My only criticism is that he's comparing Toyota's code and processes to a published but unenforced standard and clearly they are nowhere near that standard. It would be more relevant to compare Toyota to other manufacturers.
It seems the legal argument against Toyota is that they were not following industry standards - but if no one else was, could you really call it an industry standard?
Not at all. But if it turned out that Toyota was already trying three times harder than everyone else to get it right, it would be harder to argue they didn't take "reasonable" precautions.
In the talk, he did mention that the government agency that certifies vehicles does only basic checks and does not enforce any standards on software. One could easily argue that they are partially to blame, as they're leaving it up to the manufacturers.
It seems the legal argument against Toyota is that they were not following industry standards - but if no one else was, could you really call it an industry standard?