DOCSLIB.ORG

Signature Redacted

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Signature Redacted Driving Toward Monopoly: Regulating Autonomous Mobility Platforms as Public Utilities By Joanne Wong A. B. in Social Studies Harvard College (2013) Submitted to the Department of Urban Studies and Planning in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master in City Planning at the MASSACHUSETTS INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY June 2018 ( 2018 Joanne Wong. All Rights Reserved. The author hereby grants to MIT the permission to reproduce and to distribute publicly paper and electronic copies of the thesis document in whole or in part in any medium now known pkereafter created. Author Signature redacted ga rdae rtment of Urban Studies and Planning (Signature redacted May 24, 2018 Certified by I Professor Amy Glasmeier Depa rtment of Urban Studies and Planning / Thesis Supervisor Accepted by- Signature redacted Professor of the Practice, Ceasar McDowell MASSACHUSETTS INSTITUTE Chair, MCP Committee OF TECHNOLOGY Department of Urban Studies and Planning JUN 18 2018 LIBRARIES ARCHIVES Driving Toward Monopoly: Regulating Autonomous Mobility Platforms as Public Utilities By Joanne Wong Submitted to the Department of Urban Studies and Planning on May 24, 2018 in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master in City Planning Abstract Autonomous vehicles (AV) have captured the collective imagination of everyone from traditional auto manufacturers to computer software startups, from government administrators to urban planners. This thesis articulates a likely future for the deployment of AVs. Through stakeholder interviews and industry case studies, I show that there is general optimism about the progress of AV technology and its power to positively impact society. Stakeholders across sectors are expecting a future of autonomous electric fleets, but have divergent attitudes toward the regulation needed to facilitate its implementation. I demonstrate that, given the immense upfront capital investments and the nature of network effects intrinsic to data-intensive platforms, the autonomous mobility-as-a-service system is likely to tend toward a natural monopoly. This view is corroborated by key informants as well as recent industry trends. In order to better anticipate the characteristics of this emerging platform, I look back at the developmental trajectories of two classic public utilities - telecommunications and the electricity industry. I argue that the aspiring monopolists in autonomous mobility, like icons in these traditional industries, will succeed in supplanting a legacy technology with a new, transformative one, and use pricing and market consolidation tactics to gain regional dominance. The discussion on monopoly power is then adapted to the new business models of internet-enabled technology giants, and I examine two additional industry case studies in Google and Amazon. I argue that the autonomous mobility platform will first be designed to prioritize scale over everything else, including profits, and that firms are likely to pursue both horizontal and vertical integration strategies to achieve sustained market leadership. I conclude by recommending next steps for reining in platforms that may harm the public interest, and encourage planners to traverse disciplinary boundaries to better facilitate discussions between innovators and regulators. Thesis Advisor: Amy Glasmeier Thesis Reader: David Hsu Professor of Economic Geography & Associate Professor of Urban & Regional Planning Environmental Planning 3 Acknowledgements Many thanks to my advisor, Amy Glasmeier, for her trust, incisive questions, and unwavering support that made this research project a real joy to complete; To my reader, David Hsu, for his enthusiasm and reading lists that helped to clarify the major ideas here; To my interviewees, for taking the time to share their perspectives and brainstorm the future with me; To my classmates at DUSP, for their kindness and hopeful energy; To Team Octant, for piquing my interest in autonomous vehicles and being ever optimistic; To my family, friends, and B26, for sustaining me through another thesis; And finally, to Jason, for being a gift and an anchor in this transformative season. I hope you read this thesis one day. 4 Table of Contents Chapter 1: Introduction.......................................................................................... 7 A Prim er on A utonom ous Vehicles.......................................................................................................... 7 Regulating a System of Shared Autonomous Vehicles.......................................................................... 14 Research Q uestions and M ethodology.................................................................................................... 18 O ve rvie w o f the T h e sis .................................................................................................................................. 