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.
Tesla shared a striking video showcasing the decommissioning of the original Model S and Model X assembly line at its Fremont Factory in Northern California. Completed in just 46 days, the teardown involved heavy machinery dismantling concrete pits, removing robotic arms and conveyors, and clearing the space for new production.
The post, captioned “End of an era,” captured both the end of a historic chapter and Tesla’s aggressive pivot toward its next major initiative, Optimus.
End of an era: Decommissioning the original Model S & X assembly line in just 46 days pic.twitter.com/kGEdfhl62h
— Tesla Manufacturing (@gigafactories) July 10, 2026
The decision to retire the Model S and Model X originated during Tesla’s Q4 2025 Earnings Call in late January 2026. CEO Elon Musk announced that production of the company’s flagship sedan and SUV would wind down by the end of Q2 2026, describing it as bringing the programs to an “honorable discharge.”
Custom orders ceased around early April 2026, with the final vehicles rolling off the line in early May. A special signature delivery ceremony on May 20 marked the emotional close for these vehicles, which had defined Tesla’s early success and luxury EV segment since the Model S launch in 2012.
The primary reason for tearing down the lines was to repurpose the valuable factory floor space for high-volume production of Tesla’s Optimus humanoid robot. Musk had indicated on Earnings Calls that the Fremont S/X line would be replaced by a dedicated Optimus manufacturing line targeting a capacity of one million units per year.
This move aligns with Tesla’s broader strategic shift from traditional vehicle manufacturing toward robotics and artificial intelligence, leveraging the company’s expertise in autonomy, AI training, and high-volume production.
Optimus, Tesla’s general-purpose humanoid robot, is designed to perform repetitive or dangerous tasks in factories, warehouses, and eventually homes. Powered by Tesla’s AI and Neural Networks, it aims to be a versatile, affordable platform. Production of Optimus Gen 3 is already underway in limited form at Fremont, with full-scale output on the converted line expected to begin in late July or August.
Tesla is targeting rapid scaling, with internal ambitions pointing toward tens or even hundreds of thousands of units annually by the end of 2026.
Longer-term, Tesla is constructing a much larger second-generation Optimus facility at Giga Texas, with potential capacity reaching millions of units per year. The company views Optimus as a transformative product that could eventually surpass its automotive business in scale and value, enabling widespread deployment of useful robots across industries. CEO Elon Musk has even predicted it would be the most popular product of all-time.
As one era closes at Fremont, another is rapidly taking shape.
Elon Musk posted a candid admission on his social media platform X on June 9, declaring that he had been “clearly wrong” about Anthropic. The statement marked a notable reversal from his earlier skepticism toward the AI company.
In September, Musk had written, “Winning was never in the set of possible outcomes for Anthropic,” reflecting his view at the time that the startup had lacked the foundation or even the trajectory to succeed in what is an incredibly intense race for advanced artificial intelligence.
Musk’s latest post came amid discussion of Anthropic’s reliance on external compute resources. He praised the company’s progress, stating that Anthropic is “obviously currently the leader in AI” and that “no company has released a model as good as Mythos/Fable,” with expectations of a strong follow-up in Mythos 2.
The tone shifted dramatically from dismissal to acknowledgement of superior performance.
I was clearly wrong about Anthropic. They are obviously currently the leader in AI. No company has released a model as good as Mythos/Fable and they will undoubtedly have Mythos 2 ready soon.
And I would never cut them off in a way that hurt them badly, even as a competitor.…
— Elon Musk (@elonmusk) July 9, 2026
The context of Musk’s comments added significance. Anthropic has been operating under a recent compute deal with SpaceXAI, Musk’s AI infrastructure-focused venture. The pair entered a short-term GPU lease agreement initiated in May, providing Anthropic access to critical computing power for training and deploying its frontier models.
SpaceXAI signs agreement with Anthropic for massive AI supercomputer access
Some observers had speculated that Musk could leverage this dependency to disadvantage a rival. Musk directly addressed the possibility, writing, “I would never cut them off in a way that hurt them badly, even as a competitor. That’s not my style.”
