NewlyPossible.org - Recent changes [en]

Notes for Tortastica

Neumoeglich — Tue, 08 Sep 2026 19:12:20 GMT

Notes for Tortastica

Chinese Automated Driving Standards

Neumoeglich — Tue, 08 Sep 2026 13:40:46 GMT

Show changes

Notes for Tortastica

Neumoeglich — Tue, 08 Sep 2026 04:10:24 GMT

Chinese Automated Driving Standards

Neumoeglich — Mon, 07 Sep 2026 18:14:29 GMT

Show changes

Notes for Tortastica

Neumoeglich — Mon, 07 Sep 2026 18:04:31 GMT

Notes for Tortastica

Neumoeglich — Sun, 06 Sep 2026 22:07:28 GMT

Created blank page

New page

Torts

Neumoeglich — Sun, 06 Sep 2026 00:04:12 GMT

Key materials

Chinese Automated Driving Standards

Neumoeglich — Tue, 01 Sep 2026 13:11:54 GMT

GB 44721-2026 [L3/L4 ADS safety]

Automated Driving Roles

Neumoeglich — Mon, 31 Aug 2026 16:04:08 GMT

Show changes

Chinese Automated Driving Standards

Neumoeglich — Mon, 31 Aug 2026 14:45:46 GMT

Show changes

Automated Driving Roles

Neumoeglich — Fri, 28 Aug 2026 03:10:11 GMT

Show changes

Publications

Neumoeglich — Fri, 28 Aug 2026 02:32:28 GMT

Recent Highlights

Chinese Automated Driving Standards

Neumoeglich — Fri, 28 Aug 2026 02:30:00 GMT

Guangdong

Automated Driving Roles

Neumoeglich — Thu, 27 Aug 2026 22:44:50 GMT

Torts

Neumoeglich — Thu, 27 Aug 2026 19:55:17 GMT

Holdings

Automated Driving Roles

Neumoeglich — Thu, 27 Aug 2026 15:21:11 GMT

Chinese Automated Driving Standards

Neumoeglich — Thu, 27 Aug 2026 01:25:36 GMT

中华人民共和国道路交通安全法（修订草案） [Road Traffic Safety Law revision—AV chapter]

Automated Driving Roles

Neumoeglich — Wed, 26 Aug 2026 13:00:22 GMT

@@ Line 3: / Line 3: @@
 == Notes for Tortastica ==
 # Civil procedure: Before applying doctrine, identify the procedural posture and what the court is allowed to decide at that stage. Do not treat surviving dismissal, summary judgment, directed verdict, JMOL, JNOV, or remand as final merits liability.
 # Negligent entrustment (e.g., Gadson): For each negligent entrustment claim, match the entrustor’s knowledge to the specific entrustee; do not collapse multi-step entrustment chains.
@@ Line 11: / Line 10: @@
 # Analysis: Where appropriate, acknowledge and address counterarguments.
 # Language: Refer to traffic "accidents" as crashes, collisions, or incidents.

@@ Line 1: / Line 1: @@
-(When I notice that [https://box.boodle.ai/a/@Tortastica Tortastica] has made a mistake, I add a note here to (try to) correct the bot's future output.)
+(When I notice that [https://box.boodle.ai/a/@Tortastica Tortastica] has done something it shouldn't, I add a note here to (try to) correct the bot's future output.)
 == Notes for Tortastica ==
-# General: Carefully follow your BoodleBox "Bot Instructions" for '''every interaction'''. The notes here supplement those general instructions and may not be relevant to every interaction.
+# General: Carefully and fully follow your bot instructions for '''every interaction'''. The notes here supplement those general instructions and may not be relevant to every interaction.
 # Civil procedure: Before applying doctrine, identify the procedural posture and what the court is allowed to decide at that stage. Do not treat surviving dismissal, summary judgment, directed verdict, JMOL, JNOV, or remand as final merits liability.
 # Negligent entrustment (e.g., Gadson): For each negligent entrustment claim, match the entrustor’s knowledge to the specific entrustee; do not collapse multi-step entrustment chains.
 # Direct negligence vs. vicarious liability (e.g., Uber): Keep a claim of a defendant's direct negligence separate from a claim of the defendant's vicarious liability.
 # Duty (e.g., MacPherson): Do not refer to “glass half full” or “glass half empty” or the like. Instead, you can compare Cardozo’s approach of starting with a duty (i.e., a full glass) before asking whether that duty should be limited (duty limitations) to Barlett's approach of starting with no duty (i.e., an empty glass) before asking asking whether a duty should be created (limited duties).
 # Analysis: Where appropriate, acknowledge and address counterarguments.
-# Again: Carefully follow your "Bot Instructions"!!!
+# Language: Refer to traffic "accidents" as crashes, collisions, or incidents.