20 Chapter 2: The Inevitability of Autonomous Electric Fleets ................................. 22 The Future Will be Autonomous Electric Fleets..................................................................................... 22 T h re e C ate g o ries o f "B e lieve rs" .................................................................................................................. 28 S u m m a ry ........................................................................................................................................................ 3 2 Chapter 3: Why the Autonomous Mobility Platform Will Be A Natural Monopoly..34 A P rim e r o n N atu ra l M o no p o ly.....................................................................................................................34 Why the Autonomous Mobility Platform Will be a Natural Monopoly .................................................. 38 Natural Monopolies as "Common Carriers" ......................................................................................... 45 Chapter 4: What Classic Common Carriers Teach Us About the Future AV Platform .................................................................................................................................. 4 6 Brief History and Rationale of Regulating Utilities ................................................................................ 47 Transformative Nature of the Technology...............................................................................................48 S u p p la ntin g an O ld Syste m .......................................................................................................................... 5 1 Regulated Pricing and Price D iscrim ination............................................................................................ 54 R e g io n a l D o m in a n c e ..................................................................................................................................... 5 8 S u m m a ry ........................................................................................................................................................ 6 2 Chapter 5: What Today's Technology Giants Teach Us About the Future AV P latfo rm .................................................................................................................... 6 4 A d ap ting to N ew M o no p o lies ..................................................................................................................... 65 How is This N ew M onopoly D ifferent?...................................................... ........................................... 68 Sca le O ve r Eve ryth ing ..................................... .................................................. ...................................... 69 The Q uest to Becom e Infrastructure ........................................................................................................ 73 A p p licatio ns to the A V C ase ......................................................................................................................... 78 T he G o o g le/U b e r M o d e l .............................................................................................................................. 79 5 T he A m azo n/Lyft M o d e l ................................................................................................................................ 8 1 Downsides and Cautions .............................................................................................................................. 83 S u m m a ry ........................................................................................................................................................ 8 4 C hapter 6: M oving Forw ard ..................................................................................... 86 R efle ctio n a nd S u m m a ry ...............................................................................................................................87 P o licy Im p lic a tio n s .........................................................................................................................................9 1 F u rth e r Q u e stio n s ..........................................................................................................................................9 3 M o v in g F o rw a rd .............................................................................................................................................9 3 Bibliography ................................................................................................
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Result Build a Self-Driving Network
