By on September 14, 2018

vision 2.0 NHTSA Autonomous vehicles

Volkswagen Group is interested in teaming up with other automakers to establish a new industry standard for self-driving technology. While the move would likely help streamline development, VW’s primary concern seems to be legal protection in the event an autonomous vehicle makes a mistake.

The idea of an automaker preparing itself to better cope with the legal ramifications of accidentally killing one of its customers isn’t particularly encouraging, but it’s at least understandable.

Pushing for an industry standard for new tech is commonplace within the automotive sector. Last year, several manufacturers adopted Automotive Grade Linux in an attempt to create a default, open-sourced platform for in-car infotainment. While similar in concept to the standardizing of autonomous technology, the obvious difference is that there usually aren’t lives riding on infotainment systems.

There have, however, been several incidents where autonomous technology and advanced driving aids have failed over the last two years, resulting in a loss of human life and extremely negative publicity. As self-driving solutions are still in development, more accidents will likely arise in the coming years. Volkswagen simply wants to establish an alliance to share development costs and liability claims.

VW’s plans are not yet public, though Automotive News spoke with an anonymous VW executive who outlined the company’s corporate goals and described why they’re being put into place. “When you are involved in an accident, you have a better chance in court when you can prove that your car adheres to the latest technical standard,” the individual said.

“How do you create an industry standard? Ideally, by getting others to use the same sensor kit and software, so for that reason an overarching cooperation between automakers is one of the options we are examining,” continued the VW executive. “The question is: How do we bring products to market that guarantee we made ourselves as small a target for damage claims as possible?”

It sounds a little diabolical on the surface. But it’s not simply a matter of VW figuring out how to best cover its ass in the event of a disaster. Standardizing things helps to create a more level playing field, allowing automakers to tell regulators and courtrooms they followed the agreed-upon actions and weren’t shirking responsibility.

That issue isn’t helped by the lax regulation of autonomous technologies. While giving automakers and tech companies a green light to test whatever systems they think might work has helped, governments helped accelerate development. But the byproduct is a nearly complete lack of legal protection for both the manufacturers of these vehicles and the general public. “Law firms are already in the starting blocks,” the executive said.

Volkswagen is believed to be in discussions with more than 15 different companies, including automakers, concerning the prospective alliance. But standardizing a technology that’s dependent on countless systems, many of them proprietary, isn’t going to be easy. It’s also going to be difficult to get every member group to commit to terms when some are leading the charge into the autonomous revolution, while others are just leaving the self-driving nest.

From Automotive News:

A key criterion when considering partners is whether all can agree that the technology would be open source, meaning there was no restriction on its use by participants. This would also help with ensuring tests were comparable, so validation data from one party would be applicable to all.

Some companies have approached Volkswagen offering to license it a drop-in solution, but this is considered out of the question. VW believes it must gain expertise in all elements of the artificial intelligence down to a self-driving vehicle’s path planning. Simply integrating a supplier’s “black box” into the vehicle without access to the technology behind it would not be acceptable.

However, it might be worth it to share some of the inevitable legal pitfalls associated with self-driving vehicles. “I don’t believe we are the only ones asking ourselves if we really want to take these kinds of risks,” the VW staffer said. “No one wants a repeat of the Uber accident.”

That incident involved a self-driving Volvo XC90 testbed owned by Uber. In spring of this year, the vehicle struck and killed a pedestrian crossing the street in Tempe, Arizona. Its systems completely failed to identify the individual or make any attempt to brake, according to the U.S. National Transportation Safety Board. While the police report faulted the backup driver for negligence after on-board cameras caught the individual watching a cellphone video, Uber still settled with the victim’s family out of court.

Options for an alliance could be presented to the VW Group management board as early as next month.

[Image: NHTSA]

Get the latest TTAC e-Newsletter!

11 Comments on “VW Seeking Industry Alliance for Self-driving Cars, Legal Protection for When They Crash...”

  • avatar

    No more Dieselgate.And if, we want to share it with you,dummy!

  • avatar

    And THAT’S how human drivers get forced out. Automakers agree to a set of standards, and then it’ll be that unpredictable human driver that gets the blame every time. “If there wasn’t a human driver involved, there wouldn’t have been a crash.”

  • avatar

    When an autonomous VW gets into an accident, it’ll take off, then automatically alter it’s GPS and crash detection logs to show it wasn’t in the area of the accident.

  • avatar
    SCE to AUX

    “legal protection in the event an autonomous vehicle makes a mistake”

    As I’ve been saying all along, this technology is more about liability than actual performance.

    Mfrs will *not* be writing blank checks to victims of AV crashes, and consumers won’t buy AVs if they’re still stuck with the liability.

    Today’s Level 2 AVs still hold the driver liable, so they don’t even have to work right. But I believe a Level 4 or 5 system will never see production due to liability uncertainty.

  • avatar

    We should not overlook the profundity of this effort to establish artificially self-regulated precedent.

    This is the governments job…and if they are deferring then we need a more effective government.

    AI Integration is just our latest “No Country for Old Men” moment….but perhaps the most consequential and irreversible.

  • avatar

    I don’t believe you have to have every vehicle using identical sensor suites to make autonomous driving safer. What you need is a common communications protocol so that each vehicle can monitor what the others around it are doing and the whole can communicate with a traffic management network to monitor overall traffic patterns for most efficient routing to their destination. Bluetooth or WiFi intra-vehicle communications with cellular TMS networking can be standardized while each brand can use its own sensor suites.

  • avatar

    The insurance industry will never allow anyone other than the “driver” to be liable. They’ll base your rates on your credit score, zip code where your pod is parked, past autonomous habits, and whether or not you put ketchup on eggs.

  • avatar

    I will. But I also trust my parking brake to work well enough, that I usually omit blocking the wheels every time I park on a hill in San Francisco.

    As it is, assessing “liability” for every little maybe-slightly-less-than-5-nines-optimal happening in a complex system, serves exactly no other purpose than providing gobs of unearned rent for net-negative-contribution ambulance chasers and FIRE racketeers. That is a genuinely huge problem. A clear symptom of a society ending one, in fact. But whether some dude’s billycart is equipped with cruise control or not, doesn’t really alter the issue much. At best, it may provide a jumping off point for a more general debate about pathologies already entrenched.

  • avatar

    I personally think that today’s self-driving cars haven’t been fully ready to be operated on public roads. There have been quite many accidents with these cars involved in these past few years. I have just read an article about this at I hope the car’s manufacturers would think seriously about how to perfecting the features of these cars.

Read all comments

Back to TopLeave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Recent Comments

  • jack4x: Hard to put into words how awesome this seems to be. Hopefully there will be a time before the end of the run...
  • dwford: This is how sports car engines are supposed to be: high revving and naturally aspirated, not 6000rpm turbo...
  • pmirp1: Magnificent car. Long Live Chevrolet Corvette. The King.
  • JMII: Just noticed they moved the exhaust back to the center… I like that better then tips on the edges the...
  • Lou_BC: Maybe I should quote something from ELO…Electric Light Orchestra?

New Car Research

Get a Free Dealer Quote

Who We Are

  • Adam Tonge
  • Bozi Tatarevic
  • Corey Lewis
  • Mark Baruth
  • Ronnie Schreiber