Connect with us
CA wants to make it illegal for Tesla to label FSD as FSD CA wants to make it illegal for Tesla to label FSD as FSD

News

CA wants to make it illegal for Tesla to label FSD as FSD

Credit: Whole Mars Catalog

Published

on

The California state legislature passed a bill today that would make it illegal for Tesla to label its software Full Self-Driving (FSD). The bill was inspired by the California Department of Motor Vehicle’s claim that Tesla’s FSD is “false advertising.”

The DMV would revoke Tesla’s license to make and sell EVs in the state if it got its way and said that Tesla would be “required to advertise to consumers and better educate Tesla drivers about the capabilities of its ‘Autopilot’ and ‘Full Self-Driving’ features, including cautionary warnings regarding the limitations of the features, and for other actions as appropriate given the violations.”

In other words, Tesla would have to pay for traditional advertising for its products to please the DMV. The DMV is conducting a review and Tesla plans to fight back. Tesla asked for a hearing to present its defense but the state legislator has lost patience so it decided to try to make the DMV’s rule a new state law.

The bill was sponsored by Senate Transportation Committee Chair Lena Gonzalez and passed by the Senate. The next step is for Governor Gavin Newsom to either sign it into law or veto it. Gonzalez said that Tesla’s false advertising of its technology is a safety issue and told the LA Times that she and her fellow legislators were puzzled at the DMV’s slow response to Tesla’s claims.

Advertisement

It should be noted that Tesla has never said FSD was fully autonomous and requires drivers to be alert and ready to take over at all times when engaging either FSD or Autopilot. For FSD Beta testers, Tesla has a strike system that will kick out a beta tester for unsafe driving once they reach five strikes.

“Are we just going to wait for another person to be killed in California?” Gonzalez said.

 

My 2.5¢

I think that Gonzalez is exaggerating, with her question. Clearly, Tesla is not responsible for all of the deaths in California.

So far, there haven’t been any deaths as a result of FSD and although the National Highway Safety Transporation Administration is investigating several accidents involving Tesla and Autopilot, those investigations are still ongoing.

So unless the NHTSA comes out and says, “Hey Tesla actually did kill those people,” Gonzalez can not say that Tesla was responsible for those deaths. I mean, she can but it wouldn’t be true.

Advertisement

Also, this whole thing started with the DMV wanting Tesla to traditionally advertise its products and services. If this becomes state law, would Tesla have to traditionally advertise in the state of California to be able to make and sell its vehicles in the state?  Or would the lawmakers require a name change?

Perhaps California is tired of Tesla and the prosperity that Tesla has brought to the state. Perhaps the state doesn’t want Tesla to be a job provider there.

Advertisement

This isn’t a safety issue, but an issue, I think, where the politicians hate Elon Musk and are letting their bias get in the way. And when politicians make decisions, it’s the people who have to suffer the consequences.

If Tesla were to decide to leave California altogether, it would hurt the state’s economy and Tesla’s employees living in the state.  I don’t think Tesla would actually do that but it might, especially if it’s banned from selling cars because the state doesn’t like the name FSD.

Also, Elon could just rebrand it to not-FSD or not-FSD-yet.

Note: Johnna is a Tesla shareholder and supports its mission. 

Advertisement

Your feedback is important. If you have any comments, or concerns, or see a typo, you can email me at johnna@teslarati.com. You can also reach me on Twitter @JohnnaCrider1

 

Johnna Crider is a Baton Rouge writer covering Tesla, Elon Musk, EVs, and clean energy & supports Tesla's mission. Johnna also interviewed Elon Musk and you can listen here

Advertisement
Comments

News

Tesla adds a new feature to Navigation in preparation for a new vehicle

After CEO Elon Musk announced earlier this week that the Semi’s mass production processes were scheduled for later this year, the company has been making various preparations as it nears manufacturing.

Published

on

Credit: Uber

Tesla has added a new feature to its Navigation and Supercharger Map in preparation for a new vehicle to hit the road: the Semi.

After CEO Elon Musk announced earlier this week that the Semi’s mass production processes were scheduled for later this year, the company has been making various preparations as it nears manufacturing.

Elon Musk confirms Tesla Semi will enter high-volume production this year

One of those changes has been the newly-released information regarding trim levels, as well as reports that Tesla has started to reach out to customers regarding pricing information for those trims.

Advertisement

Now, Tesla has made an additional bit of information available to the public in the form of locations of Megachargers, the infrastructure that will be responsible for charging the Semi and other all-electric Class 8 vehicles that hit the road.

Tesla made the announcement on the social media platform X:

Although it is a minor development, it is a major indication that Tesla is preparing for the Semi to head toward mass production, something the company has been hinting at for several years.

Nevertheless, this, along with the other information that was released this week, points toward a significant stride in Tesla’s progress in the Semi project.

Now that the company has also worked toward completion of the dedicated manufacturing plant in Sparks, Nevada, there are more signs than ever that the vehicle is finally ready to be built and delivered to customers outside of the pilot program that has been in operation for several years.

Advertisement

For now, the Megachargers are going to be situated on the West Coast, with a heavy emphasis on routes like I-5 and I-10. This strategy prioritizes major highways and logistics hubs where freight traffic is heaviest, ensuring coverage for both cross-country and regional hauls.

