News
Tesla gets big legal wins as Musk finds himself at risk of libel over Thai caver controversy
Tesla’s legal troubles got a bit lighter this week, while Elon Musk seemingly gave himself yet another self-inflicted blow. Earlier his week, Tesla won a dismissal of a securities fraud lawsuit over the company’s progress in the production of the Model 3. The company also won a court case against the Ontario government over the state’s cancellation of EV rebates for Tesla customers.
The securities fraud lawsuit against Tesla alleged that the company and its executives knowingly knew that they could not meet their self-imposed goals of producing 5,000 Model 3 per week by the end of December 2017. The lawsuit’s plaintiffs argued that despite knowing these, Tesla still gave the impression that it was equipped to meet its production goals. This caused the stock to become volatile, resulting in losses for some shareholders.
In a decision that was made public on Monday, U.S. District Judge Charles Breyer noted that while it was true that the electric car and energy company was not able to meet its self-imposed production goals, “federal securities laws do not punish companies for failing to achieve their targets.” Tesla, for its part, noted that its difficulties in reaching its manufacturing targets for the Model 3 were caused by bottlenecks in its Nevada Gigafactory and its main factory in Fremont, CA.
“Plaintiffs are correct that defendants’ qualifications would not have been meaningful if defendants had known that it was impossible for Tesla to meet its stated production goals, not merely highly unlikely. The facts plaintiffs have put forth do not tend to establish that this was the case,” Judge Breyer wrote.
Tesla also won a case it filed against the Ontario government over the cancellation of EV rebates for Tesla’s electric cars. The revised EV rebate program was rolled out by the new Ontario government, and it singled out Tesla’s customers from qualifying for rebates of up to $10,640. In a ruling on Monday, Judge Frederick Myers of Ontario opted to strike down the transition program rolled out by the new government. A spokesperson for Tesla issued a statement to Reuters welcoming the Ontario judge’s ruling.
“Tesla only sought fair treatment for our customers, and we hope the Ministry now does the right thing by delivering on its promise to ensure all [electric vehicle]-owners receive their incentives,” the Tesla spokesperson said.
Unfortunately, this week also saw Elon Musk getting baited once more on Twitter over his previous comments about British cave explorer Vernon Unsworth, who was critical of Musk’s efforts to help a soccer team stranded in a flooded Thai cave system last July. After receiving requests online that he help in the Thai rescue efforts, Musk, together with SpaceX and Boring Co. engineers, developed a mini-submarine that the stranded children could use to escape the flooded cave system. Unsworth was dismissive of the mini-sub, stating that it would not work and suggesting that Musk “stick his submarine where it hurts.” In anger, Musk retorted, calling the caver a “pedo guy” on Twitter. Musk later deleted his tweet and apologized to Unsworth.
-
Just yesterday, Musk was on Twitter when he got baited into discussing Unsworth and his previous incendiary comments once more. At one point, Musk even noted that “You don’t think it’s strange he hasn’t sued me? He was offered free legal services.”
As it turns out, a libel lawsuit was indeed on the way. Unsworth is reportedly preparing to file a civil complaint for libel against Musk, according to a letter from the caver’s lawyer shared to CNBC. The attorney’s letter described Musk’s tweets as “false and defamatory.” The lawyer also urged Musk’s legal counsel to contact him to avoid litigation and correct the reportedly false statements. The letter was dated August 6, just a day before Musk posted his fateful “funding secured” tweet.
While Musk faces another possible lawsuit over his Twitter activity, Tesla continues to pursue its Model 3 ramp. The production of the electric car seems poised to hit record levels this quarter, with analyst Romit Shah of Nomura Instinet stating that Tesla could produce as many as 65,000-70,000 Model 3 this quarter. Baird analyst Ben Kallo is also optimistic about Tesla’s numbers this Q3, stating that the company’s fundamentals are “underappreciated” amidst the noise from the controversy resulting from Elon Musk’s go-private initiative.
In a new note to investors on Tuesday, Morgan Stanley analyst Andrew Percoco said that Tesla has one big financial question to answer for investors regarding its Robotaxi rollout, Full Self-Driving software, and Optimus.
Percoco said in the note that, for the most part, investors are still very positive about the direction the company is headed. However, there are some things the firm would like to see, and they have to do with financials.
Tesla (TSLA) Q2 2026 earnings results: miss on EPS, beat on revenue
Tesla bulls are more than convinced that the company’s Full Self-Driving software is proof it can develop physical AI. Financially, however, there are still some questions, especially on elevated spending, which CEO Elon Musk said would occur as the company works to roll out Robotaxi faster and continue developing its Optimus robot.
The latter two are where Tesla will have to prove progress to investors, as Percoco writes that both projects “will require clearer evidence that Robotaxi is scaling and more tangible Optimus proof points to support the ROI on elevated capex.”
Percoco said the second quarter earnings call did not change his long-term thesis of where Tesla is positioned in the AI race, which is out in front. However, there are concerns that weaker gross margins and higher R&D spend will stress financials, and that has “sharpened our (and investors’) focus on measurable progress across Robotaxi and Optimus.”
