News
Tesla Full Self-Driving could soon be allowed in Germany, gov approves legislation aimed at autonomous driving
The national Parliament of the Federal Republic of Germany decided on Thursday to change an existing traffic law that had prohibited vehicles from being engaged in autonomous mode. Drawing on votes from both the Social Democratic Party (SPD) and the Christian Democratic Union (CSU), the Bundestag has agreed to allow fully autonomous driving vehicles to travel on Germany’s streets. The (translated) law reads, in part,
“During vehicle driving, the driver may turn away from traffic and vehicle control by means of highly automated or fully automated driving function… [but must] immediately [assume control] if he recognizes that the conditions for the intended use of the highly or fully automated driving functions no longer exist… even if he does not control the vehicle in the context of the intended use of this function.”
The law provides a balance between driver responsibility in the event of traffic incident and the ability of the the driver to release control of the vehicle to a control system, depending on situation and duration. The driver must retain the capacity to reassume control as well as to deactivate the control system. All vehicles with autonomous driving systems would have a “black box” data storage system, which would assist in determining fault in the event of an accident.
The new German law supersedes the 1968 “Vienna Convention on Road Traffic,” which specified that human drivers must have full control over their vehicle at any time. Of course, at that time of that law’s implementation, autonomous vehicles had not yet been introduced.
Tensions were high immediately preceding the vote, according to Germany’s golem.de newspaper, which described the level of autonomy to be permitted as “highly automated and fully automatic vehicles.” SPD deputy Kirsten Lühmann accusing the body of assigning drivers the roles of “experimental rabbits for new technology.” Stephan Kühn, the Green party deputy, also disagreed with the extent of the law. “It is not enough just to formulate in the justification of the legal text what the driver is allowed to do without worry while the computer is driving the car. This must be re-written into the law itself.”
The SPD defended the amendments as sound and timely.
German Federal Minister of Transport Alexander Dobrindt (CSU) had offered draft legislation for the new law in February, but it received violent criticism and underwent significant revision, particularly around data protection regulations. At the beginning of this week’s debate, he envisioned Germany as having “the most modern road traffic law in the world.” Dobrindt has rationalized the law as providing value added software innovation that could be homegrown in Germany and Europe. With the new systems, he said, will come increased traffic safety, fewer traffic jams, and reduced environmental pollution [emphasis added].
Germany is a forerunner for European autonomous driving, with some sections of public highways already designated as live testing zones. The Institute for the German Economy calculates that Germany has registered 58% of all global patents in autonomous driving since 2010.
The approved revision states that the owner of the car is still liable for actions taken while under autonomous mode, as prescribed by section 7 of the Road Traffic Act (Hazard Liability). Specific German autonomous driving regulations have not yet been established; those will come alongside international regulations and definitions and will likely change, too, as technological development in autonomous driving continues to progress. Like so many in the auto industry today, German engineers, scientists, and regulators are in a race to figure out the details of how autonomous cars will function so that they can be market ready by the early 2020’s.
Of course, Elon Musk, Tesla’s CEO, has stated that his company’s electric vehicles will have autonomous capability by the second half of 2017. The Society of Automotive Engineers has identified different levels of autonomy, ranging from 0 to Level 5, with Level 5 signifying that a vehicle can drive itself at all times under all conditions and need no input from a human. Level 4 autonomy refers to a vehicle that can be autonomous almost all the time, within determined parameters, as seems to be outlined by the Bundestag.
Interestingly, according to Musk’s statements, Teslas may soon be able to approach Level 4. That would make Tesla R&D far ahead of any German innovation currently underway.
With a bicameral parliament, Germany has two chambers: the Bundestag (lower house) and the Bundesrat (Federal Council or upper house). Both chambers can initiate legislation, and most bills must be approved by both chambers, as well as the executive branch, before becoming law. Now that the autonomous driving legislation has been approved by the Bundestag, it will go before the Federal Council. Coalition forces feel confident that this week’s modifications to Dobrindt’s original draft proposal are sufficient to pass through the Bundestrat.
Bitkom CEO Bernhard Rohleder was excited about the law, saying, “The Bundestag has cleared the way for the Automnation Deutschland to be the world leader in autonomous driving.” He acknowledged that changes will occur around liability rules or the use of data. “But we must not make the mistake of trying to settle everything down to the end in a long-term debate, then other countries will create facts and we will have the opportunity to use this technology.”