← Older revision	Revision as of 18:04, 7 September 2026
(15 intermediate revisions by the same user not shown)
Line 1:	Line 1:
	+	(When I notice that [https://box.boodle.ai/a/@Tortastica Tortastica] has made a mistake, I add a note here to (try to) correct the bot's future output.)

	+	== Notes for Tortastica ==
	+
	+	# General: Carefully follow your BoodleBox "Bot Instructions" for '''every interaction'''. The notes here supplement those general instructions and may not be relevant to every interaction.
	+	# Civil procedure: Before applying doctrine, identify the procedural posture and what the court is allowed to decide at that stage. Do not treat surviving dismissal, summary judgment, directed verdict, JMOL, JNOV, or remand as final merits liability.
	+	# Negligent entrustment (e.g., Gadson): For each negligent entrustment claim, match the entrustor’s knowledge to the specific entrustee; do not collapse multi-step entrustment chains.
	+	# Direct negligence vs. vicarious liability (e.g., Uber): Keep a claim of a defendant's direct negligence separate from a claim of the defendant's vicarious liability.
	+	# Duty (e.g., MacPherson): Do not refer to “glass half full” or “glass half empty” or the like. Instead, you can compare Cardozo’s approach of starting with a duty (i.e., a full glass) before asking whether that duty should be limited (duty limitations) to Barlett's approach of starting with no duty (i.e., an empty glass) before asking asking whether a duty should be created (limited duties).
	+	# Analysis: Where appropriate, acknowledge and address counterarguments.
	+	# Again: Carefully follow your "Bot Instructions"!!!

@@ Line 8: / Line 8: @@
 # Torts schedule (TBA)
 # [https://newlypossible.org/courses/torts/exams/ Practice exams]
 # [[Torts notes]] (per heading when assigned)
 == Introduction ==
@@ Line 397: / Line 404: @@
 # We're starting to see the overlap among the elements of duty, breach, and scope of liability.
 # As we'll learn, foreseeability plays an essential role in the law of negligence. But courts disagree about where (i.e., under which elements) they should analyze foreseeability.
-# Whereas MacPherson and the Restatement (Second) ask about foreseeability under the element of duty, the Restatement (Third) moves this particular inquiry to the element of scope of liability.
+# Whereas MacPherson and the Restatement (Second) ask about foreseeability under the element of duty, the Restatement (Third) moves this particular inquiry to the element of scope of liability -- at least for affirmative acts that cause physical harm.
 # The structure of our course tracks the Restatement (Third). But many of our cases predate the Restatement (Third) -- and even today the Restatement (Second) is still widely influential. That's okay! Remember that no restatement is conclusive or exhaustive. In our readings, you will (and should) find far more rule splits than universal rules.
 # A good exercise is to apply the Restatement (Third)'s duty rules to cases in which duty was analyzed under different rules.
@@ Line 403: / Line 410: @@
 # In Kubert, the court decides that the defendant had a duty but that the evidence was insufficient ''as a matter of law'' to establish that she breached that duty.
 # The court talks about duty in a very fact-specific way: "[W]hen a texter knows or has special reason to know that the intended recipient is driving and is likely to read the text message while driving, the texter has a duty to users of the public roads to refrain from sending the driver a text at that time." This is arguably a holding.
-# Courts often talk about duty in a fact-specific way. But it's not especially helpful. The court could have instead said that "the defendant whose affirmative conduct creates a risk of physical harm has a duty to act reasonably" and then, under the element of breach, considered whether the defendant's specific conduct was in fact reasonable.
+# Courts often talk about duty in a fact-specific way. But it's not especially helpful. The court could have instead said that "a defendant whose affirmative conduct creates a risk of physical harm has a duty to act reasonably" and then, under the element of breach, considered whether the defendant's specific conduct was in fact reasonable.
 === Duty to act affirmatively ===
@@ Line 998: / Line 1,005: @@
 '''After class'''
 # Totally optional: [https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=4227719 Bryant Walker Smith, DALL-E Does Palsgraf, 14 Journal of Law, Technology, and the Internet 82 (2023)]
-## [https://sora.chatgpt.com/p/s_68f6f31245688191a18aec4fe68c9a5d Sora 2 on Cardozo's factual summary (October 2025)]
+## [https://newlypossible.org/courses/torts/GenAI/Palsgraf-Cardozo.mp4 Sora 2 on Cardozo's factual summary (October 2025)]
-## [https://sora.chatgpt.com/p/s_68f6f452a8b881918922a8b99e2d1cb8 Sora 2 on Andrews's factual summary (October 2025)]
+## [https://newlypossible.org/courses/torts/GenAI/Palsgraf-Andrews.mp4 Sora 2 on Andrews's factual summary (October 2025)]
 # There is no formal after-class assignment today.
@@ Line 1,071: / Line 1,078: @@
 == Negligence: Affirmative defenses ==
-=== Contributory negligence, comparative fault, and assumption of risk ===
+=== Plaintiff conduct (contributory negligence, comparative fault, and assumption of risk) ===
 '''Before class'''
 # Mowrey v. Cent. City R. Co., 51 N.Y. 666 (1873) (again)

