Driverless tech: First comes carriage ... then the law

""Under the existing code, a human user could almost always be considered a 'driver,' " regardless of where that person is, Smith said. "That is probably not appropriate for these higher levels of automation."

Many ambiguities could be clarified by through statements of purpose that say the state's intent is to promote the use of safe technology on the road, he said. Judges would then use these statements as guidance for interpreting flexible concepts like "prudence" and "driving," said Smith."