    SELF-DRIVING NETWORKS “LOOK, MA: NO HANDS” Kireeti Kompella CTO, Engineering Juniper Networks ITU FG Net2030 Geneva, Oct 2019 © 2019 Juniper Networks 1 Juniper Public VISION © 2019 Juniper Networks Juniper Public THE DARPA GRAND CHALLENGE BUILD A FULLY AUTONOMOUS GROUND VEHICLE IMPACT • Programmers, not drivers • No cops, lawyers, witnesses GOAL • Quadruple highway capacity Drive a pre-defined 240km course in the Mojave Desert along freeway I-15 • Glitches, insurance? • Ethical Self-Driving Cars? PRIZE POSSIBILITIES $1 Million RESULT 2004: Fail (best was less than 12km!) 2005: 5/23 completed it 2007: “URBAN CHALLENGE” Drive a 96km urban course following traffic regulations & dealing with other cars 6 cars completed this © 2019 Juniper Networks 3 Juniper Public GRAND RESULT: THE SELF-DRIVING CAR: (2009, 2014) No steering wheel, no pedals— a completely autonomous car Not just an incremental improvement This is a DISRUPTIVE change in automotive technology! © 2019 Juniper Networks 4 Juniper Public THE NETWORKING GRAND CHALLENGE BUILD A SELF-DRIVING NETWORK IMPACT • New skill sets required GOAL • New focus • BGP/IGP policies AI policy Self-Discover—Self-Configure—Self-Monitor—Self-Correct—Auto-Detect • Service config service design Customers—Auto-Provision—Self-Diagnose—Self-Optimize—Self-Report • Reactive proactive • Firewall rules anomaly detection RESULT Free up people to work at a higher-level: new service design and “mash-ups” POSSIBILITIES Agile, even anticipatory service creation Fast, intelligent response to security breaches CHALLENGE
    [Show full text]
  • An Off-Road Autonomous Vehicle for DARPA's Grand Challenge
    2005 Journal of Field Robotics Special Issue on the DARPA Grand Challenge MITRE Meteor: An Off-Road Autonomous Vehicle for DARPA’s Grand Challenge Robert Grabowski, Richard Weatherly, Robert Bolling, David Seidel, Michael Shadid, and Ann Jones. The MITRE Corporation 7525 Colshire Drive McLean VA, 22102 [email protected] Abstract The MITRE Meteor team fielded an autonomous vehicle that competed in DARPA’s 2005 Grand Challenge race. This paper describes the team’s approach to building its robotic vehicle, the vehicle and components that let the vehicle see and act, and the computer software that made the vehicle autonomous. It presents how the team prepared for the race and how their vehicle performed. 1 Introduction In 2004, the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) challenged developers of autonomous ground vehicles to build machines that could complete a 132-mile, off-road course. Figure 1: The MITRE Meteor starting the finals of the 2005 DARPA Grand Challenge. 2005 Journal of Field Robotics Special Issue on the DARPA Grand Challenge 195 teams applied – only 23 qualified to compete. Qualification included demonstrations to DARPA and a ten-day National Qualifying Event (NQE) in California. The race took place on October 8 and 9, 2005 in the Mojave Desert over a course containing gravel roads, dirt paths, switchbacks, open desert, dry lakebeds, mountain passes, and tunnels. The MITRE Corporation decided to compete in the Grand Challenge in September 2004 by sponsoring the Meteor team. They believed that MITRE’s work programs and military sponsors would benefit from an understanding of the technologies that contribute to the DARPA Grand Challenge.
    [Show full text]
  • A Survey of Autonomous Driving: Common Practices and Emerging Technologies
    Accepted March 22, 2020 Digital Object Identifier 10.1109/ACCESS.2020.2983149 A Survey of Autonomous Driving: Common Practices and Emerging Technologies EKIM YURTSEVER1, (Member, IEEE), JACOB LAMBERT 1, ALEXANDER CARBALLO 1, (Member, IEEE), AND KAZUYA TAKEDA 1, 2, (Senior Member, IEEE) 1Nagoya University, Furo-cho, Nagoya, 464-8603, Japan 2Tier4 Inc. Nagoya, Japan Corresponding author: Ekim Yurtsever (e-mail: [email protected]). ABSTRACT Automated driving systems (ADSs) promise a safe, comfortable and efficient driving experience. However, fatalities involving vehicles equipped with ADSs are on the rise. The full potential of ADSs cannot be realized unless the robustness of state-of-the-art is improved further. This paper discusses unsolved problems and surveys the technical aspect of automated driving. Studies regarding present challenges, high- level system architectures, emerging methodologies and core functions including localization, mapping, perception, planning, and human machine interfaces, were thoroughly reviewed. Furthermore, many state- of-the-art algorithms were implemented and compared on our own platform in a real-world driving setting. The paper concludes with an overview of available datasets and tools for ADS development. INDEX TERMS Autonomous Vehicles, Control, Robotics, Automation, Intelligent Vehicles, Intelligent Transportation Systems I. INTRODUCTION necessary here. CCORDING to a recent technical report by the Eureka Project PROMETHEUS [11] was carried out in A National Highway Traffic Safety Administration Europe between 1987-1995, and it was one of the earliest (NHTSA), 94% of road accidents are caused by human major automated driving studies. The project led to the errors [1]. Against this backdrop, Automated Driving Sys- development of VITA II by Daimler-Benz, which succeeded tems (ADSs) are being developed with the promise of in automatically driving on highways [12].
