket modifications to autonomous vehicles, while others do not address liability issues (Villasenor 14).

In the near future, as autonomous vehicles become more prevalent, human oversight will continue to be necessary, leading to a shared liability scenario. Insurance companies will likely have to adapt by developing new products or adjusting existing policies to accommodate autonomous technology. This could mean that additional vehicle data will be needed to investigate accidents. The introduction of autonomous vehicles will undoubtedly shake up the relationships between insurers, claimants, drivers, and manufacturers, ultimately giving rise to the development of new insurance frameworks and regulations. We can expect that liability insurance will involve insurers seeking reimbursement from manufacturers through legal action or other measures after a claim is made.