Differences

This shows you the differences between two versions of the page.

Link to this comparison view

--- en:safeav:as:frameworks [2025/06/27 15:07] – rahulrazdan
+++ en:safeav:as:frameworks [2025/10/12 15:14] (current) – ToDo checked: rczyba
@@ Line 2: / Line 2: @@
 {{:en:iot-open:czapka_b.png?50| Bachelors (1st level) classification icon }}
-<todo @rahulrazdan #rahulrazdan:2025-06-16></todo>
+<todo @rahulrazdan #rczyba:2025-10-12></todo>
 {{:en:safeav:as:slide6.jpg?400|}}
@@ Line 19: / Line 19: @@
 {{:en:safeav:as:slide11.jpg?400|}}
-In fact, autonomous vehicles (AVs) are considered to be one of these situations. Why ?   In traditional automobiles, the body of law connected to product liability is connected to the car, and the liability of actions using the car is connected to the driver. Further, Product liability is often managed at the federal level and driver licensing more locally. For
+In fact, autonomous vehicles (AVs) are considered to be one of these situations. Why ?   In traditional automobiles, the body of law connected to product liability is connected to the car, and the liability of actions using the car is connected to the driver. Further, Product liability is often managed at the federal level and driver licensing more locally. However, surprisingly, as the figure below shows, there is a body of law dealing with autonomous vehicles from the distant past. In the days of horses, there were accidents, and a sophisticated liability structure emerged. In this structure, there was a concept that if a person directed his horse into an accident, then the driver was at fault. However, if a bystander did something to "spook" the horse, it was the bystander's fault. Finally, there was also the concept of "no-fault" when a horse unexpectedly went rogue.  A discerning reader may well understand that this body of law emerges from a deep understanding of the characteristics of a horse. In legal terms, it creates an "expectation.'  What are the "expectations" for a modern autonomous vehicle ? This is currently a highly debated point in the industry.
-{{:en:safeav:as:slide11.jpg?400|}}
+Overall, whatever value products provide to their consumers is weighed against the potential harm caused by the product, and leads to the concept of legal product liability. While laws diverge across various geographies, the fundamental tenets have key elements of expectation and harm.  Expectation as judged by “reasonable behavior given a totality of the facts” attaches liability. As an example, the clear expectation is that if you stand in front of a train, it cannot stop instantly while this is not the expectation for most autonomous driving situations.  Harm is another key concept where AI recommendation systems for movies are not held to the same standards as autonomous vehicles.  The governance framework for liability is mechanically developed through legislative actions and associated regulations. The framework is tested in the court system under the particular circumstances or facts of the case. To provide stability to the system, the database of cases and decisions are viewed as a whole under the concept of precedence. Clarification on legal points is set by the appellate legal system where arguments on the application of the law are decided what sets precedence.
+{{:en:safeav:as:slide8.jpg?400|}}
+What is an example of this whole situation ?  Consider the airborne space with the figure above where the governance framework consists of enacted law (in this case US) with associated cases providing legal precedence, regulations, and industry standards. Any product in the airborne sector, must be compliant to release their solution to the marketplace.
-Whatever value products provide to their consumers is weighed against the potential harm caused by the product, and leads to the concept of legal product liability. While laws diverge across various geographies, the fundamental tenets have key elements of expectation and harm.  Expectation as judged by “reasonable behavior given a totality of the facts” attaches liability. As an example, the clear expectation is that if you stand in front of a train, it cannot stop instantly while this is not the expectation for most autonomous driving situations.  Harm is another key concept where AI recommendation systems for movies are not held to the same standards as autonomous vehicles.  The governance framework for liability is mechanically developed through legislative actions and associated regulations. The framework is tested in the court system under the particular circumstances or facts of the case. To provide stability to the system, the database of cases and decisions are viewed as a whole under the concept of precedence. Clarification on legal points is set by the appellate legal system where arguments on the application of the law are decided what sets precedence.
+ Ref:
+  - Razdan, R., (2019) “Unsettled Technology Areas in Autonomous Vehicle Test and Validation,” Jun. 12, 2019, EPR2019001.
+  - Razdan, R., (2019) “Unsettled Topics Concerning Automated Driving Systems and the Transportation Ecosystem,” Nov 5, 2019, EPR2019005.
+  - Ross, K. Product Liability Law and its effect on product safety. In Compliance Magazine 2023, [Online]. Available:  https://incompliancemag.com/product-liability-law-and-its-effect-on-product-safety/
-{{:en:safeav:as:slide8.jpg?400|}}

en/safeav/as/frameworks.1751036825.txt.gz · Last modified: 2025/06/27 15:07 by rahulrazdan