The first production vehicles equipped with autonomous driving features will be introduced to Germany sometime in 2017. “We can also be innovative in the legal framework and do not need to hide from the Silicon Valley ,” said Ulrich Lange (CSU), a CSU member, argued during the final moments of debate.
Elon Musk
Musk forces Judge’s exit from shareholder battles over viral social media slip-up
McCormick insisted in a court filing that she harbors no actual bias against Musk or the defendants. She claimed she either never clicked the “support” button, LinkedIn’s version of a “like,” or did so accidentally.
Many Tesla fans are familiar with the name Kathaleen McCormick, especially if they are investors in the company.
McCormick is a Delaware Chancery Court Judge who presided over Tesla CEO Elon Musk’s pay package lawsuit over the past few years, as well as his purchase of Twitter. However, she will no longer be sitting in on any issues related to Musk.
Elon Musk demands Delaware Judge recuse herself after ‘support’ post celebrating $2B court loss
In a rare admission of potential optics issues in one of America’s most powerful corporate courts, Delaware Chancery Court Chancellor Kathaleen McCormick stepped aside Monday from a cluster of shareholder lawsuits targeting Elon Musk and Tesla’s board.
The move came just days after Musk’s legal team highlighted her apparent “support” on LinkedIn for a post that mocked the billionaire over his 2022 tweets about the $44 billion Twitter acquisition.
McCormick insisted in a court filing that she harbors no actual bias against Musk or the defendants. She claimed she either never clicked the “support” button, LinkedIn’s version of a “like,” or did so accidentally.
She wrote in a newly published memo from the Delaware Chancery Court:
“The motion for recusal rests on a false premise — that I support a LinkedIn post about Mr. Musk, which I do not in fact support. I am not biased against the defendants in these actions.”
Yet she granted the reassignment anyway, acknowledging that the intense media scrutiny surrounding her involvement had become “detrimental to the administration of justice.”
The consolidated cases will now be handled by three of her colleagues on the Delaware Court of Chancery, the nation’s go-to venue for high-stakes corporate disputes. The lawsuits accuse Musk and Tesla directors of breaching fiduciary duties through lavish executive compensation and lax governance oversight.
One prominent claim, filed by a Detroit pension fund, challenges massive stock awards granted to board members, alleging the payouts harmed the company. The litigation also overlaps with issues stemming from Musk’s turbulent 2022 Twitter purchase.
McCormick’s history with Musk made her a lightning rod. In 2022, she presided over the fast-tracked lawsuit that ultimately forced Musk to complete the Twitter deal after he tried to back out.
Then in 2024, she struck down his record $56 billion Tesla compensation package, ruling the approval process was flawed and overly CEO-friendly. The Delaware Supreme Court later reinstated the pay on technical grounds, but the ruling fueled Musk’s long-standing criticism of the state’s judiciary.
Musk has repeatedly urged companies to reincorporate elsewhere, arguing Delaware courts have grown hostile to visionary leaders. Monday’s recusal hands him a symbolic victory and underscores how personal social-media activity can collide with judicial impartiality standards.
Delaware law requires judges to step aside if there’s even a “reasonable basis” to question their neutrality.
Court watchers say the episode highlights growing tensions in corporate America’s legal epicenter. While McCormick maintained her impartiality, the appearance of bias proved too costly to ignore. The cases will proceed without her, but the broader debate over Delaware’s dominance in business litigation is far from over.
Elon Musk
Elon Musk has generous TSA offer denied by the White House: here’s why
Musk stepped in on March 21 via a post on X, writing: “I would like to offer to pay the salaries of TSA personnel during this funding impasse that is negatively affecting the lives of so many Americans at airports throughout the country.”
Tesla and SpaceX CEO Elon Musk made a generous offer to pay the salaries of Transportation Security Administration (TSA) employees last week, but the offer was denied by the White House.
In a striking display of private-sector initiative clashing with federal bureaucracy, the White House has turned down an offer from Elon Musk to personally cover the salaries of TSA officers amid an ongoing partial government shutdown. The rejection, reported last Wednesday by multiple outlets, highlights the legal and political hurdles facing unconventional solutions to Washington’s funding gridlock.
The impasse began weeks ago when Congress failed to pass funding for the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), leaving TSA employees, essential workers who screen millions of travelers daily, without paychecks while still required to report for duty.
Frustrated travelers have endured record-long security lines at major airports, with reports of chaos and delays rippling across the country.
