Abstract：With regard to the tort liability of self-driving automobiles accidents,the main body of liability and the form of responsibility commitment are the focus of the current controversy,which also causes the dilemma of identification in practice.The academic community has debated for a long time about whether the legal personality of artificial intelligence can be endowed with the qualification of self-driving automobiles and its independent liability.Considering the protection of consumers' interests,the protection of infringed rights and the promotion of the development of the autopilot industry,it is not necessary to give AI the principal qualification solely for the purpose of explaining the effectiveness of AI's behavior. “Reference to Elevator Tort Liability Theory”is also inappropriate,and consumers do not need to take responsibility.The supplier of self-driving automobiles should be defined as the main body of responsibility,and the product liability is borne by it.It can be consistent with the principle of consistency of risks and benefits,guarantee product quality,enhance the safety performance of self-driving automobiles technology,and better protect the interests of victims.Although the product liability system has a strong adaptability to the adjustment of self-driving automobiles,there are also shortcomings such as the untimely relief to victims and the high litigation cost.By setting up a compulsory insurance mechanism for auto driving vehicles and innovating the liability insurance mode,the manufacturer or owner can afford the compulsory insurance,which can effectively supplement product liability,relieve victims in time and effectively,and disperse accident risk.
[1]克尔.人工智能与法律的对话[M].陈吉栋,译.上海:上海人民出版社,2018:32. [2]MAURER M,GERDES J C,LENZ B,et al.Autonomous driving[M].Berlin:Springer Berlin Heidelberg,2016:3. [3]BOEGLIN J.The costs of self-driving cars:reconciling freedom and privacy with tort liability in autonomous vehicle regulation[J].Yale JL & tech.,2015 (17):171-196. [4]韦弗.机器人是人吗[M].刘海安,译.上海:上海人民出版社,2018:35. [5]DUFFY,SOPHIA H,HOPKINS,et al.Sit,stay,drive:the future of autonomous car liability[J].SMU sci.& tech.L.rev.,2013 (16):453-479. [6]ZOHN J R.When robots attack:how should the law handle self-driving cars that cause damages[J].U.Ill.JL tech.& pol′y,2015 (1):461-485. [7]WALPERT J D.Carpooling liability:applying tort law principles to the joint emergence of self-driving automobiles and transportation network companies[J].Fordham L.rev.,2016 (85):1863-1889. [8]PINTO C.How autonomous vehicle policy in California and Nevada addresses technological and non-technological liabilities[J].Intersect:the stanford journal of science,technology,and society,2012 (1):1-16. [9]HOLOYDA B J,LANDESS J,SCOTT C L,et al.Taking the wheel:patient driving in clinical psychiatry[J].Psychiatric annals,2018 (9):421-426. [10]冯洁语.人工智能技术与责任法的变迁——以自动驾驶技术为考察[J].比较法研究,2018:143-155. [11]杨立新.用现行民法规则解决人工智能法律调整问题的尝试[J].中州学刊,2018 (7):40-49. [12]郑志峰.自动驾驶汽车的交通事故侵权责任[J].法学,2018 (4):16-29. [13]司晓,曹建峰.论人工智能的民事责任:以自动驾驶汽车和智能机器人为切入点[J].法律科学,2017 (5):166-173. [14]冯珏.自动驾驶汽车致损的民事侵权责任[J].中国法学,2018 (6):109-132. [15]吴习彧.论人工智能的法律主体资格[J].浙江社会科学,2018 (6):60-66. [16]BORENSTEIN J,HERKERT J,MILLER K.Self-driving cars:ethical responsibilities of design engineers[J].IEEE technology and society magazine,2017 (2):70-75. [17]许中缘.论智能汽车侵权责任立法——以工具性人格为中心[J].法学,2019 (4):67-81. [18]帕加罗.谁为机器人的行为负责[M].张卉林,译.上海:上海人民出版社,2018:44. [19]殷秋实.智能汽车的侵权法问题与应对[J].法律科学,2018,36 (5):42-51. [20]张龙.自动驾驶型道路交通事故责任主体认定研究[J].苏州大学学报 (哲学社会科学版),2018 (5):73-80. [21]卢嘉程.人工智能体侵权责任承担可行路径研究[J].东南大学学报 (哲学社会科学版),2018,20 (S2):58-63. [22]The future of mobility and shifting risk[EB/OL]. (2019-05-23).https://www.aig.com/content/dam/aig/americacanada/us/documents/insights/aig-the-future-of-mobility-and-shifting-risk.pdf. [23]This adorable driverless bus will soon be making stops at the university of michigan[EB/OL]. (2019-05-23).https://www.theverge.com/2017/6/21/15848098/michigan-driverless-shuttle-navya-mcity. [24]Driverless cars:who′s doing what,and how it impacts urban transportation[EB/OL]. (2019-05-24).https://www.curbed.com/2017/7/7/15935126/google-uber-driverless-car-waymo-autonomous. [25]Can′t accept autonmomous liability?get out of the game,says volvo[EB/OL]. (2019-05-24).https://www.autoblog.com/2015/10/09/volvo-accept-autonomous-car-liability/. [26]General motors to take responsibility for autonomous car crashes?[EB/OL]. (2019-05-24).https://artofgears.com/2017/10/05/general-motors-autonomous-car-crashes/. [27]赵申豪.自动驾驶汽车侵权责任研究[J].江西社会科学,2018 (7):207-218. [28]COLONNA K.Autonomous cars and tort liability[J].Case W.res.JL tech.& internet,2012 (4):81-102. [29]陶盈.自动驾驶汽车交通事故损害赔偿责任探析[J].湖南大学学报 (社会科学版),2018 (3):136-141. [30]张继红,肖剑兰.自动驾驶汽车侵权责任问题研究[J].上海大学学报 (社会科学版),2019 (1):16-31. [31]曹险峰,张龙. 《侵权责任法》第49条的解释论研读——主体分离下的道路交通事故侵权责任论纲[J].法律科学 (西北政法大学学报),2017,35 (1):111-124.
2019, 
