[JumpCrisscross]

> Tesla shares responsibility for marketing something deceptively that can cause serious incidents

The driver is criminally liable to the estate of the young man he killed. Tesla may be liable for money damages to the driver they misled. (Maybe the estate also has a civil claim on Tesla if they can show its marketing was grossly negligent.)

[abduhl]

Why are you so sure that criminal liability ends with the driver? Washington’s first degree manslaughter law requires “recklessly caus[ing] the death of another person.” Second degree requires merely causing the death of another person “with criminal negligence.” Criminal negligence requires Tesla to “fail to be aware of a substantial risk that a wrongful act may occur” and that this failure be “a gross deviation from the standard of care that a reasonable person would exercise in the same situation.”

It’s certainly not hard to make the case for either, especially given Tesla’s apparent inaction after a number of people have died while Autopilot is active and a number of accidents have occurred while Autopilot is active. Cf the Crumbleys: https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-68223118

Also a pedantic point: the driver is civilly liable to the estate. Criminal charges (and hence criminal liability) can only be brought by the state.

[JumpCrisscross]

> Why are you so sure that criminal liability ends with the driver?

I'm not. But it would be precedent setting. Given this case has the driver admitting to cops that he was distracted in a way Tesla's user manual presumably tells you not to be, I'm not sure I'd start here.

> pedantic point: the driver is civilly liable to the estate

You're right, I was being loose with my words.