China first Tesla drive fatal accidents: dealers as defendants | Tesla | | dealer _ the traffic accident news
Original title: the first Tesla drive fatal accidents automatically expose dealers as defendants
On January 20, 2016, Handan, Hebei, Beijing, Hong Kong and Macao high-speed rear-end collisions occurred, a Tesla car into path of a job cleaning cars, Tesla cars damaged driver Gao Yaning died. Identified by the police, driving a Tesla driver in this crash elegant Ning will have the primary responsibility. However after only six months later, elegant Ning's family take Tesla's dealership on the Court. Why is that?
Of the rule of law online: "autopilot" safe security Driving recorder restored one minute before the accident the driver easy
Picture taken through the vehicle traveling data recorder can be seen day of fine weather, the vehicle speed is not fast, a minute before the driver in the event of accidents also sing a few songs. And then was defenseless against the front of the road sweeper.
After the accident, Road sweeping and alert the driver of the car. Because the accident happened in Handan, Hebei high-speed Beijing-Macao high-speed traffic Police Corps detachment morbidity of Brigade road sections within the jurisdiction, morbidity of groups of civilian police immediately rushed to the scene of the accident to be disposed.
Live: Tesla has no brakes before the collision marks
Police at the scene did not find the white car in the event of signs of any brake before the collision.
Based on field survey and traffic recorder video data, traffic police to the sweeper driver was questioned, and eventually come to the conclusion:
Tesla sedan in front of the met under construction when the job of road sweeping vehicles, has not taken any emergency braking and avoidance measures, direct collision, rear-end accidents.
Wondering: why don't saw a car on the front brake does not escape?
When the accident happened, elegant Ning was just 23 years old, his father Gao Jubin cannot understand long evident in the vehicle traveling data recorder road Sweeper, but why his son was neither brake nor escape, just hit up?
According to Gao Jubin introduced, elegant and better early in 2011, just turned 18 years old when they obtain a driver's license, good driving skills. Moreover, in 2013, the elegant Ning in his capacity as college students joining the military, is also big drivers of military vehicles in the army has always been excellent. September 2015 before the accident, demobilization went home.
According to police on the scene of the accident investigation, elegant Ning's car prior to the collision, has not taken any emergency braking or avoidance measures. Trip recorder screen display, more than 20 seconds before the accident, clean the vehicle rear lights are clearly visible, such a long time, enough drivers to slow down and disposal lines, elegant Ning why there was no reaction to go hit up?
Speculation that a vehicle in a State of constant speed "automatic" function
Gao Jubin thought his son had repeatedly mentioned the "autopilot" feature. According to tell Gao Jubin, after the accident, he provides driving recorder video taken to specialists for analysis. Their conclusion is that the car should be in a State of constant speed.
Gao Jubin speculates that because in the process of driving launched the "autopilot" feature will drive entirely to vehicles, led to his son's attention is not placed on the observation of the pavement. Meanwhile, "autopilot" system also failed to identify the front of the vehicle and eventually led to the tragedy.
Experience: "autopilot" system is still not perfect obstacle difficult to identify small
Tesla's automatic driving what is a function? Reporter found and purchased Gao Jubin Tesla owner Mr. Zhang. According to Zhang, they are purchased in 2014 Tesla which was not on autopilot functions. 2015 Tesla introduced the automatic steering system, and started propaganda, he and other owners of the same batch of automatic upgrade this feature through software. According to Mr CHEUNG, this system is in most cases better able to identify the ground line and the position of other vehicles, and dispose of it accordingly.
However, not all situations the system can easily cope with. According to Zhang, the "autopilot" system cannot recognise tapered barrel and small obstacles such as pedestrians, he nearly scrapes while using the autopilot to tapered barrel placed on the road, but found time, avoid the artificial.
Filed in family compensation of 10,000 yuan if Tesla take responsibility?
According to what Mr Cheung said, Tesla the autopilot system is not mature. And because of this, in July 2016, Gao Jubin Tesla's sales company in China to the Beijing Chaoyang district people's Court, demanding compensation of 10,000 yuan. Gao Jubin also believe that Tesla in the case of automatic driving system is still not perfect, still propaganda to lure the user to trust the system, should bear the corresponding legal responsibility.
Gao Jubin's lawyer said, the amount of compensation is not an end, let the public know they hope cases "autopilot" technology is still flawed, don't try. Meanwhile, hope that Tesla in product marketing process more seriously and not immature "autopilot" as a selling point to attract eyeballs, so as to avoid similar accidents.
At present, the Beijing Chaoyang district people's Court has accepted the Gao Jubin's claim, the case will be hearing in the near future.