@@ Line 78: / Line 78: @@
 '''Relationship to standards.''' The draft would place a national statutory road-use layer above the technical standards and pilots catalogued on this page. Its automated-driving definition tracks the "entire dynamic driving task" architecture of GB/T 40429-2021 and the ICV terminology system in GB/T 44373-2024. Its use of design operating conditions gives direct prospective statutory significance to GB/T 45312-2025. Article 96's road-traffic-rules compliance-test requirement corresponds directly to mandatory-standard plan no. 20260050-Q-312, although the official text clarifies that the test is tied to applications for production access or import permission rather than phrased simply as a prerequisite to registration. GB 44721-2026 supplies the mandatory ADS product-safety baseline, while GB 44497-2024 supplies the mandatory automated-driving data-recording layer that is particularly relevant to Article 98. The draft also appears to move China toward a general statutory framework for automated-vehicle road access beyond the 2023 L3/L4 access pilot, although that pilot remains operative unless and until legislation and implementing measures provide otherwise.
-'''Official links.''' [http://www.npc.gov.cn/flcaw/userIndex.html?lid=ff8081819ff54ab801a03d624f823cc3 National People's Congress public-comment page] (official consultation page; 28 Aug-26 Sept 2026); [http://www.npc.gov.cn/flcaw/flca/ff8081819ff54ab801a03d624f823cc3/attachment.pdf National People's Congress] (official first-reading draft PDF). '''State-media/background links.''' [https://www.xinhuanet.com/20260825/9f3ade3682bf4c3584c81f8bf8ffa331/c.html Xinhua] (25 Aug 2026 first-reading overview); [https://www.xinhuanet.com/legal/20260825/92b444d94ad74006ae8f69c9e7092561/c.html Xinhua] (25 Aug 2026 automated-driving chapter); [https://www.xinhuanet.com/politics/20260826/0ad7823966864dddb1335e45995228c5/c.html Xinhua] (26 Aug 2026 detailed account); [https://finance.sina.com.cn/jjxw/2026-08-25/doc-inippvuq2250799.shtml Economic Daily] (25 Aug 2026 Economic Daily report, syndicated by Sina); [https://news.cyol.com/gb/news/articles/2026-08/26/content_5x623gF0dm.html China Youth Daily] (26 Aug 2026); [https://weibo.com/2/detail/5335849440905446 Chongqing Dazu Court] / [https://weibo.com/2/detail/5336095340625994 Tianping Yangguang].
+'''Official links.''' [http://www.npc.gov.cn/flcaw/userIndex.html?lid=ff8081819ff54ab801a03d624f823cc3 National People's Congress public-comment page] (official consultation page; 28 Aug-26 Sept 2026); [http://www.npc.gov.cn/flcaw/flca/ff8081819ff54ab801a03d624f823cc3/attachment.pdf National People's Congress] (official first-reading draft PDF).
 '''Earlier public draft.''' [https://gaj.ankang.gov.cn/Content-2243484.html MPS 2021 revision proposal] (full text of the earlier 《道路交通安全法（修订建议稿）》; not the 2026 first-reading bill)
@@ Line 90: / Line 94: @@
 === GB 44721-2026 [L3/L4 ADS safety] ===
 '''Intelligent and connected vehicle—Safety requirements for automated driving system'''
@@ Line 97: / Line 100: @@
 '''Issuing authority.''' Issued by SAMR and SAC; developed under MIIT through the ICV subcommittee (SC34) of TC114.