    [Show full text]
  • New Action Thriller by Alex Schuler Takes on the Controversial And
    FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE Publication Date: 8/17/2021 Alyssia Gonzalez Trade Paper ISBN: 9781933769844 ($18.95) Book Publicist eBook ISBN: 9781933769851 ($9.99) [email protected] New Action Thriller by Alex Schuler Takes on the Controversial and Dramatic History of Self-Driving Cars Level 4 Press presents a fictionalized retelling of how the autonomous car came to be. JAMUL, CA (FEB 2020) — Author Alex Schuler captures intense determination and a clash of egos in his new action thriller, Faster. It follows a fictional engineer and computer scientist who helped pioneer the self-driving car industry while navigating their own tumultuous relationship. Their drive to take on Detroit and become leaders in this technological revolution leaves the reader in awe of what humanity can accomplish, and just how much sacrifice it takes to change the world. Autonomous car breakthroughs spiked during the DARPA challenges between 2004 and 2013, giving names to eccentric computer scientists and engineers drawn to innovation. These remarkable individuals often find themselves embroiled in controversy as they forge new paths. Robotics wonderkid Sebastian Thrun is regularly in the news for his “internet freedom” crusades. Elon Musk is legendary for breaking norms, such as the Tesla autopilot feature rushed to market in 2015. Autonomous vehicle guru Anthony Levandowski took on Google, then found himself sentenced to jail, only to be pardoned by former president Donald Trump. These pioneers dedicated their lives to technological progress. But what’s behind their drive—self-interest or a desire to improve society? Or some of both? Alex Schuler fictionalizes the autonomous car industry’s past, exploring the motivations of these innovators and asking what we can expect for the future.
    [Show full text]
  • Automated Driving Activities in the U.S
    AUTOMATED DRIVING ACTIVITIES IN THE U.S. A PARTIAL REPORT JANE LAPPIN CHAIR, TRB STANDING COMMITTEE ON VEHICLE HIGHWAY AUTOMATION APRIL 19, 2021 EUCAD- VIRTUALLY BRUSSELS WHAT NATIONAL POLICIES AND ACTIONS CAN ACCELERATE DEVELOPMENT AND DEPLOYMENT? • Structural safety standards for new vehicle designs • Data exchange standards • Safe driving integration, by ODD, vehicle size/type • Public acceptance • Built infrastructure • ReMote operations • • Machine-readable signage Consistent national regulations • Procedural safety • Digital short-range communications • Platooning • Road operations • Planning • Ethics • Sensors/enabling technologies • Liability • Equity • Internal and external vehicle communications • Investment in Innovation* • Accessibility • Multi-sector Pilots • Personal security • Public deMonstrations • Cybersecurity • Test beds INDICATORS OF HEALTHY INNOVATION: AS OF FEBRUARY 25, 2021, CA DMV HAS ISSUED AUTONOMOUS VEHICLE TESTING PERMITS (WITH A DRIVER) TO THE FOLLOWING 56 ENTITIES: • AIMOTIVE INC • RENOVO.AUTO • Qcraft.ai • • • AMBARELLA CORPORATION RIDECELL INC • LEONIS TECHNOLOGIES QUALCOMM TECHNOLOGIES, • INC • APEX.AI SUBARU • LYFT, INC • TELENAV, INC. • APPLE INC • BOX BOT INC • MANDO AMERICA CORP • • TESLA • ARGO AI, LLC CONTINENTAL • MERC BENZ • • TOYOTA RESEARCH INSTITUTE • ATLAS ROBOTICS, INC CRUISE LLC • NIO USA INC. • • UATC, LLC (UBER) • AURORA INNOVATION CYNGN INC • NISSAN • DEEPROUTE.AI • UDACITY • AUTOX TECHNOLOGIES INC • NURO, INC • • Udelv, Inc • BAIDU USA LLC DELPHI • NVIDIA CORPORATION • • VALEO NORTH AMERICA,
    [Show full text]
  • Provisional Injunctive Relief Under the UTSA and the DTSA in Federal Court New Product Cases