To support his commitment to ethical competition, Musk referenced concrete examples from his other companies. Tesla famously open-sourced its entire portfolio of electric vehicle patents in 2014. The move was designed to accelerate the global adoption of sustainable transportation technology rather than protect proprietary advantages.
Tesla also made its Supercharger network available to competing electric vehicle manufacturers, transforming what could have remained an exclusive charging ecosystem into a shared infrastructure that benefits the broader industry and reduces barriers for EV adoption.
Musk further pointed to SpaceX’s practices, noting that the company launches satellites for competing commercial systems “with no increase in price or use of unfair terms.” He extended the principle to his social platform, observing that “even my worst enemies attack me on this platform,” underscoring preference for open discourse over retaliation.
These examples have illustrated Musk’s long-standing philosophy that long-term technological progress is best served by open competition and infrastructure sharing rather than leveraging market power to stifle rivals. In the fast-evolving AI sector, where compute resources and model capabilities determine leadership, Musk’s stance suggests a willingness to compete on innovation and performance alone.
Musk’s admission arrives as SpaceXAI itself advances its own frontier models while maintaining business relationships across the ecosystem. By publicly correcting his earlier assessment and reaffirming principles of fair play, Musk highlights a model of competition that prioritizes advancement of the field over short-term tactical advantages.
A Tesla analyst believes the company’s Full Self-Driving suite is close to an “inflection point,” where people will finally realize that it is more than what it appears, similar to how many view the iPhone.
Pierre Ferragu, an analyst who has covered Tesla for many years at New Street Research, says the Full Self-Driving suite is one piece of evidence supporting the view that a Tesla is more than a car. He compared it to the iPhone and noted that the high price tag seemed like a lot for a phone early on. Then people realized the iPhone was more than just something you make calls with. It made their lives simpler.
🚨 Analyst @p_ferragu says Tesla Full Self-Driving is at an “inflection point” in a recent commentary:
“A Tesla is not a car, the same way an iPhone was not a phone. As a tool that gets you to work peacefully every morning, it is not expensive. Give us 2 more quarters to see… pic.twitter.com/tm6xFrjVPV
— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) July 10, 2026
Suddenly, that price tag was justified.
Tesla offers several models under the average transaction price for a new vehicle, which was above $49,000, according to Kelley Blue Book. However, that does not take into account that many people can still not afford a $35,000 vehicle. Ferragu offers his thoughts:
“Remember when the addressable market of the iPhone was 10 million units? Then people realized how good it was, and now, nearly 250m are sold every year.
A similar evolution for Tesla is still on the table. A Tesla is not a car, the same way an iPhone was not a phone.
A model 3 at $35k + $100 per month is too expensive for most, but only as a car, the same way a $600 iPhone was too expensive for most, until most realized it was much more than a phone.
As a tool that gets you to work peacefully every morning, it is not expensive.”
This point is valid, especially considering the iPhone’s impact on the cell phone market. There are still a handful of players, but most people you know have an iPhone. The iPhone ties into Apple’s other ecosystem of products.
This is how Tesla plans to infiltrate the automotive market, and once the company offers a fully autonomous suite, or something that can allow for unsupervised self-driving, more and more people will flock to Tesla.
Ferragu believes Tesla needs two additional quarters of development before things will truly change. He didn’t elaborate on what will happen in two quarters, but he said it will give us all time to “see where this is heading.”
It is really quite interesting to see people’s reactions when they find out what a Tesla is capable of. Full Self-Driving is a great tool for taking stress out of travel; I use it daily, and it has made it really difficult to consider taking any other car on a drive of practically any length.
To me, it is really hard to believe that people will not at least seriously consider a Tesla as their next car if they experience Full Self-Driving. This is a major point for those who argue that Tesla should advertise in some way.
Tesla shows rapid teardown of Model S and X lines, paving the way for Optimus at Fremont
Elon Musk admits he was ‘clearly wrong’ about Anthropic