Inventory: the use of "autopilot" accidents
On May 7, 2016, the United States, Florida, a Tesla car in "automatic" mode crashes, in which a driver died. This is the United States's first automotive "autopilot" feature of traffic fatalities, in elegant Ning four months after the accident, the accident remained known as the Tesla as the first global "autopilot" deaths.
On August 2, 2016, the Beijing owner Luo in the two months he bought himself the way Tesla Motors to complete a licence, there is a traffic accident. The accident occurred, and Gao Yaning is the same. Also enables automatic driving with the car in the process, avoiding the vehicle in the event of obstacles, autopilot system did not identify the vehicle barriers and direct hit up.
Zhihou, Mr Cars has maintained its original speed, until he hit the brakes and vehicles came to a halt. Different degrees of damage caused two car accidents, fortunately, caused no casualties. Mr Luo said how serious the accident he did not think, and then think some cringe.
Follow-up: the "autopilot" was renamed the "automatic driver-assistance"
Gao Jubin said, Tesla recently said in communication with him, and they have the Chinese translation of the system from "automatic" to "automatic driving", and asked the sales staff to the system for driver assistance systems. In addition, Tesla also updated the system, while trying to enable users to use the system focus.
Analysis: Tesla found misleading or face higher compensation for
, Associate Professor of China University of politics and law, China consumers Association director Wu Jingming, introduced, in fact, currently on the market to adopt similar technology car maker Tesla more than a but different marketing strategies for others. "Other auto makers made clear it was a secondary function, is a function that cannot be used independently and Tesla are fully as an independent function to publicity. ”
Wu Jingming said manufacturers on product promotion is in strict accordance with the law to do, or may have to bear the corresponding legal consequences. In addition, Wu Jingming also believes that, although the Gao Jubin claims only 10,000 yuan, but if the Court found Tesla's manufacturers on advertising misleading, is obliged to make compensation to the families.
Responsible editor: Kang Yunkai
Article keywords:Tesla's accident dealers
I want feedback
Save a Web page
CCTV
中国国内首起特斯拉自动驾驶致死事故:经销商成被告|特斯拉|交通事故|经销商_新闻资讯
原标题：国内首起特斯拉自动驾驶致死事故曝光 经销商成被告
