Carmakers: Driverless cars need legal framework

Driverless cars are already safer than human drivers, in given situations. Not only car makers but also insurance companies, transportation unions, etc, are demanding a faster introduction and a legal framework to support it.

Cra. Zy. The world depicted in Wall-E is getting closer and closer to reality. We can't walk anymore so we have Segways, we can't be bothered to actually drive anymore so we get driverless cars. And by what study and what sample size can you say driverless cars are already safer than human drivers? When there is an accident, who'll pay? Hal-9000? Don't blame me, says the driverless car owner, it's the car manufacturer's fault! I will never sign on insurance saying I take responsibility for this machine's actions. Ab. Surd.

Who's responsible? Driver? Car maker? Software programmer? Map maker? System maker? Road maker? Telematics infrastructure provider? The list goes on… An accident victim's nightmare and a lawyer's dream.

No doubt the final outcome would be that the driver is held responsible. Even Subaru's EyeSight system, widely regarded as one of the best collision avoidance systems currently available, is only considered driver assist, as shown in a court case in Australia