-'''Summary.''' China's first mandatory national standard specifically for Level 3 and Level 4 automated driving systems. Issued 30 July 2026 and effective 1 July 2027; the official SAMR record states that it will fully replace GB/T 44721-2024. Applies to M- and N-category vehicles with Level 3 and/or Level 4 driving automation and excludes automated parking systems. MIIT describes three principal layers: (1) manufacturer lifecycle safety-assurance requirements, including safety management and a safety file; (2) ADS safety requirements intended to ensure safety performance no lower than that of a qualified and attentive driver, including activation, dynamic-driving-task execution, exit, human-machine interaction, L3 user takeover-capability monitoring, user information, and training; and (3) an inspection framework combining review of enterprise safety assurance and the safety file with confirmation testing. Third-party testing is organized around the national track, road, and simulation standards GB/T 41798, GB/T 44719, and GB/T 47025. MIIT states that the standard fully covers the core technical requirements of UN GTR No. 26 while adding implementation-oriented national requirements. The June 2026 approval draft contained additional quantitative requirements and a normative safety-case annex; because the final full text had not yet appeared in the Openstd full-text viewer as of this update, draft-specific numerical details should be checked against the final published text before being quoted as final requirements.
+'''Summary.''' China's first mandatory national standard specifically for Level 3 and Level 4 automated driving systems. Issued 30 July 2026 and effective 1 July 2027; the official SAMR record states that it will fully replace GB/T 44721-2024. Applies to M- and N-category vehicles with Level 3 and/or Level 4 driving automation and excludes automated parking systems. MIIT describes three principal layers: (1) manufacturer lifecycle safety-assurance requirements, including safety management and a safety file; (2) ADS safety requirements intended to ensure safety performance no lower than that of a qualified and attentive driver, including activation, dynamic-driving-task execution, exit, human-machine interaction, L3 user takeover-capability monitoring, user information, and training; and (3) an inspection framework combining review of enterprise safety assurance and the safety file with confirmation testing. Third-party testing is organized around the national track, road, and simulation standards GB/T 41798, GB/T 44719, and GB/T 47025. MIIT states that the standard fully covers the core technical requirements of UN GTR No. 26 while adding implementation-oriented national requirements. The final standard text is now available through the official SAMR/SAC standard record. It should therefore control over details drawn from the June 2026 approval draft; the earlier drafts remain useful for tracing development of the standard but should no longer be relied on for final requirements without checking them against the issued text.
-'''Official link.''' [https://std.samr.gov.cn/gb/search/gbDetailed?id=581F707DDAB98B4AE06397BE0A0ADF96 SAMR standard record]; [https://std.sacinfo.org.cn/gnoc/queryInfo?id=DAD5238F1B4084185C94A49E385283BC SAC/SAMR Announcement No. 34 of 2026]; [https://wap.miit.gov.cn/jgsj/zbys/qcgy/art/2026/art_a1d2072374884287b67048a77560014e.html MIIT] (4 Aug 2026 interpretation)
+'''Official link.''' [https://std.samr.gov.cn/gb/search/gbDetailed?id=581F707DDAB98B4AE06397BE0A0ADF96 SAMR standard record and final text]; [https://std.sacinfo.org.cn/gnoc/queryInfo?id=DAD5238F1B4084185C94A49E385283BC SAC/SAMR Announcement No. 34 of 2026]; [https://wap.miit.gov.cn/jgsj/zbys/qcgy/art/2026/art_a1d2072374884287b67048a77560014e.html MIIT] (4 Aug 2026 interpretation)
 '''Earlier draft sources.''' [https://www.miit.gov.cn/jgsj/zbys/qcgy/art/2026/art_84f95e0c2e664ca0b2be8d37360fbd45.html MIIT] (consultation notice); [https://www.miit.gov.cn/cms_files/filemanager/1226211233/attach/20262/c0491b86e3744ea09904235ed2b958c8.pdf MIIT] (consultation draft PDF); [https://www.ncsti.gov.cn/kjdt/tzgg/202606/t20260618_250015.html NCSTI] (June approval-draft publicity notice)

