News
Pablo Escobar’s brother wants $100 million in Tesla shares for Not-a-Flamethrower dispute
Elon Musk is no stranger to taking on powerful forces that stand in the way of his Earth-changing missions, but drug lord families still seem like an odd addition to the list. Despite the improbability, infamous cartel founder and cocaine kingpin Pablo Escobar has recently been linked to the serial entrepreneur over The Boring Company’s Not-a-Flamethrower, specifically through Escobar’s brother. Roberto Escobar claims Musk stole the Flamethrower design from him and plans to sue over it – unless Musk agrees to hand over $100 million dollars in either cash or Tesla shares, that is.
“Elon we both know you stole from me, I am OK to settle this right now for $100 million. Tesla shares is OK or cash. I will win in court, and you will lose more than $100 million,” Escobar said in a statement to The Next Web. “Maybe I will make myself new Tesla CEO with the courts?… Let’s settle this like gentleman. Send me the Tesla Shares to Escobar Inc.”
Someone associated with Musk’s business activities reportedly spent time with Escobar (the living brother, not the deceased drug lord) in the summer of 2017 wherein an Escobar Inc. toy flamethrower concept was discussed, according to a report originally published by TMZ. The Boring Company’s Flamethrower, announced in January 2018, apparently was a dead ringer for Escobar’s idea design-wise, leading cartel leader’s brother to angrily conclude that his idea had been stolen. Musk later responded to TMZ‘s report on Twitter, saying “It’s Not a Flamethrower, Mr Escobar.”
The dispute is interesting and unusual, to say the least, but we can be sure there’s one thing Boring clearly did not get from Escobar Inc. – the flamethrower’s purpose.
“I want the people to be able to burn money, like me and Pablo used to do. I burned probably a couple of billion dollars over the years. Literally burning the money. For many reasons,” Escobar was quoted as saying about the device.
Escobar is now weighing his legal options against Musk, although it’s not clear what options are exactly available.
Prior to 2013, if an inventor could demonstrate their invention predated someone else’s patented invention for the same thing, they could sue and work out a financially retroactive deal to be compensated for their work (more or less). However, with the enactment of the America Invents Act, the United States now has a “first to file” system that only gives inventors one year from public disclosure of their invention to file for patent protection. In Escobar’s case, he’s basically too late to file for a patent where it would matter most to Musk – in the United States. The only other legal workaround would seem to be a lawsuit over a non-disclosure agreement, which doesn’t appear to have happened here. It’s not enough that there were witnesses to the discussion, and it also doesn’t seem like there was even a handshake-type understanding over any claims to the design.
Another thing worth mentioning is that if The Boring Company has already filed for patent protection of its Not-a-Flamethrower design, it doesn’t appear to have published yet based on patent database searches. Since the idea was disclosed in January 2018 (or even 2017, based on Escobar’s claims), it’s now considered ‘prior art’ and renders any other highly similar patent filings ineligible for protection. It would appear that Escobar’s best bet for legal protection would have been to file for a patent right after Musk’s flamethrower was announced so both devices would have been in that muddy one-year window and open to a court fight. Alas, it’s all water under the bridge now.
The Boring Company had a few options to pursue here, actually. First, the tunneling venture could have filed for a design patent which only protects what their flamethrower looks like. These types of patent applications usually issue to full patents quickly unless the patent examiner objects to it based on similar designs. If Boring went this route, we should see a patent show up shortly if one was filed around the time of the product announcement in January 2018.
A second option The Boring Company could have taken was to file for a utility patent, meaning there was some sort of technical merit to the Not-a-Flamethrower’s design. These publish 18 months after filing unless non-publication is specifically requested. If Boring went this route, well, there are so many timelines that could have been taken, it’s hard to say whether we’ll see anything until a patent issues, assuming one issues at all. Regardless, the patent route was Escobar’s only real route for lawsuit-driven compensation, and he seems out of luck.
Perhaps in response to recent publicity, the Escobar Inc. Flamethrower just went on sale for $250, and according to its company website’s History page, 20,000 units will be produced. This, of course, is the exact amount the Boring Company sold at the original price of $500. Among other interesting news items, one of the gems from that same History page reads, “2004 – Roberto de Jesus Escobar Gaviria is freed from Itagui Prison based on excellent behavior.” This important moment in the Escobar Inc. chronicles is surely only matched by the successful launch of Escobar Inc.’s Flamethrower for burning cold hard cash in cocaine kingpin fashion.
Elon Musk
Elon Musk confirms Tesla Cybercab pricing and consumer release date
Elon Musk has confirmed that Tesla does intend to sell a version of the Cybercab for less than $30,000 by 2027.
Elon Musk has confirmed that Tesla does intend to sell a version of the Cybercab for less than $30,000 by 2027. He shared the update in a post on social media platform X.
Amidst Tesla’s announcement that the first Cybercab has been produced at Giga Texas’ production line, some members of the Tesla community immediately started joking about how the milestone will affect a wager shared by popular YouTube tech reviewer Marques Brownlee (MKBHD.)
Following Tesla’s We, Robot event in October 2024, MKBHD noted that while the Cybercab was impressive in a lot of ways, he is very skeptical about Elon Musk’s estimate that the autonomous two-seater could be sold to consumers for below $30,000 around 2027.
“I think the obvious red flag, the biggest red flag to me is the timeline stuff. This is notorious Elon stuff. He gets on stage, he says we’re going to have this vehicle out for $30,000 before 2027,” he said, adding “No, they’re not. There’s just no way that they’re actually going to be able to do that. I mean, if they do, let’s say they do, I will shave my head on camera because I’m that confident.”