    Science and Technology Law Review Volume 23 Number 2 Article 3 2020 Provisional Injunctive Relief Under the UTSA and the DTSA in Federal Court New Product Cases Richard F. Dole, Jr. Univerisity of Houston Law Center, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://scholar.smu.edu/scitech Part of the Computer Law Commons, Intellectual Property Law Commons, Internet Law Commons, and the Science and Technology Law Commons Recommended Citation Richard F Dole,, Provisional Injunctive Relief Under the UTSA and the DTSA in Federal Court New Product Cases, 23 SMU SCI. & TECH. L. REV. 127 (2020) https://scholar.smu.edu/scitech/vol23/iss2/3 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Law Journals at SMU Scholar. It has been accepted for inclusion in Science and Technology Law Review by an authorized administrator of SMU Scholar. For more information, please visit http://digitalrepository.smu.edu. Provisional Injunctive Relief Under the UTSA and the DTSA in Federal Court New Product Cases Richard F. Dole, Jr.* TABLE OF CONTENTS I. INTRODUCTION ......................................... 128 II. FEDERAL RULE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE 65 ............ 131 A. Procedural Requirements .............................. 131 B. Discretionary Requirements ............................ 133 III. THE WAYMO CASE ...................................... 136 A. Background ........................................... 136 B. Lessons from the Waymo Case ......................... 141 1. The Importance of the Unchallenged Evidence that Levandowski had Downloaded Without Authorization Over 14,000 Files of Waymo’s Driverless Vehicle Research.......................................... 141 2. Judge Alsup’s Refusal to Draw Negative Inferences from Levandowski’s Claim Over 400 Times of the Fifth Amendment Privilege Against Self- Incrimination ..................................... 141 3. The Adequacy of Waymo’s Remedy at Law .......
    [Show full text]
  • A Hierarchical Control System for Autonomous Driving Towards Urban Challenges
    applied sciences Article A Hierarchical Control System for Autonomous Driving towards Urban Challenges Nam Dinh Van , Muhammad Sualeh , Dohyeong Kim and Gon-Woo Kim *,† Intelligent Robotics Laboratory, Department of Control and Robot Engineering, Chungbuk National University, Cheongju-si 28644, Korea; [email protected] (N.D.V.); [email protected] (M.S.); [email protected] (D.K.) * Correspondence: [email protected] † Current Address: Chungdae-ro 1, Seowon-Gu, Cheongju, Chungbuk 28644, Korea. Received: 23 April 2020; Accepted: 18 May 2020; Published: 20 May 2020 Abstract: In recent years, the self-driving car technologies have been developed with many successful stories in both academia and industry. The challenge for autonomous vehicles is the requirement of operating accurately and robustly in the urban environment. This paper focuses on how to efficiently solve the hierarchical control system of a self-driving car into practice. This technique is composed of decision making, local path planning and control. An ego vehicle is navigated by global path planning with the aid of a High Definition map. Firstly, we propose the decision making for motion planning by applying a two-stage Finite State Machine to manipulate mission planning and control states. Furthermore, we implement a real-time hybrid A* algorithm with an occupancy grid map to find an efficient route for obstacle avoidance. Secondly, the local path planning is conducted to generate a safe and comfortable trajectory in unstructured scenarios. Herein, we solve an optimization problem with nonlinear constraints to optimize the sum of jerks for a smooth drive. In addition, controllers are designed by using the pure pursuit algorithm and the scheduled feedforward PI controller for lateral and longitudinal direction, respectively.
