The “fully autonomous car” is defined as the SAE Level of Driving Automation’s L4 and L5. Currently, there isn’t any model in Taiwan’s car market that surpasses L2, not to mention L4. Even though there are claims of L3 model sales overseas, their usage is heavily limited. Before the deployment of L4 products, our government had better start gathering and studying regulations enacted by developed countries, which are related to automakers, system suppliers, car owners, drivers, and passengers’ duties and rights. Even R&D plans of automakers and system suppliers, business adjustments of property insurance companies, and law procedures of the traffic police will be affected.
Before the future implementation of autonomous vehicle technologies, the legislation of related laws and regulations is critical for its success. Developed countries have been making efforts on legislation in the past two years to have people enjoy better travel qualities enabled by new techs as early as possible, instead of suffering from accidents and chaos. In China, where autonomous techs development couldn’t be overemphasized, the enforcement of traffic regulations for Intelligent Connected Vehicles (ICV) began in Shenzhen in early August. This change allows fully-autonomous cars to drive on regular roads in designated areas, not only giving them the right of way but also clarifying their legal responsibility. Interestingly, the accountability for L3 accidents lies on the same shoulders as ADAS in L2s, namely, the drivers; this means that even if the driver lets the car system completely take over driving, the accountability still lies entirely on the driver under any incidents. This determination of legal accountability has proven that L3 is not a clear advantage in the competition of autonomous tech between carmakers. At the same time, it reminds consumers to lower their expectations for L3. Additionally, Beijing began its test operation of autonomous cars in April, allowing Robotaxi safety drivers to move from the driver’s seat to the passenger seat. As for other countries, there’re some regulations worthy of reference:
- Germany allowed L4 cars to drive on public roads in designated areas early this year. Also, it is the first country to allow autonomous cars in daily traffics. The focus of the regulation is as follows: autonomous-car manufacturers should hold compulsory liability insurance, and the beneficiary is the technical supervisor (the passenger in the incident). Additionally, recording equipment is a must for all autonomous vehicles… If the accident occurred under manual control, the driver should be held responsible; if in autonomy mode, the automaker should take responsibility.
- Japan allowed L3 cars to hit the road in April the year before last. According to related regulations, L3 drivers must preserve all the operational processes in car-data recorders. The owner is liable for any losses in accidents, even if the car was on autopilot.
- ENISA (European Union Agency for Cybersecurity) proposed the definition of connection safety and privacy safety for intelligent cars the year before, clearly restricting the tech companies’ attempts to develop their autonomous tech using driving data from sold units. This scenario had made matters considerably worse for R&D personnel for autonomous tech development.
- Sweden requires carmakers to pass six public road tests before rolling out autonomous cars, putting an extra load on the development costs of autonomous systems.
- Matching the UN’s regulation on Automated Lane Keeping Systems (ALKS), the UK requires L3 cars not to change lanes and keep their speed under 60km/hr. If there should be any accident during autopilot, the insurance company for the compulsory third-party insurance is held responsible. The enforcement of this act began this year while the UK is working towards passing all autonomous car-related regulations and enforcement rules by 2025.
- As for the country with the most advanced development in autonomous technologies, the US Federal Government still hasn’t announced any laws about legal liabilities while only having regulations emphasizing passenger safety. However, in March of this year, the human controls originally required by the NHTSA (such as steering wheels, brakes, and gas pedals) had been fully removed from future fully-autonomous cars.
Below are some summaries and interpretations of these varying regulations from different countries:
- Regulations on product design. As for now, L3 cars are not qualified as computer-controlled autonomous vehicles and are just regarded as upgrades of ADAS. In the future implementation of L5 models, they would have the permission to remove human controls to free up the interior and cut back component costs; in addition, there would be more specific test requirements and cybersecurity agreements for autonomous models than their L2 counterparts.
- Legal responsibility in accidents. Unless the car system fails, drivers should take legal responsibility in L3 accidents; even for the L3 in Mercedes EQS, the prerequisites for shifting the responsibility to the carmaker are innumerable (for example, only certain German regions and under 60km/hr cases are applicable). As a result, drivers cannot take EQS as fully autonomous cars. In L3 and L4, driver monitoring systems (DMS) and data storage systems for automated driving (DSSAD) will be standard equipment to determine accountability in accidents.
- Ethics for autonomous cars. In theory, there shouldn’t be any reason for this scenario to happen under fully-developed self-driving techs. However, if there should be such a case, the primary concern for regulations would be the general safety of all traffic participants. In other words, the safety concerns for passengers and pedestrians should be equal. Autonomous technology aims to mitigate traffic incidents instead of completely wiping out every possibility (for example, autonomous cars cannot avoid fake accidents), so damages to animal life or properties are relatively preferred outcomes. Under these circumstances, maybe future regulations would require L4 systems to hand over their controls to drivers (while L5 still relies entirely on itself).
Autonomous cars’ relevant regulations are very complicated, which is why the UK plans to spend three years completing all the topics and enforcement rules. Despite all this, we still have ample time to work on these regulations, especially clear restrictions for L3 as the first priority, for the commercialization of fully autonomous vehicles needs eight to ten years to achieve. In my opinion, however, I would suggest Taiwan ban the sales of L3 cars, in case they pose a bigger threat to our traffic safety.