[zeroname]

> And if the risk is being taken by a company, it has to pay for it - because it intends to reap the rewards? Not a woman or a negligent employee.

First of all, this is criminal liability. Uber may still be held financially liable in a civil court.

Secondly, liability needs to be decided on a case by case basis. In this case, the woman (not "a woman") shouldn't have crossed the road and the operator should have been alert.

Furthermore, why should a company be criminally liable for any negligent behavior of an employee? That's ridiculous.

[cgidriver]

> First of all, this is criminal liability. Uber may still be held financially liable in a civil court.

I am waiting for the 10% of market value punishment for Uber.

> Secondly, liability needs to be decided on a case by case basis.

Agreed.

> In this case, the woman (not "a women") shouldn't have crossed the road and the operator should have been alert.

In this case, "the Uber" should have made sure it's sensors pick up the point cloud in 1/15th of the second and stop the car in time.

>Furthermore, why should a company be criminally liable for >any negligent behavior of an employee? That's ridiculous.

Indeed - I am just preaching for 10%. And only from the shareholders :).