Musk stepped in on March 21 via a post on X, writing: “I would like to offer to pay the salaries of TSA personnel during this funding impasse that is negatively affecting the lives of so many Americans at airports throughout the country.”
I would like to offer to pay the salaries of TSA personnel during this funding impasse that is negatively affecting the lives of so many Americans at airports throughout the country
— Elon Musk (@elonmusk) March 21, 2026
But it was not for no reason.
White House spokesperson Abigail Jackson responded on behalf of the Trump administration, expressing appreciation for Musk’s gesture.
However, the legal obstacles, which would be insurmountable, would inhibit Musk from doing so. Jackson said:
“We greatly appreciate Elon’s generous offer. This would pose great legal challenges due to his involvement with federal government contracts.”
Musk’s companies hold significant federal contracts, including NASA launches through SpaceX and potential Defense Department work, raising concerns about conflicts of interest, ethics rules, and anti-bribery statutes that prohibit private payments to government employees. Administration officials also indicated they expect the shutdown to end soon, making external funding unnecessary.
The episode underscores deeper tensions in Washington. Musk, who has advised on government efficiency efforts and maintains a close relationship with President Trump, has frequently criticized wasteful spending and bureaucratic delays.
His offer came as airport security lines ballooned, drawing public frustration toward both parties. TSA officers, many of whom rely on paychecks to cover mortgages and family expenses, have continued working without compensation, a situation that has drawn bipartisan concern but little immediate resolution.
Critics of the rejection argue it prioritizes red tape over practical relief for frontline workers and travelers. Supporters of the White House position counter that allowing private funding sets a dangerous precedent and could undermine congressional authority over the budget.
The White House eventually came to terms with the TSA on Friday and started paying them once again, and lines at airports instantly shrank. The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) said that TSA staf would begin receiving paychecks “as early as” today.
Elon Musk
Tesla FSD mocks BMW human driver: Saves pedestrian from near miss
Tesla FSD anticipated a BMW driver’s lane drift before the human behind the wheel could react.
A video posted to r/TeslaFSD this week put a sharp spotlight on Tesla’s Full Self-Driving (FSD) software being able to react to pedestrian intent than an actual human driver behind the wheel. In the Reddit clip, a BMW driver can be seen rolling through a neighborhood street completely unaware of a pedestrian stepping in to cross. At the same time, a Tesla driving on FSD had already begun slowing down before the pedestrian even began their attempt to cross the street The BMW kept moving, prompting the pedestrian to hop back, while the Tesla came to a stop and provide right-of-way for the human to safely cross.
That gap between what the BMW driver saw and what FSD had already processed is the story. Tesla FSD wasn’t reacting to a person in the street, rather it was reading the signals that a person was about to enter it based on the pedestrian’s movement, trajectory, and their trajectory to telegraph intent.
Tesla’s FSD is now built on an end-to-end neural network trained on billions of real-world miles, learning to interpret subtle human behavioral cues the same way an experienced human driver does instinctively. The difference is consistency. A human driver distracted for two seconds misses what FSD does not.
Tesla sues California DMV over Autopilot and FSD advertising ruling
Reddit commenters in the thread were blunt about the BMW driver’s failure, with several pointing out that the pedestrian was visible well before the crossing. One response put it plainly that the car on FSD saw the situation developing before the human in the other car had registered there was a situation at all.
Tesla has published data showing FSD (Supervised) is 54% safer than a human driver, accumulated across billions of miles driven on the system. Elon Musk has said FSD v14 will outperform human drivers by a factor of two to three, and that v15 has “a shot” at a 10x improvement. Pedestrian safety is where the stakes are highest, and where intent prediction closes the gap fastest. At 30 mph, a car covers roughly 44 feet per second. An extra second of awareness from reading a person’s body language rather than waiting for them to step out is often the difference between a near miss and a fatality.
Video and community discussion: r/TeslaFSD on Reddit
FSD saves man from becoming a pancake. BMW driver nearly flattens him.
by
u/Qwertygolol in
TeslaFSD
Musk forces Judge’s exit from shareholder battles over viral social media slip-up
Elon Musk has generous TSA offer denied by the White House: here’s why
Tesla FSD mocks BMW human driver: Saves pedestrian from near miss
Elon Musk says Tesla is developing a new vehicle: ‘Way cooler than a minivan’
Elon Musk launches TERAFAB: The $25B Tesla-SpaceXAI chip factory that will rewire the AI industry