    [Show full text]
  • 2021 Tech M&A Outlook: Internet of Things
    2021 Tech M&A Outlook: Internet of Things Analysts - Christian Renaud, Rich Karpinski, Katy Ring, Brian O’Rourke, Johan Vermij, Mark Fontecchio, Jonathan Stern Publication date: Thursday, February 18 2021 Introduction Semiconductor activity contributed to a strong year for IoT dealmaking in 2020, followed by a flurry of consolidation in the healthcare, transportation, manufacturing and wireless sectors. According to 451 Research's M&A KnowledgeBase, the total value of IoT acquisitions rose to nearly $69bn from $8bn in 2019. Transaction volume was down slightly to 125 prints from the 2019 record of 139 purchases. Even backing out the $33.5bn NVIDIA-Arm pairing, total deal value was over four times the prior year. M&A activity was concentrated in a small handful of verticals as businesses sought to digitize. Spurred by a global health crisis, healthcare technology-related transactions led in volume with 24 acquisitions totaling over $19bn, or 20% of all deals in the year. There was continued enthusiasm for the transportation sector, with 13 transactions in both commercial and consumer transportation totaling over $5.8bn, including four rather large LiDAR special-purpose acquisition company (SPAC) deals. This transportation number does not include the acquisition in December of Uber's Advanced Technology Group by Aurora Innovation for a reported $4bn and is also not reflected in the $66bn in total IoT transactions. Healthcare and transportation were followed by manufacturing and industrial (13 prints, $5bn) and wireless-related firms (sensors and infrastructure), with 13 deals totaling $41m. This export was generated by user [email protected] at account S&P Global on 6/24/2021 from IP address 168.149.160.75.
    [Show full text]
  • Self-Driving Car Using Artificial Intelligence Prof
    International Journal of Future Generation Communication and Networking Vol. 13, No. 3s, (2020), pp. 612–615 Self-Driving Car Using Artificial Intelligence Prof. S.R. Wategaonkar #1, Sujoy Bhattacharya*2, Shubham Bhitre*3 Prem Kumar Singh *4, Khushboo Bedse *5 #Professor and Project Faculty member, Department of Electronic and Telecommunication, Bharati Vidyapeeth’s College of Engineering, Navi Mumbai, Maharashtra, India. *Project Student, Department of Electronic and Telecommunication, Bharati Vidyapeeth’s College of Engineering, Navi Mumbai, Maharashtra, India. [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] Abstract Self-driving cars have the prospective to transform urban mobility by providing safe, convenient and congestion free transportability. This autonomous vehicle as an application of Artificial Intelligence (AI) have several difficulties like traffic light detection, lane end detection, pedestrian, signs etc. This problem can be overcome by using technologies such as Machine Learning (ML), Deep Learning (DL) and Image Processing. In this paper, author’s propose deep neural network for lane and traffic light detection. The model is trained and assessed using the dataset, which contains the front view image frames and the steering angle data captured when driving on the road. Keeping cars inside the lane is a very important feature of self-driving cars. It learns how to keep the vehicle in lane from human driving data. The paper presents Artificial Intelligence based autonomous navigation and obstacle avoidance of self-driving cars, applied with Deep Learning to a simulated cars in an urban environment. Keywords—Self-Driving car, Autonomous driving, Object Detection, Lane End Detection, Deep Learning, Traffic light Detection.
    [Show full text]
  • Stanley: the Robot That Won the DARPA Grand Challenge
    Stanley: The Robot that Won the DARPA Grand Challenge ••••••••••••••••• •••••••••••••• Sebastian Thrun, Mike Montemerlo, Hendrik Dahlkamp, David Stavens, Andrei Aron, James Diebel, Philip Fong, John Gale, Morgan Halpenny, Gabriel Hoffmann, Kenny Lau, Celia Oakley, Mark Palatucci, Vaughan Pratt, and Pascal Stang Stanford Artificial Intelligence Laboratory Stanford University Stanford, California 94305 Sven Strohband, Cedric Dupont, Lars-Erik Jendrossek, Christian Koelen, Charles Markey, Carlo Rummel, Joe van Niekerk, Eric Jensen, and Philippe Alessandrini Volkswagen of America, Inc. Electronics Research Laboratory 4009 Miranda Avenue, Suite 100 Palo Alto, California 94304 Gary Bradski, Bob Davies, Scott Ettinger, Adrian Kaehler, and Ara Nefian Intel Research 2200 Mission College Boulevard Santa Clara, California 95052 Pamela Mahoney Mohr Davidow Ventures 3000 Sand Hill Road, Bldg. 3, Suite 290 Menlo Park, California 94025 Received 13 April 2006; accepted 27 June 2006 Journal of Field Robotics 23(9), 661–692 (2006) © 2006 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. Published online in Wiley InterScience (www.interscience.wiley.com). • DOI: 10.1002/rob.20147 662 • Journal of Field Robotics—2006 This article describes the robot Stanley, which won the 2005 DARPA Grand Challenge. Stanley was developed for high-speed desert driving without manual intervention. The robot’s software system relied predominately on state-of-the-art artificial intelligence technologies, such as machine learning and probabilistic reasoning. This paper describes the major components of this architecture, and discusses the results of the Grand Chal- lenge race. © 2006 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. 1. INTRODUCTION sult of an intense development effort led by Stanford University, and involving experts from Volkswagen The Grand Challenge was launched by the Defense of America, Mohr Davidow Ventures, Intel Research, ͑ ͒ Advanced Research Projects Agency DARPA in and a number of other entities.