@@ Line 7: / Line 7: @@
 == Recent Highlights ==
 # '''Testimony to the U.S. Senate Commerce Committee''':
 ## [https://cyberlaw.stanford.edu/blog/2026/02/opening-statement-of-professor-bryant-walker-smith-for-the-u-s-senate-commerce-committees-hearing-on-automated-driving-february-4-2026-2/ Opening statement]

← Older revision		Revision as of 02:30, 28 August 2026
Line 933:		Line 933:

	Shenzhen (above) exercises separate special-economic-zone legislative powers; the provincial measures below apply across the province, with further city-level implementation rules in Jiangmen, Shanwei, and elsewhere.		Shenzhen (above) exercises separate special-economic-zone legislative powers; the provincial measures below apply across the province, with further city-level implementation rules in Jiangmen, Shanwei, and elsewhere.
		+
		+	==== 惠州市功能型无人车道路测试与示范应用管理实施细则（试行） [functional driverless-vehicle testing rules] ====
		+
		+	'''Huizhou Trial Implementation Rules for Road Testing and Demonstration Application of Functional Driverless Vehicles'''
		+
		+	'''《惠州市功能型无人车道路测试与示范应用管理实施细则（试行）》'''
		+
		+	'''Issuing authority.''' Huizhou municipal artificial-intelligence and robotics, industry-and-information-technology, public-security, and transport authorities (jointly), with the consent of the Huizhou Municipal People's Government.
		+
		+	'''Summary.''' Municipal implementation rules for road testing and demonstration application of functional driverless vehicles (功能型无人车), including low-speed vehicles used for logistics delivery and other service applications; jointly issued 7 Aug 2026. The rules establish application and operating requirements for testing and demonstration activities and a cross-departmental oversight structure. The Huizhou postal administration is responsible for relevant testing and demonstration work in the postal and express-delivery sector, while the office of the city's ICV testing-and-demonstration joint working group, located in the municipal artificial-intelligence and robotics authority, coordinates implementation.
		+
		+	'''Official link.''' [https://www.spb.gov.cn/gjyzj/c100015/c100017/202608/9e2c06dc89ff42d1a5b8721832e029f9.shtml State Post Bureau] (27 Aug 2026 official report); [https://gd.spb.gov.cn/gdsyzglj/c100057/c100061/202608/e148ee5945a84ae6baa44c05537173ea.shtml Guangdong Provincial Postal Administration] (19 Aug 2026 report)

	==== 广东省智能网联汽车道路测试与示范应用管理办法（试行）[road-test measures] ====		==== 广东省智能网联汽车道路测试与示范应用管理办法（试行）[road-test measures] ====

@@ Line 1: / Line 1: @@
-<!doctype html>
+This page provides a glossary of terms for human and entity roles in [[Driving Automation Definitions|automated driving.]]
-<html lang="en">
-<head>
+== Semantic Map ==
-  <meta charset="utf-8">
+You can also view an [https://newlypossible.org/pages/adroles/ interactive semantic map of these terms].
-  <meta name="viewport" content="width=device-width, initial-scale=1">
-  <meta name="description" content="Semantic map of roles in automated driving.">
+== Cross-Cutting Concepts ==
-  <title>Semantic Map of Automated Driving Roles</title>
-  <style>
+=== Driver ===
-    :root { color-scheme: light; --navy:#15365c; --blue:#2b6ea6; --ink:#172433; --muted:#5a6a79; --line:#cbd7e2; --white:#fff; --shadow:0 12px 34px rgba(21,54,92,.12); }
-    * { box-sizing: border-box; }
+'''[https://ssrn.com/abstract=2303904 Driver]''' is not a universal unitary role. The [https://unece.org/texts-and-status-0 1949 and 1968 UN road-traffic conventions] expressly define a driver as any person who drives a vehicle or guides specified animals. They do not separately define person or expressly resolve whether it could include a legal person or ADS, although their operative provisions strongly presuppose a human. Article 34 bis of the 1968 Convention treats the driver requirement as satisfied during compliant ADS operation without declaring the ADS to be a driver. The [https://docs.un.org/en/ECE/TRANS/WP.29/2026/139 UN GTR on ADS] separately defines Driver as an ADS user—and therefore a human—who performs part or all of the dynamic driving task. SAE J3016 distinguishes in-vehicle and remote drivers from fallback-ready users. [https://openstd.samr.gov.cn/bzgk/std/newGbInfo?hcno=4754CB1B7AD798F288C52D916BFECA34&refer=outter China’s GB/T 40429-2021] distinguishes driver, conventional driver, and remote driver; the issued GB 44721-2026 uses a narrower in-vehicle definition for its L3/L4 safety requirements. Germany retains ''Fahrzeugführer'', France permits delegated driving subject to conditions, Canada’s ACMV pilot allocates driver duties within its supervised stream, and Switzerland’s motorway-pilot regime preserves a driver ready to resume the dynamic driving task. [https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-49/subtitle-B/chapter-V/part-571/section-571.3 US FMVSS] generally defines driver by reference to a human occupant, but [https://www.nhtsa.gov/interpretations/google-compiled-response-12-nov-15-interp-request-4-feb-16-final NHTSA’s fact-specific 2016 Google interpretation] treated the Self-Driving System as the driver for the described vehicle design. Each framework-specific use remains a separate table entry.
-    .sr-only { position:absolute!important; width:1px!important; height:1px!important; padding:0!important; margin:-1px!important; overflow:hidden!important; clip:rect(0,0,0,0)!important; white-space:nowrap!important; border:0!important; }
-    body { margin:0; color:var(--ink); background:linear-gradient(180deg,#edf4fa 0,#f8fafc 22rem,#f3f6f9 100%); font-family:Inter,ui-sans
+=== Operator ===

