Who or what is legally responsible if self-driving vehicles are involved in accidents?

The software company 100%. Let's see them promote these things after that

As with any accident it would be who is at fault. If someone runs a red light and smacks into the side of a self-driving vehicle, wouldn't it be the fault of the driver? Most people think that the self-driving car would always be at fault and, to be sure, it would probably be most of the time. But not always.

well said Gene.

Presumably the insurer. Self driving cars will still have insurance, which may offer better cover than the insurance some human drivers have.

Every car in Japan with shaken has compulsory (jibaiseki) insurance but it provides limited cover for injury and death only. It does not cover damage to other cars or property.

The car maker and the software corporation. The driver of the cause of the accident if they altered the self-driving mechanism.

Speed

and gov allowing these to be used in public transport.

In all self driving cars the self drive is initiated by the driver. The driver is responsible for any accidents caused while in control of the vehicle. The self drive is to help the driver. So if in self drive mode, the car goes through a red light causing a collision then the driver would be found mostly at fault. The driver may have a claim against the car and/or software manufacturer but the small print in the purchase manual will possibly cancel this.

Mr KiplingToday 12:08 pm JST

The driver didn't write the software. It is up to governments to make the small print pointless.

In the end… no one and everyone. Makes for happy lawyers

The registered owner.

Be it commercial, private, city, state of government.

In Japan there is the idea of proportionate blame which is worked out on an individual basis for every accident. Even when unfair, the resultant fudge is a kind of shared fairness. Persumably with the advent of self-drive, the proportions will be adjusted.

driverless and self drive are different.

the driver activates self drive, but is responsible for being ready to override the system immediately. driver is responsible.

Everyone involved, of course. The developers for insufficient safety measures, the users for using a not ripe and safe technology, and the victim in the role of voters for not setting the right politics that hinders that technology reaching real roads and traffic. Everyone has a certain guilt level, more or less.

Peter NeilSep. 14 07:48 pm JST

driverless and self drive are different.

the driver activates self drive, but is responsible for being ready to override the system immediately. driver is responsible.

If I hire a taxi, I don't have to be ready to take the wheel. The same should be true with "self-driving" cars.

While it's nice to think the car manufacturer / software company would be at risk, but I don't see them doing that. There is cost of insurance through monthly premiums and it would amount to them passing the cost back to the consumer in the end even if the risk is paid by them. They will hem and haw about it's the driver's responsibility and never remove the override is my prediction.

Gene is exactly right. The only exception being an unknown engineering fault by the mfg.

TaiwanIsNotChinaToday  01:25 am JST

If I hire a taxi, I don't have to be ready to take the wheel. The same should be true with "self-driving" cars.

you’re not the driver. the taxi driver is the driver.

a driver activating self driving mode of a vehicle is accepting the risks inherent with the software.

an autonomous driverless car is different. the owner of the vehicle is responsible, since they are buying the liability insurance.