[solid_fuel]

I'm not aware of someone filing such a case yet, but I would think so too.

I'm not sure if you would sue the city or the robot company, or both? It feels like a failure on the part of both.

[margalabargala]

Why would the city be liable for shitty robot behavior?

Maybe you could construct a situation where they would be but I can't imagine it would be one that would play out in real life. A city allowing robots to operate would make the robot company to follow all applicable laws" including ADA so unless the city's lawyer is really really bad this lands on the robot company.

[colechristensen]

Whatever entities, city or state which are doing the licensing and permitting I'd imagine might be able to be sued.

Because it's a bit of a unique new situation with no caselaw, it would be a pretty open question of who could be sued for what.

[bluefirebrand]

It's not the city's responsibility to make the sidewalks delivery robot friendly, it's 100% a failure on the part of the robot company

[solid_fuel]

> It's not the city's responsibility to make the sidewalks delivery robot friendly, it's 100% a failure on the part of the robot company

I don't expect them to make the sidewalks robot friendly, but I think they are responsible for keeping the sidewalks clear of obstructions - so if the robots are obstructing people in my view the city should remove them and fine the company.

Failing to do that would be a failure to maintain the sidewalk space, at least that's my thinking.

[colechristensen]

The city gives them permits, they don't just freely operate wherever.