European Commission mandates vehicle interior-facing cameras

The European Commission has implemented new laws mandating that new cars within the EU come equipped with an interior-facing camera as part of an “advanced driver distraction warning (ADDW) system,” effective July 7.

The ADDW can monitor when drivers are distracted, drowsy, or otherwise inattentive, and alert them to stay focused, according to an article from the commission.

“…the number of deaths and injuries from road accidents is still too high,” the article states. “[M]any safety systems have already been mandatory for all newly registered cars and vans since 2024.”

The commission says that the vehicles will now be subject to even more advanced safety requirements.

All new passenger cars and vans across the EU must now have:

• • Advanced emergency brake to detect pedestrians and cyclists
  • Advanced driver distraction warning system to keep drivers focused
  • Better forward vision
  • New tests for worn tires to ensure safer performance
  • Expanded safety glass area to protect pedestrians during accidents

“Manufacturers were given more time to develop these more technically demanding features, which is why the legislation was rolled out in multiple phases,” the article states. “The long-term EU goal is to move as close as possible to zero fatalities in road transport by 2050, which it calls Vision Zero. These new mandatory requirements will help the EU achieve this. Moreover, they will help to better protect pedestrians and cyclists, address crashes caused by driver distraction, and encourage widespread adoption of advanced driver-assistance systems.”

A July 9 article from The Drive questions what happens to ADDW footage once it’s collected, and whether automakers “will be careful and clever enough to properly protect it from nefarious actors.”

The article notes a 2024 New York Times investigation into how car manufacturers, including General Motors and Honda, “have already been caught with their hands in the proverbial cookie jar, sharing ‘driving score’ data with brokers, who then, in some cases, sold that information to insurance companies, where it was used to raise customers’ rates.”

The article highlights the story of a driver who was confused when his insurance jumped 21% in 2022. While shopping for insurance, an insurer told him his LexisNexis report was a factor, according to the article. 

Upon request, the driver received a 258-page consumer disclosure report that detailed 640 trips he and his wife took in his Chevrolet Bolt, the article says. The report included trip start and end times, braking, and sharp acceleration. 

The New York Times says the report claimed GM provided information about the trips. 

A LexisNexis spokesman told the paper that insurers use a risk score LexisNexis creates from the data as “one factor of many” to create insurance coverage for the consumer. 

A lawsuit followed the investigation.

In May, California regulators and the state’s Privacy Protection Agency (CalPrivacy) announced a settlement had been reached with GM regarding the illegal sale of state residents’ location and driving data to two data brokers.

In January, the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) finalized a 20-year order with GM and OnStar to settle allegations that they collected, used, and sold geolocation and driving behavior data from millions of vehicles without consumer consent and notification.

Under the order, General Motors LLC, General Motors Holdings LLC, and OnStar, LLC, collectively GM, are prohibited from sharing certain consumer data with consumer reporting agencies and required to take steps to provide greater transparency and choice to consumers over the collection, use, and disclosure of their connected vehicle data.

Lawsuits have been filed by attorneys general in Arkansas, Nebraska, and Texas against GM, as well as by a Florida consumer over the same alleged activity.

In May, JD Supra reported that attempts to defund a federal law requiring OEMs to add a “kill switch” to vehicles failed.

The kill switch would reportedly detect whether a driver is drunk or impaired.

A bill introduced by Rep. Thomas Massie (R-Kentucky) failed 164-268 in January. The bill would have defunded Section 24200 of the 2021 Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act, which directs the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) to require all new passenger vehicles to be equipped with advanced drunk and impaired-driving prevention technology.

JD Supra defines the equipment as a passive performance monitoring system that continuously observes a driver’s behavior and restricts or prevents vehicle operation if the system determines the driver may be impaired, or a blood-alcohol detection system that prevents or limits operation when BAC meets or exceeds the legal limit of 0.08%.

The law has created Congressional debate, along with questions about privacy and data governance that businesses, fleet operators, and their legal counsel are trying to answer, JD Supra reported.

Images

Featured image credit: olrat/iStock