Skip to main content

Legal Accelerators and Brakes for Deployment of Automated Vehicles

  • Conference paper
  • First Online:
Road Vehicle Automation 2

Part of the book series: Lecture Notes in Mobility ((LNMOB))

  • 2708 Accesses

Abstract

This chapter will review three questions that prompted significant discussion at the 2014 Symposium on Vehicle Automation sponsored by the Transportation Research Board (TRB) and the Association for Unmanned Vehicle Systems International (AUVSI) as potential accelerators or brakes for deployment of automated vehicles: (1) Where are uniform laws needed? (2) What deployment will come first and will it be evolutionary or revolutionary? (3) How should tests be devised for ratings or certification? Participants in the “Legal Accelerators and Brakes” session noted that the legal environment does not appear to be the obstacle, or “brake” to autonomous vehicle deployment that many fear it will be. Greater uniformity in operational laws, such as tailgating and distracted driving, as well as in safety testing standards, could potentially accelerate deployment. Participants in the session concluded that key privacy and security questions will be informed by legal developments that are not unique to driving.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 129.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Hardcover Book
USD 169.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    The work of the National Conference of Commissioners on Uniform State Laws is one of the most prominent efforts in this area.

  2. 2.

    For example, a products liability defense attorney at the TRB/AUVSI meeting pointed out that two different tests (risk-benefit and consumer expectation) co-exist in the United States without creating significant legal confusion.

  3. 3.

    For example, California’s Senate Bill No. 1298, which would add language to the California Vehicle Code, states: ‘(G) The autonomous vehicle has a separate mechanism, in addition to, and separate from, any other mechanism required by law, to capture and store the autonomous technology sensord ata for at least 30 seconds before a collision occurs between the autonomous vehicle and another vehicle, object, or natural person while the vehicle is operating in autonomous mode.’ http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/pub/11-12/bill/sen/sb_1251-1300/sb_1298_bill_20120925_chaptered.pdf. See also Alliance of Automobile Manufacturers (“Auto Alliance”) Privacy Principlesf or Vehicle Technologies and Services, http://www.autoalliance.org/index.cfm?objectid=865F3AC0-68FD-11E4-866D000C296BA163 last accessed 29 May 2015.

  4. 4.

    Some of these activities may be illegal in the context of individual state “distracted driving” laws. Currently, 44 states, D.C., Puerto Rico, Guam, and the U.S. Virgin Islands ban text messaging for all drivers. Fourteen states, D.C., Puerto Rico, Guam, and the U.S. Virgin Islands prohibit all drivers from using handheld cell phones while driving. www.distraction.gov (last accessed 11/25/14).

References

  1. National Highway Traffic Safety Administration. Preliminary statement of policy concerning automated vehicles. http://www.nhtsa.gov/staticfiles/rulemaking/pdf/Automated_Vehicles_Policy.pdf. Last Accessed 12 Sept 2014

  2. Heart of Atlanta Motel Inc. v. United States (1964), 379 U.S. 241

    Google Scholar 

  3. Swanson A (2014) “Somebody grab the wheel!” state autonomous vehicle legislation and the road to a national regime. Marq L Rev 97: 1085

    Google Scholar 

  4. US v. Knotts, 460 U.S. 276 (1983)

    Google Scholar 

  5. US v. Jones, 565 U.S. ___ (2012)

    Google Scholar 

  6. Riley v. California, 573 U.S. ___ (2014)

    Google Scholar 

  7. Anderson JM, Kalra N, Stanley KD, Sorensen P, Samaras C, Oluwatola O (2014) Autonomous vehicle technology: a guide for policymakers. RAND Corporation, Santa Monica, CA, RR-443-1-RC, pp. 12–36

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Karlyn D. Stanley .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Additional information

Disclaimer The views, opinions and statements contained in this article are solely those of the author and do not represent the official policy or position of the Department of Transportation or of the Office of the Assistant Secretary for Research and Technology.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2015 Springer International Publishing Switzerland

About this paper

Cite this paper

Stanley, K.D., Partridge, E., Douma, F. (2015). Legal Accelerators and Brakes for Deployment of Automated Vehicles. In: Meyer, G., Beiker, S. (eds) Road Vehicle Automation 2. Lecture Notes in Mobility. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-19078-5_9

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-19078-5_9

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-319-19077-8

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-319-19078-5

  • eBook Packages: EngineeringEngineering (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics