科技的发展，社会的进步推动着法律制度的革新。自动驾驶技术打破了只有自然人能发布驾驶命令、执行驾驶任务的传统观念，对机动车交通事故责任中普遍适用的过错责任原则提出了挑战。随着驾驶自动化程度、人机交互程度的提高，事故责任由过错责任向产品责任转移。现行产品质量法的规定无法全面回应自动驾驶产生的问题，有必要更新产品界定、瑕疵认定等方面内容。法律制度的发展与变革是客观事实与主观价值判断的综合， 在此过程中应持续把握自动驾驶技术的先进性和局限性，综合考虑法律规则与其他制度的协同效应及其对人们行为习惯的影响。

在现行机动车交通事故侵权责任体系中，自动驾驶机动车交通事故侵权责任问题可以通过道路交通事故责任和产品责任予以规制：对于 1 级、2 级部分自动驾驶机动车，可以依据现行《道路交通安全法》的归责原则确定机动车一方（驾驶人）的责任；针对 3 级有条件自动驾驶机动车造成交通事故的情形，若自动驾驶系统分析感应到紧急情况，能够及时发出确切指示，提醒驾驶人履行接管义务，因自身原因驾驶人未能接管车辆的，应当由机动车一方承担道路交通安全责任，与保有人之责任构成不真正连带责任。针对 4 级高度自动化和 5 级完全自动化机动车造成交通事故的情形，自动驾驶系统对于机动车的不当操控尚无法采用驾驶人责任的思路予以法律调整，而应纳入产品责任体系。因在路测道路、物流园区等特定范围内，应该由生产者一方承担产品责任，特定范围之外，应当根据是否超出当前国际专业人员认可的科技水平，分析确定机动车一方的交通事故责任或生产者一方的产品责任。因自动驾驶系统设计、制造、警示和跟踪观察缺陷导致交通事故损害的， 自驾驶系统与自动驾驶机动车的生产者承担产品侵权责任，与保有人之无过错责任构成不真正连带的责任形态。

The development of science and technology and the progress of society promote the innovation of legal system. Automatic driving technology breaks the traditional concept that only natural people can issue driving orders and perform driving tasks, and challenges the fault liability principle which is generally applied in the liability of motor vehicle traffic accidents. With the improvement of driving automation and human-computer interaction, the responsibility of accident is transferred from fault liability to product liability. The current product quality law cannot fully respond to the problems caused by automatic driving, so it is necessary to update the product definition, defect identification and other aspects. The development and reform of legal system is the combination of objective facts and subjective value judgments. In this process, the advanced nature and limitations of automatic driving technology should be continuously grasped, and the synergy effect of legal rules and other systems should be considered comprehensively and their influence on people's behavior and habits.

As for the tort liability of automatic driving motor vehicles, the author thinks that under the current legal system, it can be regulated by road traffic accident liability and product liability: for the level 1 and level 2 part of automatic driving motor vehicles, the liability principle of the current road traffic safety law can be applied to determine the liability of one side of motor vehicles; for the level 3 conditional automatic driving motor vehicles causing traffic In case of accident, if the automatic driving system can remind drivers to take over vehicles in a reasonable way when they can not handle the relevant road conditions, the system has no design defects and warning defects, and the vehicle side shall bear the responsibility for road traffic safety. In other cases, the producer's product liability shall be recognized: in the case of traffic accidents caused by level 4 highly automated and level 5 fully automated vehicles, the producer shall bear the product liability within the limited scope, and in the limited scope, the traffic of the motor vehicle party shall be analyzed and determined according to the technology level beyond the recognition of current international professionals Accident liability or product liability of the producer.