Tesla's Autopilot has a tendency to be misused by drivers? @Reuters
Facts
Six weeks before the first fatal U.S. accident involving Tesla's Autopilot in 2016, Tesla's president Jon McNeill tested Autopilot, emailing his feedback to the automated-driving chief and Elon Musk. McNeill described becoming so immersed in emails or calls while using Autopilot that he missed exits, demonstrating a level of comfort and distraction.
A wrongful-death lawsuit in California cites this email as evidence that Tesla was aware drivers might not maintain attention on the road while using Autopilot. The case involves a 2018 crash that killed Apple engineer Walter Huang, with allegations focusing on whether Tesla knew the system's use could lead to driver inattention and what measures were taken to mitigate this.
Tesla contends that Huang misused the system by playing a video game just before the crash. Tesla faces several lawsuits involving Autopilot, including at least eight fatalities. The U.S. National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) has investigated numerous crashes and fatalities related to Autopilot, leading to a recall of over 2 million vehicles for additional driver alerts.
Tesla's marketing of Autopilot and Full Self-Driving features has been scrutinized, especially since the cars are not fully autonomous and require driver attention. Tesla introduced a system to monitor driver attentiveness with cameras in 2021.
Issue
The legal issue centers on whether Tesla was aware of the potential for drivers to misuse Autopilot by not paying attention to the road and what preventative measures were taken to address this foreseeable misuse.
Rule
The legal principle at play is the manufacturer's duty to design and implement systems that account for foreseeable misuse by consumers, particularly in the context of semi-autonomous driving systems where driver attention is crucial for safety.
Analysis
Plaintiffs argue that Tesla was aware of the potential for Autopilot to lull drivers into a state of inattention, as evidenced by McNeill's email and public comments by Elon Musk acknowledging challenges with maintaining driver attentiveness. The case examines Tesla's efforts to monitor and enforce driver attention, including the delay in implementing a camera-based system to track driver focus. Legal experts suggest that if it was reasonably foreseeable that drivers would misuse Autopilot, Tesla had an obligation to prevent such misuse through design or additional safety features.
Conclusion
The outcome of this legal challenge could significantly impact Tesla, particularly if it establishes a precedent regarding the company's responsibility to design its driver-assistance systems to mitigate foreseeable misuse. A ruling against Tesla could open the door for similar lawsuits, emphasizing the importance of robust driver-monitoring systems in semi-autonomous vehicles to ensure user safety.
