[LINK] Amazon Prime Air

[Roger Clarke]

>>  At 11:07 +1100 3/12/13, Bernard Robertson-Dunn wrote:
>>>  Has anybody seen a discussion on liability and/or insurance for these
>>>  autonomous things?

>On 3/12/2013 11:31 AM, Roger Clarke wrote:
>>  That's in the third paper in the series, for the first of which I
>>  sent an RFC this morning, in case anyone didn't notice  (:-)}

At 11:53 +1100 3/12/13, Bernard Robertson-Dunn wrote:
>Roger, apart from you?

A quick look in my current draft finds these tidbits:
>EC Regulation 785/2004 (EC 2004) stipulates requirements relating to 
>accident insurance for aircraft weighing more than 20kg.  This 
>appears to apply to drones.

[If I'd detected anything similar in FAA and CASA provisions, I'd 
have included that in the draft as well.

[Very few of the micro-drones in teenagers' stockings this Christmas 
will be >20kg.  And, at least within a campus area, a 1kg book could 
be delivered with a sub-20kg drone as well.

[Note too that there are various air traffic zones (described in 
paper 3 in the series), around airports, and in inverse cones above 
them, and across flight-paths at various altitudes.  But the 400-foot 
max altitude rule that applies across a lot of territory leaves 
plenty of scope for action - and congestion, and accidents, and the 
many failure-modes that drones exhibit.

[What, me worry??


>In the current context, no educational processes appear to be in 
>place to communicate to drone manufacturers, retailers and 
>commercial users that they need to undertake risk assessments, 
>devise and implement appropriate safeguards, and establish 
>appropriate commercial arrangements including public liability 
>insurance. There does not even appear to be any current momentum 
>towards encouraging hobby users to use drones within the context 
>provided by model aircraft clubs.

[I'm hoping to nail down the model aircraft situation more tightly.

[I wouldn't fly a model aircraft without either being a member of a 
club and working within their rules (which would provide me with 
cover), or reading the public liability part of my house and contents 
policy very, very carefully.

[But I'm an old greybeard with an (admittedly dubious) reputation to 
protect, and enough assets to be worth suing.  What proportion of 
drone users will take care to get (and pay for) public liability 
cover of an appropriate kind?  (Has anyone had a chat with AAMI or 
NRMA about this?).


Here's another indicator of how loose analogous situations are:
>Satellite insurance is available for the launch, post-separation and 
>in-orbit operation phases.  The duration of cover is short, and it 
>appears that the impact of space debris on other satellites may not 
>be currently insurable.  It appears that no impact of space debris 
>on earth or in the earth's atmosphere has yet been the subject of 
>litigation - although a couple of near-misses have already occurred, 
>and the USSR compensated Canada for spacecraft-related nuclear 
>contamination in 1978 - and insurance policies for satellites do not 
>(yet) cover such risks.


-- 
Roger Clarke                                 http://www.rogerclarke.com/
			            
Xamax Consultancy Pty Ltd      78 Sidaway St, Chapman ACT 2611 AUSTRALIA
Tel: +61 2 6288 6916                        http://about.me/roger.clarke
mailto:Roger.Clarke at xamax.com.au                http://www.xamax.com.au/

Visiting Professor in the Faculty of Law            University of N.S.W.
Visiting Professor in Computer Science    Australian National University