California and Texas are slated to have the most initially, with 17 and 19 sites, respectively. As the program continues to grow, Florida, Georgia, Illinois, Washington, New York, and Nevada will have Megacharger locations as well.

For now, the Megachargers are available in Lathrop, California, and Sparks, Nevada, both of which have ties to Tesla. The former is the location of the Megafactory, and Sparks is where both the Tesla Gigafactory and Semifactory are located.

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Elon Musk

Tesla stock gets latest synopsis from Jim Cramer: ‘It’s actually a robotics company’

“Turns out it’s actually a robotics and Cybercab company, and I want to buy, buy, buy. Yes, Tesla’s the paper that turned into scissors in one session,” Cramer said.

Published

on

Credit: Tesla Optimus/X

Tesla stock (NASDAQ: TSLA) got its latest synopsis from Wall Street analyst Jim Cramer, who finally realized something that many fans of the company have known all along: it’s not a car company. Instead, it’s a robotics company.

In a recent note that was released after Tesla reported Earnings in late January, Cramer seemed to recognize that the underwhelming financials and overall performance of the automotive division were not representative of the current state of affairs.

Instead, we’re seeing a company transition itself away from its early identity, essentially evolving like a caterpillar into a butterfly.

The narrative of the Earnings Call was simple: We’re not a car company, at least not from a birds-eye view. We’re an AI and Robotics company, and we are transitioning to this quicker than most people realize.

Advertisement

Tesla stock gets another analysis from Jim Cramer, and investors will like it

Tesla’s Q4 Earnings Call featured plenty of analysis from CEO Elon Musk and others, and some of the more minor details of the call were even indicative of a company that is moving toward AI instead of its cars. For example, the Model S and Model X will be no more after Q2, as Musk said that they serve relatively no purpose for the future.

Instead, Tesla is shifting its focus to the vehicles catered for autonomy and its Robotaxi and self-driving efforts.

Cramer recognizes this:

Advertisement

“…we got results from Tesla, which actually beat numbers, but nobody cares about the numbers here, as electric vehicles are the past. And according to CEO Elon Musk, the future of this company comes down to Cybercabs and humanoid robots. Stock fell more than 3% the next day. That may be because their capital expenditures budget was higher than expected, or maybe people wanted more details from the new businesses. At this point, I think Musk acolytes might be more excited about SpaceX, which is planning to come public later this year.”

He continued, highlighting the company’s true transition away from vehicles to its Cybercab, Optimus, and AI ambitions:

“I know it’s hard to believe how quickly this market can change its attitude. Last night, I heard a disastrous car company speak. Turns out it’s actually a robotics and Cybercab company, and I want to buy, buy, buy. Yes, Tesla’s the paper that turned into scissors in one session. I didn’t like it as a car company. Boy, I love it as a Cybercab and humanoid robot juggernaut. Call me a buyer and give me five robots while I’m at it.”

Cramer’s narrative seems to fit that of the most bullish Tesla investors. Anyone who is labeled a “permabull” has been echoing a similar sentiment over the past several years: Tesla is not a car company any longer.

Advertisement

Instead, the true focus is on the future and the potential that AI and Robotics bring to the company. It is truly difficult to put Tesla shares in the same group as companies like Ford, General Motors, and others.

Tesla shares are down less than half a percent at the time of publishing, trading at $423.69.

Continue Reading

Elon Musk

SpaceX secures win as US labor board drops oversight case

The NLRB confirmed that it no longer has jurisdiction over SpaceX.

Published

on

Credit: SpaceX

SpaceX scored a legal victory after the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) decided to dismiss a case which accused the company of terminating engineers who were involved in an open letter against founder Elon Musk. 

The NLRB confirmed that it no longer has jurisdiction over SpaceX. The update was initially shared by Bloomberg News, which cited a letter about the matter it reportedly reviewed.

In a letter to the former employees’ lawyers, the labor board stated that the affected employees were under the jurisdiction of the National Mediation Board (NMB), not the NLRB. As a result, the labor board stated that it was dismissing the case.

As per Danielle Pierce, a regional director of the agency, “the National Labor Relations Board lacks jurisdiction over the Employer and, therefore, I am dismissing your charge.”

Advertisement

The NMB typically oversees airlines and railroads. The NLRB, on the other hand, covers most private-sector employers, as well as manufacturers such as Boeing. 

The former SpaceX engineers have argued that the private space company did not belong under the NMB’s jurisdiction because SpaceX only offers services to “hand-picked customers.” 

In an opinion, however, the NMB stated that SpaceX was under its jurisdiction because “space transport includes air travel” to get to outer space. The mediation board also noted that anyone can contact SpaceX to secure its services.

SpaceX had previously challenged the NLRB’s authority in court, arguing that the agency’s structure was unconstitutional. Jennifer Abruzzo, the NLRB general counsel under former United States President Joe Biden, rejected SpaceX’s claims. Following Abruzzo’s termination under the Trump administration, however, SpaceX asked the labor board to reconsider its arguments. 

Advertisement

SpaceX is not the only company that has challenged the constitutionality of the NLRB. Since SpaceX filed its legal challenge against the agency in 2024, other high-profile companies have followed suit. These include Amazon, which has filed similar cases that are now pending.

Continue Reading