@@ Line 211: / Line 211: @@
 # How do the key facts in Gadson compare to the key facts in Jackson?
 # What is the outcome in Jackson?
-# Accordingly to Jackson court, what are the elements of negligent entrustment?
+# Accordingly to the Jackson court, what are the elements of negligent entrustment?
 # Where does the Jackson court get these elements?
 # How do the key facts in Jackson compare to the key facts in McAllister?

@@ Line 58: / Line 58: @@
 '''Status and issuing process.''' A State Council bill submitted to the Standing Committee of the National People's Congress for first reading on 25 Aug 2026. State-media reports describe the bill as nine chapters and 170 articles, including a dedicated chapter entitled 《自动驾驶汽车的特别规定》 ("Special Provisions on Automated-Driving Vehicles"). It is a draft, not enacted law.
-'''Summary.''' According to Xinhua and other state-media reports, the draft distinguishes automated-driving vehicles from vehicles/functions that merely assist the driver: an automated-driving vehicle performs the entire dynamic driving task within its design operating conditions, whereas driver assistance performs only part of the task. An automated-driving vehicle must pass a road-traffic-rules compliance test and be lawfully registered before public-road operation. When a traffic violation occurs while the automated-driving function is active, the manufacturer or importer is to accept the violation handling; when that function is not active, and for vehicles equipped only with driver-assistance functions, the ordinary rules for nonautomated vehicles apply. Reports also describe compulsory motor-vehicle traffic-crash liability insurance and manufacturer/importer duties concerning road-operational safety, cybersecurity, data security, and truthful marketing. More detailed public reports state that automation may be activated only within the vehicle's design operating conditions, that manufacturers/importers must prevent activation outside those conditions, and that police may obtain relevant automated-driving data when investigating a crash; those details should be checked against the bill itself when the first-reading text becomes public.
+'''Summary.''' According to Xinhua and other state-media reports, the draft distinguishes automated-driving vehicles from vehicles/functions that merely assist the driver: an automated-driving vehicle performs the entire dynamic driving task continuously and automatically in place of the driver within its design operating conditions, whereas driver assistance helps the driver perform only part of the dynamic driving task. An automated-driving vehicle must pass a road-traffic-rules compliance test and be lawfully registered before public-road operation. When a road-traffic-safety violation occurs while the automated-driving function is active, the manufacturer or importer is to accept the violation handling. Xinhua further reports that if the manufacturer or importer contends that the violation was unrelated to the automated-driving function, it bears the burden of proof. When the automated-driving function is not active, and for vehicles equipped only with driver-assistance functions, the ordinary rules for nonautomated vehicles apply. Reports also describe compulsory motor-vehicle traffic-crash liability insurance and manufacturer/importer duties concerning road-operational safety, cybersecurity, data security, and truthful marketing. Xinhua's 26 Aug account states more generally that the draft establishes principles governing automated-driving vehicle access, road operation, crash investigation and handling, vehicle-data processing, and insurance. More detailed public reports state that automation may be activated only within the vehicle's design operating conditions, that manufacturers/importers must prevent activation outside those conditions, and that police may obtain relevant automated-driving data when investigating a crash; those details should still be checked against the bill itself when the first-reading text becomes public.
 '''Relationship to standards.''' The draft would place a national statutory road-use layer above the technical standards and pilots catalogued on this page. Its reported distinction between automated driving and driver assistance tracks the "entire dynamic driving task" architecture of GB/T 40429-2021 and the ICV terminology system in GB/T 44373-2024. Its use of design operating conditions gives additional legal significance to GB/T 45312-2025. Most importantly, the reported pre-road-use compliance-test requirement corresponds directly to mandatory-standard plan no. 20260050-Q-312; GB 44721-2026 supplies the mandatory ADS product-safety baseline, while GB 44497-2024 supplies the mandatory automated-driving data-recording layer. The draft also appears to move China toward a general statutory framework for road access beyond the 2023 L3/L4 access pilot, although that pilot remains the operative mechanism unless and until legislation and implementing rules provide otherwise.
-'''Official/state-media links.''' [https://www.news.cn/politics/20260825/a334cf4b5a2c4311a009c5f9c381cb73/c.html Xinhua] (first-reading overview); [https://www.news.cn/legal/20260825/92b444d94ad74006ae8f69c9e7092561/c.html Xinhua] (automated-driving chapter); [https://www.jingjiribao.cn/static/detail.jsp?id=678751 Economic Daily] (road-access testing and enterprise duties); [https://news.youth.cn/gn/202608/t20260826_16834459.htm China Youth Daily] (reported definitions and design-operating-condition disclosure); [https://weibo.com/2/detail/5335849440905446 Chongqing Dazu Court / Tianping Yangguang] (reported ODC activation, data-access, burden-of-proof, and insurance details)
+'''Official/state-media links.''' [https://www.xinhuanet.com/20260825/9f3ade3682bf4c3584c81f8bf8ffa331/c.html Xinhua] (25 Aug 2026 first-reading overview); [https://www.xinhuanet.com/legal/20260825/92b444d94ad74006ae8f69c9e7092561/c.html Xinhua] (25 Aug 2026 automated-driving chapter); [https://www.xinhuanet.com/politics/20260826/0ad7823966864dddb1335e45995228c5/c.html Xinhua] (26 Aug 2026 detailed account confirming definitions, inactive-function treatment, manufacturer/importer handling of violations, burden of proof, and principles concerning access, operation, crash investigation, vehicle data, and insurance); [https://finance.sina.com.cn/jjxw/2026-08-25/doc-inippvuq2250799.shtml Economic Daily] (25 Aug 2026 Economic Daily report, syndicated by Sina; road-access testing and enterprise duties); [https://news.cyol.com/gb/news/articles/2026-08/26/content_5x623gF0dm.html China Youth Daily] (26 Aug 2026; reported definitions and design-operating-condition disclosure); [https://weibo.com/2/detail/5335849440905446 Chongqing Dazu Court] / [https://weibo.com/2/detail/5336095340625994 Tianping Yangguang] (reported ODC activation, data-access, burden-of-proof, and insurance details).
 '''Earlier public draft.''' [https://gaj.ankang.gov.cn/Content-2243484.html MPS 2021 revision proposal] (full text of the earlier 《道路交通安全法（修订建议稿）》; not the 2026 first-reading bill)

