L’avvocato di tesla che dice “noi avvertiamo gli utenti, chè non pensino che l’oggetto e’ ‘full self driving’.” Che stupidi questi utenti..
Forse un nome diverso da “Full Self Driving” potrebbe funzionare meglio per spiegare agli utenti che non e’ “full self driving” come dice l’avvocato ? E forse anche che l’amministratore delegato non faccia taroccare i video promozionali per fare credere che lo sia ? Forse spiegare, come dice l’avvocato, che è solo un e che e’ solo un “fancy cruise control” ?
Solo che così non ci sarebbe l’effetto wow ed il titolo ne risentirebbe “un filino” ?
La verità è che questi – sapendolo – hanno messo sulle strade degli oggetti pericolosi, che possono ferire o uccidere le cavie^W persone che ci stanno su (e anche che stanno nelle strade dove loro passano), anteponendo gli interessi dell’azienda e dei suoi azionisti alla sicurezza del pubblico.
Un comportamento che, se la corte lo stabilirà, si vedrà che non è irresponsabile, ma delinquenziale.
Source: The Washington Post
RIVERSIDE COUNTY, Calif. — Tesla faced a jury Thursday over the role its Autopilot features may have played in a calamitous 2019 crash here, among the first in a string of cases involving the technology that will be litigated around the country in the coming months.
Thursday’s trial concerns the death of 37-year-old Micah Lee, who was allegedly using Autopilot features in his Tesla Model 3 while driving his family down a highway at 65 miles per hour. Suddenly, court documents say, the car jerked off the road, crashed into a palm tree and burst into flames. Lee died from injuries suffered in the collision, while his fiancée and her son were severely injured.
Lee’s estate sued Tesla, alleging that the company knew its assisted-driving technology and enhanced safety features were defective when it sold the car. The plaintiff’s case also rests heavy on the claim that Tesla markets its Autopilot features in a way that misleads drivers into believing it is more autonomous than it actually is.
“They sold the hype and people bought it,” Jonathan Michaels, the attorney representing Lee’s estate and fiancée Lindsay Molander, said in his opening arguments. Tesla “made a decision to put their company over the safety of others.”
Thursday’s opening arguments offered a glimpse into Tesla’s strategy for defending its Autopilot features, which have been linked to more than 700 crashes since 2019 and at least 17 fatalities, according to a Washington Post analysis of National Highway Traffic Safety Administration data. The crux of the company’s defense is that the driver is ultimately in control of the vehicle, and they must keep their hands on the wheel and eyes on the road while using the feature.
Michael Carey, the attorney for Tesla, argued the technology was not at fault, and that the crash — in which the Lee’s car made a sharp right turn across two lanes of traffic — “is classic human error” and that Autopilot is “basically just fancy cruise control.” He also said that it’s “inconclusive” whether Autopilot was actually involved, as the data box in the car that would have that information was damaged in the fiery crash.
“This case is not about Autopilot. Autopilot didn’t cause the crash,” Carey said in his opening statements Thursday. “This is a bad crash with bad injuries and may have resulted from bad mistakes — but you can’t blame the car company when that happens. This is a good car with a good design.
”The cluster of trials set for the next year is also likely to demonstrate how much the technology actually relies on human intervention — despite CEO Elon Musk’s claims that cars operating in Autopilot are safer than those controlled by humans. The outcomes could amount to a pivotal moment for Tesla, which has for years tried to absolve itself from responsibility when one of its cars on Autopilot is involved in a crash.
“For Tesla to continue to get its technology on the road, it is going to have to be successful in these cases,” said Ed Walters, who teaches autonomous vehicle law at Georgetown University. “If it faces a lot of liability from accidents … it is going to be very hard for Tesla to continue getting this tech out.”
The company is facing several other lawsuits around the country involving its Autopilot technology. Some take issue with Tesla’s marketing of its autonomous features and argue it lulls drivers into a false sense of complacency.
Many of the cases heading to trial in the next year involve crashes that occurred several years ago, a reflection of the increased use of driver-assisted features and of the lengthy legal process involved in bringing such a case through the court system. In the years since, Tesla has continued to roll out its technology — some of it still in a test phase — to hundreds of thousands more vehicles on the nation’s roadways.
Autopilot, which Tesla introduced in 2014, is a suite of features that enables the car to maintain speed and distance behind other vehicles and follow lane lines, among other tasks. Tesla says drivers must monitor the road and intervene when necessary. Autosteer — a specific Autopilot feature designed to keep the car centered in the lane — is in beta test mode, and Carey said drivers are warned of the potential limitations before they enable the feature.“
We’re telling drivers that because we want you to be extra vigilant. Not because there’s something wrong with it, but because when people are driving in Autopilot, we don’t want them to think the thing is fully self driving,” Carey said. “It is an advisory to everyone who is using Autosteer that you gotta be careful with this stuff.”
Continua qui: Tesla to face jury in first of several cases over Autopilot crashes – The Washington Post
