Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
©2012 Jeffer Mangels Butler & Mitchell LLP. All rights reserved
Vehicle Connectivity and New Technologies:
Liability and Legal Issues
©2012 Jeffer Mangels Butler & Mitchell LLP. All rights reserved
The Promise and Perils of Drivers and the
Connected Car
Smartphone Integration
In-Dash Infotainment Systems
Integrated Text Messaging
Vehicle Internet Connections
3
Promises and Perils
Who is Responsible for Distracted Driving?
Is Your Car’s Data Private and Secure?
New Laws, Regulations and Court Decisions
4
The Promises of the Connected Car
Consumer Demand
All Drivers Drivers 18-35
5
The Promises of the Connected Car
Consumer DemandSmartphone App Use
for In-Car Audio
6
The Promises of the Connected Car
Safety and Reliability
Better, integrated use of phones and texting
Remote Diagnostics
Remote Software Updates
7
The Perils
Distracted Driving
3,331 killed in 2011
387,000 injured
4x the crash risk = .08 BAC
8
True Stories
Indiana, 2002: Driver using cell phone
North Carolina, 2008: Truck driver text messaging
California, 2009: Driver using navigation system
9
Williams v. Cingular
Case Dismissed
“A cellular phone does not cause a driver to wreck a car. Rather, it is the driver's inattention while using the phone that may cause an accident.”
10
Williams v. Cingular
Case Dismissed
“To place a duty on Cingular to stop selling cellular phones because they might be involved in a car accident would be akin to making a car manufacturer stop selling otherwise safe cars because the car might be negligently used in such a way that it causes an accident.”
11
Durkee v CH Robinson
Case Dismissed“The court does not disagree with plaintiffs that using any data entry or retrieval device while driving is dangerous … Indeed, adjusting the radio and climate controls, or even talking to a passenger, can be risky activities. These situations beg the question, however, as to where does manufacturer responsibility end and the responsibility of the driver begin? ”
12
Durkee v CH Robinson
Case Dismissed
“the duty owed by a product manufacturer ‘does not require him to guard against hazards apparent to the casual observer or to protect against injuries resulting from the user's own patently careless and improvident conduct.’”
13
Ford v Hertz
Case Dismissed
“That distracted driving might cause an accident was not a hazard inherent to the navigation system in the rental car.”
14
Ford v Hertz
Case Dismissed
“[T]he Legislature has already determined, in codifying Vehicle Code sections 27602 and 26708 … that the benefits gained by permitting drivers to use a global positioning or mapping system while driving out-weigh the inherent risks of such use.”
15
Distracted Driving – Liability
Williams v CingularNo liability
Durkee v CH RobinsonNo liability
Ford v HertzNo Liability
16
Lessons from the Courts:
1.No Comic Strips
2. If a technology can be used safely but isn’t, the manufacturer/provider is not responsible
3.Rely on the Legislature
17
The Connected Car – Cal Laws
Vehicle Code § 27602
No video monitors in front seat
EXCEPT-Vehicle information displays-GPS/Mapping-Interlock
18
The Connected Car – Cal Laws
Vehicle Code §§ 23123-4
“A person shall not drive a motor vehicle while using a wireless telephone unless that telephone is specifically designed and configured to allow hands-free listening and talking, and is used in that manner while driving.”
No cell phones if you are under 18, period.
19
The Connected Car – Cal Laws
20
The Connected Car – Cal Laws
Vehicle Code § 23123.5
No Texting while Driving, EXCEPT:
Devices “specifically designed and configured to allow voice operated and hands-free operation to dictate, send, or listen to a text-based communication.”
Huh?
21
The Connected Car – Cal Laws
Vehicle Code § 23123.5
CHP: No touching a phone.
Legislature: Not meant for phones. It was meant for integrated messaging systems in cars.
22
The Connected Car – Cal LawsAB 313
Introduced February, 2013
Would eliminate hands-free texting from the Vehicle Code.
23
The Connected Car – Fed Laws
NHTSA Guidelines
Voluntary guidelines, not requirements-Limit device operation to one hand-Limit to two seconds time needed to look away from the road-Limit to twelve seconds the time needed to complete tasks-“Lock out” complex tasks unless the vehicle is in park
24
Product Liability
Courts – Drivers are still responsible if technology is
abused
Look to the Laws
25
Privacy
What Does Your Car Know?
-Contacts From SmartPhone-Music, Playlists, Voice Memos-GPS Location Data
-Diagnostics-Driving habits
26
Privacy – Vehicle Laws
Vehicle Code § 9951 - “Black Box” Law
Covers “recording devices” which records driving information “for the purpose of retrieving data after an accident.”
Navigation Systems?
Infotainment Systems?
27
Privacy – Vehicle Laws
Vehicle Code § 9951 - “Black Box” Law
Data belongs to vehicle owner – no access by manufacturer or third parties (like apps)
Exception for Court Order
28
Privacy – Cal Laws
California Online Privacy Protection Act
Applies to all “online” services – including mobile apps
Must provide privacy policy to customers
29
Privacy – Fed Laws
Location Privacy Protection Act
Pending before Senate
Would require companies that can obtain location data from a smartphone or mobile device to get the user’s consent before collecting or distributing that data
Potential criminal penalties
©2012 Jeffer Mangels Butler & Mitchell LLP. All rights reserved
The Promise and Perils of Drivers and the
Connected Car
Product Liability
California Laws and Fed Guidelines
Cal and Fed Privacy Laws