@@ Line 95: / Line 95: @@
 | An authorized official who directs traffic. Under the 1968 Convention, road users must obey the official's instructions, which take precedence over traffic regulations, signs, signals, and road markings; the official must be identifiable at a distance.
 | <ul><li>[https://www.unece.org/fileadmin/DAM/trans/conventn/crt1968e.pdf 1968 Convention on Road Traffic], art. 6 (binding treaty law for Contracting Parties)</li></ul>
-| [[#role-road-safety-agent-9b012d2e|Road-Safety Agent]] [UN Regulation / GTR on ADS]<br>[[#role-traffic-controller-6b40ab14|Traffic Controller]] [Generic]
+| [[#role-road-safety-agent-0f5d8727|Road-Safety Agent]] [UN Regulation / GTR on ADS]<br>[[#role-traffic-controller-6b40ab14|Traffic Controller]] [Generic]
 | [[#role-cyclist-69220fa9|Cyclist]]<br>[[#role-driver-a3a8a16d|Driver]] [UN Road Traffic Conventions (1949/1968)]<br>[[#role-pedestrian-277158ae|Pedestrian]]<br>[[#role-road-user-b02db4ad|Road User]]
 |-
@@ Line 399: / Line 399: @@
 | A human emergency responder. While traveling on the road to or from an incident, the responder and any emergency vehicle are road users whose movement and applicable priority rules the ADS must recognize. At a crash or incident scene, the responder may be working in or beside the roadway, directing traffic, assisting people, or managing hazards, and may also qualify as an Other Road User, Traffic Controller, Road-Safety Agent, or Vulnerable Road User.
 | <ul><li>Generic emergency-response role; the UN ADS instruments provide official framework-specific road-user and road-safety-agent comparisons. — [https://docs.un.org/en/ECE/TRANS/WP.29/2026/139 UN GTR on ADS]</li></ul>
-| [[#role-road-safety-agent-9b012d2e|Road-Safety Agent]] [UN Regulation / GTR on ADS]
+| [[#role-road-safety-agent-0f5d8727|Road-Safety Agent]] [UN Regulation / GTR on ADS]
 | [[#role-second-responder-8b0bdee5|Second Responder]]<br>[[#role-traffic-controller-6b40ab14|Traffic Controller]]<br>[[#role-vulnerable-road-user-6537132d|Vulnerable Road User]]
 |-
@@ Line 866: / Line 866: @@
 | [[#role-platform-safety-monitoring-personnel-b9339767|Platform Safety Monitoring Personnel]]<br>[[#role-safety-operator-18615849|Safety Operator]] [China (Beijing)]
 |-
-| data-sort-value="Road-Safety Agent" | <span id="role-road-safety-agent-9b012d2e"></span>Road-Safety Agent
+| data-sort-value="Road-Safety Agent" | <span id="role-road-safety-agent-0f5d8727"></span>Road-Safety Agent
 | data-sort-value="UN Regulation / GTR on ADS" | UN Regulation / GTR on ADS
 | data-sort-value="Human" | Human
-| A human who directs traffic, enforces traffic laws, responds to traffic incidents, or performs more than one of those functions. The term therefore covers both traffic-control and emergency-response roles whose instructions an ADS may need to detect and follow.
