Let's put it this way, no matter what we think in here, whether we want to trash the driver or Tesla.
The game is played in the courts, in front of a jury. Not a judge, a jury.
Juries sometimes sympathize with victims over corporations (like hello?) There will come a court case where, let's say the driver believed he was being mostly safe because Tesla's marketing led him to BELIEVE he was being reasonably safe.
I could see two lawsuits against a car company, one from the owner of the car that killed someone and one from the victim who got killed.
Attorneys are going to go after the big money pie wherever they think they can win and all they have to do is convince a jury (not a judge) that their plaintiff is the victim. From what I understand Tesla owners agree to arbitration (?) not sure how that would work.
I see the comments in here asking did the operator use the "tool correctly" ?
I think this is missing the point, how did the manufacturer of the "tool" market the product? Was it marketed in a way that obscured the fact that the car can not self drive on its own and still needs driver input?
I read those materials from Tesla briefly. The promotional part leads one to believe all the wonderful aspects of its self driving technology. A jury could rule that putting a disclaimer after the marketing verbiage was not enough to make sure the purchaser know exactly the limitations? Did the owner of the car understand what he/she was reading? Were they even capable of reading and comprehending? Also he disclaimer part come AFTER the hyped up marketing could be read as misleading.
BTW- I have no idea if this is the case, but I am bringing up valid points that things are not as cut and dry as they are. There lies responsibility on a manufacturer to make sure the driver understands what they are selling and not have to decipher through marketing materials to understand it and of course a reasonable expectation the driver was doing that or understood that was to be done.
I think this can sink the "self driving" aspect of the car industry in marketing or the industry just accept its cars on self driving are going to kill people, just like drivers on non self driving kill people and will the companies will self insure for those lawsuits, much like insurance companies insure humans against lawsuits. I wonder if and how many self driving car companies already paid out compensation to avoid a court case, the cost part of doing business, along with non disclosure agreement with the parties involved. Got me.
It's kind of funny, wife and I ran into some family last night. They drove their 2024 Lincoln Navigator from NY to here, Roughly a 10 hour drive. I cant keep track of this guy, he takes cars in for oil changes and like in this case drove out in a new 2024 Lincoln Navigator for his wife that he bought waiting for the oil change *LOL*. He has also owned 2 Mustangs Mach EVs. I thought he still had one.
Anyway it came with what Ford calls it "Blue Cruise" with wording like that, one would automatically think, as I did when I heard the words, much like cruise control in a car, you still have to be interacting with the car driving it.
I dont know anything about Fords Blue Cruise except he told me for the 10 hour trip, roughly 8 hours of interstate he didnt have to touch the steering wheel. The family absolutely loves the car (or should I say bus *LOL*) Its huge, even the kids had a blast on the road trip, huge screens for movies and I think games too. This guy is a down to earth incredible family guy, would help anyone, the kind of family you would love to have living next door, self made newly what I would call wealthy guy who invented something, patented it and now being sold across this country, unbelievable the opportunities that still exist today in the USA, anyway, he was very impressed with the "Blue Cruise"