Additionally, Robotaxi still needs to be proven with more operation in existing cities while maintaining safety but improving how many rides it gives in any given time, he said. For Optimus, Percoco wrote that he is “still looking for evidence beyond commentary around SOP.”
-
Morgan Stanley put Percoco in charge of covering Tesla after long-time analyst Adam Jonas transitioned to the automotive side.
Currently, Morgan Stanley has a $415 price target on Tesla and a ‘Hold’ rating on the stock. It is trading at around $330 at the time of publication, which was 2:30 P.M. on the East Coast.
SpaceX’s massive investment in AI will make it a big winner, Argus Research said after the company’s successful earnings call last week.
The firm also upgraded shares to a Buy from Hold and set a $160 price target.
SpaceX (NASDAQ: SPCX) is currently recovering from its heavy AI infrastructure investments, as it spent nearly $16 billion in Q2 alone. The company did this primarily by monetizing high-demand GPU compute capacity at a much faster pace than traditional data center economics would suggest.
Company CFO Bret Johnsen said that SpaceX would be able to pay back anything on new deployments within a year.
There are plenty of ways the company can do this:
Leasing excess compute capacity through contracts
SpaceX has already built Colossus and Colossus II, largely for its own model training. However, much of that capacity is already rented out to third parties. It already has major deals with Anthropic, Google, and Reflection AI. These partnerships are adding billions per month to SpaceX’s spreadsheet.
-
High utilization driven by industry-wide scarcity
The demand for advanced AI training and inference capacity continues to exceed what is available for use. SpaceX can fill new racks quickly after they come online, so the capital deployed converts into revenue with minimal idle time.
Additionally, management and outside observers have described the new compute capital as behaving more like a cost-of-goods-sold than traditional multi-year capex, especially because of this rapid monetization pattern.
Capacity has already scaled from ~0.4 GW a year to 1.4 GW annually by the end of Q2. There are targets of more than 2 GW by year-end.
High incremental margins on the rental business once capacity is online
GPU cloud providers often operate at strong gross margins. SpaceX can monetize capacity that was already partially built or can be added efficiently. This means that incremental EBITDA margins on the rental revenue are usually high. This accelerates cash recovery relative to the gross capital outlay.
Parallel monetization of its own AI software and applications
Beyond pure infrastructure rental, SpaceX also generates revenue from Grok through subscriptions and usage, from X through ads, data, and other related services, enterprise APIs, and the planned integration of the Cursor coding tools acquisition.
These application layers ride on the same compute infrastructure and provide additional high-margin streams that could offset build-out costs. AI-segment revenue overall rose sharply to about $2.6 billion in Q2, according to Motley Fool. This was driven primarily by the infrastructure contracts, but the software side is also partially responsible.
Efficient, large-scale deployment and vertical integration advantages
SpaceX has emphasized the rapid construction of power and cooling infrastructure and favorable cost-per-megawatt economics relative to industry benchmarks in some disclosures.
-
Combined with its ability to scale capacity aggressively and the fact that many contracts start generating revenue within months of capacity coming online, the effective payback compresses dramatically compared with more conventional multi-year data-center projects.
SpaceX’s dominant near-term recovery path will turn the AI clusters into a hyperscale-style compute rental business for other leading AI companies while still using a portion for internal models.
Tesla headlights have caused a recall of over 20,000 of the company’s two most popular vehicles, the Model 3 and Model Y, due to the low-beam bulb exceeding the maximum allowed intensity according to federal standards.
Tesla initiated the recall with the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) this morning, stating that the low-beam output “exceeds the maximum allowed intensity in the outer upper-right and outer upper-left areas of the 10U and 90U zone, as prescribed in FMVSS No. 108.”
Tesla sourced the impacted headlights from Marelli Automotive Lighting, a Mexico-based company. The recall impacts 2020-2023 Model Y vehicles and 2017-2023 Model 3 vehicles. It is estimated that every VIN in this recall is impacted by the defect.
🚨 Tesla is recalling 20,349 2020-23 Model Y vehicles and 2017-23 Model 3 vehicles due to an excessively bright headlamp low beam.
Currently, there is no remedy plan in place, as it is still being developed. pic.twitter.com/y34cIO2U0B
— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) August 11, 2026
Typically, Tesla would remedy recalls of this nature through an Over-the-Air software update, which has been a major focus of criticism by the company and its supporters because the NHTSA still refers to it as a “recall,” even though it requires no action by the vehicle owner. The fix is shipped over the internet and downloaded to the car.
-
However, there appears to be a potentially different solution for this problem. Tesla has not developed a remedy for this issue, so it could potentially be on the way. The big issue appears to be the fact that these recalled lamps are out of production, and this is an old body style for both vehicles. The headlights and front-end designs are completely different.
Tesla switched to another supplier when the affected headlight design was discontinued. It plans to begin notifying owners of their remedy options by September 15.
Tesla filed a petition protesting the recall to fix the vehicles’ headlight issue, but the NHTSA denied it. Now, Tesla will come up with a solution to fix it.
Tesla has one big financial question to answer for investors: Morgan Stanley
SpaceX AI investment gamble will make it a big winner, firm says