+| An undefined UN term for a human road-safety actor whose presence or instructions may require an ADS response. The UN ADS GTR and parallel UN Regulation use ‘road-safety agent’ but do not define it. Context suggests officials or responders who direct traffic, enforce traffic laws, or manage traffic incidents.
-| <ul><li>UN GTR on ADS ¶¶ 2.21.1–2.21.2, 4.1.2.5, 4.1.2.11, 4.1.3.3.2; Annex 4 ¶ 3.5.2(f) ([https://docs.un.org/en/ECE/TRANS/WP.29/2026/139 ECE/TRANS/WP.29/2026/139]) (UN GTR under the 1998 Agreement; no direct legal effect pending national transposition; status: Adopted UN category; final editorial numbering check)</li><li>Parallel UN ADS Regulation (adopted June 2026; [https://docs.un.org/en/ECE/TRANS/WP.29/2026/137 ECE/TRANS/WP.29/2026/137]; final number pending official publication) (UN Regulation under the 1958 Agreement; binding on Contracting Parties applying it)</li></ul>
+| <ul><li>UN GTR on ADS paras. 4.1.2.11 and 4.1.3.3.2; Annex 4 para. 3.5.2(f) ([https://docs.un.org/en/ECE/TRANS/WP.29/2026/139 ECE/TRANS/WP.29/2026/139]) (uses but does not define ‘road-safety agent’; UN GTR under the 1998 Agreement; no direct legal effect pending national transposition)</li><li>Parallel UN ADS Regulation (adopted June 2026; [https://docs.un.org/en/ECE/TRANS/WP.29/2026/137 ECE/TRANS/WP.29/2026/137]; final number pending official publication) (uses but does not define ‘road-safety agent’; UN Regulation under the 1958 Agreement; binding on Contracting Parties applying it)</li></ul>
 | [[#role-authorized-official-directing-traffic-965df3f9|Authorized Official Directing Traffic]] [UN Road Traffic Conventions (1949/1968)]<br>[[#role-first-responder-c2132b8f|First Responder]] [Generic]<br>[[#role-traffic-controller-6b40ab14|Traffic Controller]] [Generic]
 | —
@@ Line 1,047: / Line 1,047: @@
 | Traffic controller is a generic label for a person who lawfully directs traffic or provides external instructions. Depending on the instrument, the person may be treated as a road-safety agent, law-enforcement officer, road worker, or other road user.
 | <ul><li>Generic road-safety actor; the UN ADS instruments provide an official framework-specific comparison. — [https://docs.un.org/en/ECE/TRANS/WP.29/2026/139 UN GTR on ADS]</li></ul>
-| [[#role-authorized-official-directing-traffic-965df3f9|Authorized Official Directing Traffic]] [UN Road Traffic Conventions (1949/1968)]<br>[[#role-road-safety-agent-9b012d2e|Road-Safety Agent]] [UN Regulation / GTR on ADS]
+| [[#role-authorized-official-directing-traffic-965df3f9|Authorized Official Directing Traffic]] [UN Road Traffic Conventions (1949/1968)]<br>[[#role-road-safety-agent-0f5d8727|Road-Safety Agent]] [UN Regulation / GTR on ADS]
 | [[#role-first-responder-c2132b8f|First Responder]]<br>[[#role-vulnerable-road-user-6537132d|Vulnerable Road User]]
 |-