Produktna odgovornost in avtonomna vozila

Petrovič, Iva (author), Možina, Damjan (mentor)

Avtonomna vozila bodo preobrazila dosedanjo (individualno) vožnjo posameznika v kolektivno. Sistematizirana oblika vožnje bo nujno pomenila le enega voznika - operacijski sistem, ki bo upravljal s celotno floto vozil in točno določal, kako naj se vsako izmed njih ravna v vsakem trenutku. Za določitev odgovornosti (popolnoma delujočega sistema) ne bodo več pomembne le okoliščine določene nesreče, saj bo proizvajalec razbremenjen odgovornosti, če bo uspel dokazati, da je bila flota programirana dovolj varno glede na standard razumnega ravnanja oziroma da je bil sistem zasnovan tako, da je bil glede na predhodna testiranja varnejši od navadnih vozil. Pogoj za razbremenitev odgovornosti ostaja zadostno opozorilo potrošnikom glede preostalih možnih tveganj, ki bi bilo najbolj kvalitetno, če bi proizvajalci razkrili zavarovalne premije za svoje proizvode. Produktna odgovornost za škodo nastalo zaradi napake na proizvodu torej ostaja, le da se bodo napake v programski opremi (software) obravnavale kot pojasnjeno. Argumente, da software ni proizvod v smislu Direktive 85/374/EGS o odgovornosti za proizvod z napako, je mogoče ovreči. Poleg tega bi nasprotno stališče pripeljalo do vrste nezaželenih zaključkov. Napake v fizičnem ogrodju – strojni opremi (hardware) ne prinašajo novosti. Poleg napak v programiranju bo v prvo kategorijo spadala tudi odgovornost za škodo, ki nastane zaradi hekerskih vdorov v operacijski sistem, kjer bo zelo pomembna vloga opozoril potrošnikom. Področje kibernetske kriminalitete prinaša še največ negotovosti glede odgovornosti za proizvod. Pomembni ostajata tudi odgovornost imetnika vozila ter odgovornost za malomarno ravnanje. Slednja, ko npr. proizvajalec ne bo obravnaval potrošnikov in naključnih mimoidočih enakopravno pri samem načrtovanju vozila in ko proizvajalec sploh ne bo ravnal v skladu z predpisi (malomarnost per se). Po takšni analizi je razvidno, da odgovornost proizvajalcev pravzaprav ni nepredvidljiva, strah proizvajalcev pred poplavo tožbenih zahtevkov pa je neutemeljen.

• Language: Slovenian
• Keywords: Avtonomna vozila, produktna odgovornost, odgovornost imetnika vozila, napake v programiranju, napake v načrtovanju, vloga opozoril potrošnikom, vloga predprodajnih testiranj, vdori v operacijske sisteme
• Work type: Master's thesis/paper
• Organization: PF - Faculty of Law
• Year: 2020
• PID: 20.500.12556/RUL-125030
• COBISS.SI-ID: 54745347
• Publication date in RUL: 02.03.2021

Secondary language

• Language: English
• Title: Product liability and autonomous vehicles

Abstract

Autonomous vehicles will completely transform driving experience as we know it. In place of individual driving we will have systemized form of driving which will necessary mean only one driver for a whole fleet of AVs – the operating system. Consequently, the circumstances of one traffic accident will no longer be relevant. To assess the liability, we will have to look at the operating system as whole. The producer will not be held liable if he manages to successfully prove that his fleet was programmed in a reasonably safe manner and that the operating system could perform the dynamic driving task in a safer way than conventional vehicles based on premarket testing. Adequate warning to consumers about the remaining risks remains mandatory and can be satisfied by disclosing insurance premium that considers those risks. Producer remains strictly liable for the damage caused by product defect in the hardware of an AV. Malfunctions in software must however be considered as described above. The latter category includes programming bugs and damages resulting from crashes caused by 3rd party hacks. Cybersecurity is a potential source of systemic legal uncertainty. Software should qualify as a product within the ambit of the Product Liability Directive 85/374/EEC as any contrary conclusions would lead to absurd situations. Importance of adequate warnings about potential hacks must not be neglected. Holder of the AV will remain strictly liable. Negligent behaviour remains an important liability basis. Especially when pedestrians are not treated equally in the designing process of AVs and when manufacturers fail to follow mandatory rules. Through such analysis we come to conclusion that liability for AVs is after all not as unpredictable as it may seem at first. With some small adaptations product liability rules can govern the world of this new technology.

• Keywords: Autonomous vehicles, product liability, strict liability of the vehicle holder, software defects, design defects, consumer warnings, premarket testing, third party hacks