    [Show full text]
  • Introducing Driverless Cars to UK Roads
    Introducing Driverless Cars to UK Roads WORK PACKAGE 5.1 Deliverable D1 Understanding the Socioeconomic Adoption Scenarios for Autonomous Vehicles: A Literature Review Ben Clark Graham Parkhurst Miriam Ricci June 2016 Preferred Citation: Clark, B., Parkhurst, G. and Ricci, M. (2016) Understanding the Socioeconomic Adoption Scenarios for Autonomous Vehicles: A Literature Review. Project Report. University of the West of England, Bristol. Available from: http://eprints.uwe.ac.uk/29134 Centre for Transport & Society Department of Geography and Environmental Management University of the West of England Bristol BS16 1QY UK Email enquiries to [email protected] VENTURER: Introducing driverless cars to UK roads Contents 1 INTRODUCTION .............................................................................................................................................. 2 2 A HISTORY OF AUTONOMOUS VEHICLES ................................................................................................ 2 3 THEORETICAL PERSPECTIVES ON THE ADOPTION OF AVS ............................................................... 4 3.1 THE MULTI-LEVEL PERSPECTIVE AND SOCIO-TECHNICAL TRANSITIONS ............................................................ 4 3.2 THE TECHNOLOGY ACCEPTANCE MODEL ........................................................................................................ 8 3.3 SUMMARY ...................................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Supplementary Submission Intellectual Property And
    MAY 2017 HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES STANDING COMMITTEE ON INDUSTRY, INNOVATION, SCIENCE AND RESOURCES SUPPLEMENTARY SUBMISSION INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY AND SELF-DRIVING CARS: WAYMO VS UBER DR MATTHEW RIMMER PROFESSOR OF INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY AND INNOVATION LAW FACULTY OF LAW QUEENSLAND UNIVERSITY OF TECHNOLOGY Queensland University of Technology 2 George Street GPO Box 2434 Brisbane Queensland 4001 Australia Work Telephone Number: SUPPLEMENTARY SUBMISSION INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY AND SELF-DRIVING CARS: WAYMO VS UBER Matthew Rimmer While the Australian Parliament has been inquiring into social issues relating to land-based driverless vehicles in Australia since February 2017, intellectual property litigation has erupted in the courts between Waymo (Google’s Self-Driving Car Project) and Uber in the United States. The case has attracted much public attention. Alex Davies has reflected: Until today, the race to build a self-driving car seemed to hinge on who had the best technology. Now it’s become a case of full-blown corporate intrigue. Alphabet’s self-driving startup, Waymo, is suing Uber, accusing the ridesharing giant of stealing critical autonomous driving technology. If the suit goes to trial, Apple’s legal battle with Samsung could wind up looking tame by comparison.1 The intellectual property dispute could have significant implications for competition in respect of self-driving cars and autonomous vehicles. The New York Times has noted that ‘companies in Silicon Valley and Detroit are betting big on self-driving car technology’ and ‘the
    [Show full text]