2016年1月20日，京港澳高速河北邯郸段发生一起追尾事故，一辆特斯拉轿车直接撞上一辆正在作业的道路清扫车，特斯拉轿车当场损坏，司机高雅宁不幸身亡。经交警认定，在这起追尾事故中驾驶特斯拉的司机高雅宁负主要责任。然而时隔半年之后，高雅宁的家人却把特斯拉的经销商告上了法庭。这是为什么呢？
△《法治在线》：“自动驾驶”安全不安全 行车记录仪还原事故前一分钟 司机状态轻松
通过行车记录仪拍摄的画面可以看到，当天天气晴好，车辆速度也并不快，驾驶人在发生事故的一分钟前还哼了几句歌。而随后便毫无防备地撞上了前面的道路清扫车。
事故发生后，道路清扫车的司机进行了报警。由于事故发生在京港澳高速河北高速交警总队邯郸支队磁县大队管辖路段内，磁县大队的民警立即赶往事故现场进行处置。
现场：碰撞前特斯拉没有任何刹车痕迹
民警们在现场并没有发现白色轿车在发生碰撞前有任何的刹车痕迹。
结合现场勘查情况和行车记录仪视频资料，交警对清扫车司机进行了询问，最终得出了事故结论：
特斯拉轿车在遇到前方正在施工作业的道路清扫作业车时，没有采取任何的紧急制动和躲避措施，直接相撞，发生追尾交通事故。
疑惑：看到前方有车为何不刹车不躲避？
事故发生的时候，高雅宁刚刚23岁，他的父亲高巨斌始终无法理解，在行车记录仪里明明早就看到了道路清扫车，可是他的儿子当时为什么既没有刹车，也没有躲避，而是直接撞了上去呢？
据高巨斌介绍，高雅宁早在2011年刚满十八岁的时候就考取了驾照，驾驶技术很好。而且，2013年，高雅宁以在校大学生的身份参军入伍，在部队中也是担任大型军用车辆的驾驶员，一直表现优秀。在事故发生前的2015年9月，刚刚复员回家。
根据警方对事故现场的勘查，高雅宁的车在碰撞发生之前，没有采取过任何紧急制动或者避让的措施。行车记录仪画面显示，在事故发生前的二十多秒，清扫作业车的尾灯便清晰可见，这么长的时间，完全足够驾驶员进行减速并线等处置，为什么高雅宁当时没有任何反应，径直地撞了上去呢？
推测：车辆处于定速状态 “自动驾驶”功能启动
高巨斌想到了儿子曾经多次提到的“自动驾驶”功能。据高巨斌讲述，事故发生后，他将行车记录仪拍摄的视频提供给了一些专业人士进行分析。而他们得到的结论都是当时这辆车应该处于定速的状态。
高巨斌推测，正是因为在驾驶过程中启动了“自动驾驶”功能，将驾驶完全交给了车辆，才导致儿子的注意力并没有放在对路面的观察上。同时，“自动驾驶”系统也没有成功识别出前方的车辆，最终酿成了悲剧。
体验：“自动驾驶”系统尚不完善 难识别小型障碍物
特斯拉的自动驾驶到底是怎样一种功能呢？记者找到了和高巨斌一起购买特斯拉的车主张先生。据张先生介绍，他们是2014年购买的特斯拉，当时车上并没有自动驾驶功能。2015年特斯拉推出自动驾驶系统，并开始对外宣传，张先生和其他同批次的车主通过软件自动升级获得了这项功能。据张先生说，这套系统在大部分情况下都能够较好地识别出地面分道线和其它车辆的位置，并进行相应处置。
然而，并不是所有情况这套系统都能轻松应对。据张先生介绍，这套“自动驾驶”系统识别不了锥桶以及行人等小型障碍物，他曾经在使用自动驾驶时险些刮蹭到路上摆放的锥桶，好在发现及时，人工进行了躲避。
起诉：家属要求赔偿一万元 特斯拉是否担责？
按照张先生的说法，特斯拉的这套自动驾驶系统并不成熟。也正是因为这样，2016年7月，高巨斌将特斯拉在中国的销售公司起诉至北京市朝阳区人民法院，要求赔偿损失一万元。高巨斌还认为，特斯拉在自动驾驶系统尚不完善的情况下，仍然通过宣传诱导用户去信任这套系统，应该承担相应的法律责任。
高巨斌的代理律师表示，赔偿的多少并不是目的，他们希望通过案件让公众了解“自动驾驶”技术仍有缺陷，不要轻易尝试。同时，希望特斯拉公司在产品的宣传营销过程中更加慎重，不要把不成熟的“自动驾驶”作为一个吸引眼球的卖点，以免造成类似的恶性事故。
目前，北京市朝阳区人民法院已经受理了高巨斌的诉讼请求，案件将于近期开庭审理。
盘点：使用“自动驾驶”事故频发
2016年5月7日，美国佛罗里达州一辆特斯拉汽车在“自动驾驶”模式下发生撞车事故，导致司机身亡。这是美国首例涉及汽车“自动驾驶”功能的交通死亡事故，而在高雅宁发生交通事故四个月后，这起事故依然被称为特斯拉全球首起“自动驾驶”死亡案例。
2016年8月2日，北京车主罗先生在给自己新买两个月的特斯拉汽车上完牌照的路上，发生了交通事故。而这起事故发生的过程，与高雅宁的简直是如出一辙。也是在启用自动驾驶跟车的过程中，前车遇有障碍物进行了避让，而自动驾驶系统没有识别出障碍车辆，直接撞了上去。
之后，罗先生的车依然保持着原来的速度向前行驶，直到他踩下刹车，车辆才停下来。事故造成两车不同程度的损伤，所幸没有造成人员伤亡。罗先生表示，事故发生当时他并没有觉得有多么严重，而后来想想才有些后怕。
后续：“自动驾驶”更名“自动辅助驾驶”
高巨斌说，特斯拉公司最近在跟他沟通时表示，他们已经将这一系统的中文翻译由“自动驾驶”改为“自动辅助驾驶”，并要求销售人员严格将这一系统表述为驾驶辅助系统。此外，特斯拉也对这一系统进行了更新，试图使用户在使用这一系统时集中注意力。
解析：特斯拉若被判存在误导 或面临高额赔偿
中国政法大学副教授、中国消费者协会理事吴景明介绍，事实上目前市面上推出类似技术的汽车厂商不止特斯拉一家，但其他厂商的宣传营销策略有所不同。“其他汽车厂商明确它是一个辅助功能，是一个不可以独立使用的功能，而特斯拉是将它完全作为一个独立的功能来宣传的。”
吴景明表示，厂商对产品的宣传推广也是要严格按照法律规定来做的，否则可能要承担相应的法律后果。此外，吴景明还认为，虽然高巨斌的赔偿请求只有一万元，但是如果法院判定特斯拉厂商在宣传上存在误导，是有责任对家属做出更多的赔偿的。
责任编辑：康云凯
文章关键词： 特斯拉 交通事故 经销商
我要反馈
保存网页
央视