It was then no surprise that meme images of MKBHD with his head shaved immediately spread on X following Tesla’s announcement that the first Cybercab has been built at Giga Texas. One of these, which was posted by longtime FSD tester Whole Mars Catalog, received a response from Elon Musk. The CEO responded with the words “Gonna happen,” together with a laughing emoji.
Apart from riding jokes about MKBHD’s wager, Musk also confirmed that Tesla will be selling a Cybercab to regular consumers before 2027, and the vehicle will be priced for $30,000 or less. In response to an X user who asked if the exact scenario will be happening, Musk responded with a simple “Yes.”
While the first Cybercab has been produced at Giga Texas, it would not be surprising if the following months will only see low volumes of the autonomous two seater being produced. As per Elon Musk in previous comments, the Cybercab’s early production will likely be slow, but it will eventually be extremely fast. “For Cybercab and Optimus, almost everything is new, so the early production rate will be agonizingly slow, but eventually end up being insanely fast,” he said.
Elon Musk
First Tesla Cybercab rolls off Giga Texas production line
Tesla’s official account on X shared an image showing employees gathered around the first Cybercab built at Gigafactory Texas.
Tesla has produced the first Tesla Cybercab at Texas Gigafactory, marking a key milestone ahead of the planned autonomous two-seater’s production in April. The two-seat Robotaxi, which was unveiled in 2024, is designed without pedals or a steering wheel and represents Tesla’s most aggressive step yet toward fully autonomous mobility.
Tesla’s official account on X shared an image showing employees gathered around the first Cybercab built at Gigafactory Texas. Elon Musk echoed the milestone, writing, “Congratulations to the Tesla team on making the first production Cybercab!”
Previous comments from Musk on X reiterated the idea that production of the Cybercab “starts in April.” The vehicle will launch without traditional driver controls, and it will rely entirely on Tesla’s vision-based Full Self-Driving (FSD) system.
The Cybercab is positioned to compete with autonomous services such as Waymo. While Tesla has deployed Model Y vehicles in limited Robotaxi operations in Austin and the Bay Area, a serious ramp of the service to other cities across the United States is yet to be implemented. The production of the Cybercab could then be seen as a push towards the company’s autonomy plans.
Musk has linked the Cybercab to Tesla’s proposed “Unboxed” manufacturing process, which would assemble large vehicle modules separately before integrating them, rather than following a traditional production line. The approach is intended to cut costs, reduce factory footprint, and speed up output.
That being said, Elon Musk has set expectations for the Cybercab’s production ramp. As per Musk, it would likely take some time before meaningful volumes of the Cybercab are produced because it is such a new and different vehicle. But when the vehicle hits its pace, volumes will be notable.
“Initial production is always very slow and follows an S-curve. The speed of production ramp is inversely proportionate to how many new parts and steps there are. For Cybercab and Optimus, almost everything is new, so the early production rate will be agonizingly slow, but eventually end up being insanely fast,” Musk noted.
Elon Musk
California city weighs banning Elon Musk companies like Tesla and SpaceX
A resolution draft titled, “Resolution Ending Engagement With Elon Musk-Controlled Companies and To Encourage CalPERS To Divest Stock In These Companies,” alleges that Musk “has engaged in business practices that are alleged to include violations of labor laws, environmental regulations, workplace safety standards, and regulatory noncompliance.”
A California City Council is planning to weigh whether it would adopt a resolution that would place a ban on its engagement with Elon Musk companies, like Tesla and SpaceX.
The City of Davis, California, will have its City Council weigh a new proposal that would adopt a resolution “to divest from companies owned and/or controlled by Elon Musk.”
This would include a divestment proposal to encourage CalPERS, the California Public Employees Retirement System, to divest from stock in any Musk company.
A resolution draft titled, “Resolution Ending Engagement With Elon Musk-Controlled Companies and To Encourage CalPERS To Divest Stock In These Companies,” alleges that Musk “has engaged in business practices that are alleged to include violations of labor laws, environmental regulations, workplace safety standards, and regulatory noncompliance.”
It claims that Musk “has used his influence and corporate platforms to promote political ideologies and activities that threaten democratic norms and institutions, including campaign finance activities that raise ethical and legal concerns.”
If adopted, Davis would bar the city from entering into any new contracts or purchasing agreements with any company owned or controlled by Elon Musk. It also says it will not consider utilizing Tesla Robotaxis.
Hotel owner tears down Tesla chargers in frustration over Musk’s politics
A staff report on the proposal claims there is “no immediate budgetary impact.” However, a move like this would only impact its residents, especially with Tesla, as the Supercharger Network is open to all electric vehicle manufacturers. It is also extremely reliable and widespread.
Regarding the divestment request to CalPERS, it would not be surprising to see the firm make the move. Although it voted against Musk’s compensation package last year, the firm has no issue continuing to make money off of Tesla’s performance on Wall Street.
The decision to avoid Musk companies will be considered this evening at the City Council meeting.
The report comes from Davis Vanguard.
It is no secret that Musk’s political involvement, especially during the most recent Presidential Election, ruffled some feathers. Other cities considered similar options, like the City of Baltimore, which “decided to go in another direction” after awarding Tesla a $5 million contract for a fleet of EVs for city employees.
Elon Musk confirms Tesla Cybercab pricing and consumer release date
First Tesla Cybercab rolls off Giga Texas production line
