User:Alvcantu/sandbox

Liability clashing with current legislation
On 2012, the state of California's decision to implement sensors to determine fault whenever an autonomous vehicle crashes raises the question of who is liable for the damage. California clearly states that "the conversion of vehicles originally manufactured by a third party shall control issues of liability arising from the operation of the autonomous vehicle". Yet according to the the same legislative council, this provision is in reconsideration. The Yale Journal of Law & Technology argues that this disagreement stems from policy's and overall regulators failure to separate freedom and privacy as 'nearly all' of the literature on self driving cars explores. Limiting liability to just manufacturers is not a popular option due to the very nature of the technology. According to Santa Clara Law Review, manufacturers could argue that such legislative intervention can negatively affect deployment and use of autonomous vehicles. This is because the technology represents a massive socially benefit that, at least at a theoretical level, would remove these liabilities altogether. Legislation would therefore eliminate any incentive for the manufacturers to make any improvements to the technology. In addition, making the manufacturer liable is not as simple as legislation makes it look like. As California's PATH Research Report argues: If a self driving vehicle causes any sort of accident, several entities can be held liable. These include the vehicle manufacturer, the manufacturer of the component, the software engineer who programmed the code for vehicle operation and even the road designer who's work helps control the vehicle.