News
(Op-Ed) Tesla China has been very successful legally–but is something nefarious really afoot?
A recent report from the Associated Press has highlighted the fact that Tesla China has been very successful legally. Over the years, Tesla China has seen a remarkable record in winning legal cases against critics, from media outlets and social media influencers to customers.
But while the report carried a tone that hinted that something nefarious was afoot, Tesla China’s legal successes may simply be explained by a simple reason—it chooses to hold people accountable.
The AP’s piece:
- A look at the Associated Press‘ piece on Tesla China’s aggressive legal strategy opens with the story of Zhang Yazhou, who held a protest at the 2021 Shanghai Auto Show alleging that her Model 3 experienced a brake failure.
- Here’s how the report framed the matter:
- “Tesla has embraced an aggressive legal strategy in China to stifle its critics — suing its own customers.
- “That’s left some Tesla owners desperate. Zhang Yazhou protested publicly that her Model 3’s brakes had failed and caused an accident in 2021 that sent her parents to the hospital. Tesla said that wasn’t true and sued her for defamation. A Chinese court ordered Zhang to pay the $1.1-trillion company more than $23,000 in damages and publicly apologize for her criticism.
- “”I refuse to accept it,” said Zhang, who appealed the verdict. “As a consumer, even if I said something wrong, I have the right to comment and criticize. I spoke about my feelings as a user of the car. It has nothing to do with damaging their reputation.””
- The AP report also described Tesla China’s legal victories as follows:
- “Over the last four years, Tesla has sued at least six car owners in China who had sudden vehicle malfunctions, quality complaints or accidents they claimed were caused by mechanical failures.
- “The company has also sued at least six bloggers and two Chinese media outlets that wrote critically about the company, according to a review of public court documents and Chinese media reports by The Associated Press.
- “Tesla won all eleven cases for which AP could determine the verdicts. Two judgments are on appeal. One case was settled out of court.
- “Tesla has not only won the defamation cases it brought against unhappy car owners and critical journalists, it has also prevailed in lawsuits customers have filed against it.”
Context matters:
- While it is quite popular these days in several corners of the internet to frame Elon Musk and Tesla as evil entities that must be eliminated, it is important to look at the context behind Tesla China’s legal successes.
- Tesla China’s success in the country’s court system may not be due to a nefarious reasons at all. Instead, it could simply be due to one particular thing that the company is very good at—in-vehicle data.
- Take the case of Ms. Zhang, for example. When she alleged that her Model 3 experienced brake failure, Tesla China simply supplied the data from her vehicle to prove that the car’s brakes, in fact, did not malfunction.
- The same thing was true for social media influencers who allegedly showed Tesla’s vehicles experiencing brake failure.
- Back in 2021, during the height of the brake controversy in China, a Tesla owner decided to demonstrate how his Model X’s brakes were allegedly failing. The owner later admitted that the video was for entertainment purposes only.
- A famous blogger who alleged that Tesla’s automatic emergency braking system was subpar also posted a public apology to Tesla China after the company’s legal department pursued him.
- In that particular case, Tesla China was hardly throwing its weight around, since netizens in the country were already calling out the blogger for pressing on the vehicle’s accelerator during his automatic emergency braking test.
- Overall, Tesla China’s long string of legal victories seems to be due to the company’s willingness to hold critics accountable when needed, as well as the objective data that is provided by its vehicles.
The whipping boys of media:
- Elon Musk has a high tolerance for pain, and Tesla does too, at times to the detriment of the company’s shareholders.
- This has caused media outlets, social media influencers, and general netizens to casually throw out wild accusations against the CEO and the electric vehicle maker.
- This has been especially notable recently amidst Elon Musk’s work with DOGE.
- But while this is the status quo in the United States, Tesla China’s management team requires a more assertive legal strategy—one that would allow the company to thrive in the world’s most competitive and challenging electric vehicle market.
Don’t hesitate to contact us with news tips. Just send a message to simon@teslarati.com to give us a heads up.
-
Tesla’s AI lead Ashok Elluswamy doubled down on the company’s strategy regarding Full Self-Driving’s speed settings, and owners are definitely confused.
Earlier versions of Full Self-Driving allowed owners to set a max speed that the vehicle could travel while operating under the semi-autonomous driver assistance platform. This allowed more customization for the driver, giving them the ability to experience FSD’s robust performance with their own personal preferences.
Speed is massively important for obvious reasons — it’s not only a question of keeping the vehicle occupants comfortable by traveling at a safe speed, but it’s also something that could contribute to a ticket or infraction from law enforcement.
With the release of FSD v14 last year, Tesla removed the ability to set a max speed and instead opted for five Speed Profiles, ranging from “Sloth,” the most conservative, to “Mad Max,” the most aggressive and spirited. These profiles not only control speed, but also how frequently the vehicle will execute passes, perform lane changes, and other contributing factors.
The removal of the Max Speed setting was a major complaint amongst the Tesla community because it left owners scrambling for a way to experience suitable behaviors while traveling at an appropriate speed. Most felt the driving profiles would be a good indicator of the behaviors, while speed would still be left up to the discretion of the driver.
Instead, Tesla’s Speed Profiles determine both, and the constant tinkering of how they behave has been a major bottleneck and point of confusion for both owners and the company. From update to update, the Speed Profiles will change, sometimes more drastically than others. Some owners have complained that the “Standard” profile is too fast, while others have experienced “Mad Max” traveling below the speed limit:
What has happened to Mad Max?
At one point it was going 32 in a 35. Traffic ahead had pulled away considerably https://t.co/bjKvaMVTNX pic.twitter.com/aaZSWmLu5v
— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) January 24, 2026
These things change with each update, but the big complaint is that owners are on the hook for any tickets that come from FSD’s infractions; that’s the caveat of the suite being named FSD (Supervised). It ultimately means the driver is responsible, and the automaker has no liability when it comes to speeding tickets or general traffic infractions.
It is the driver’s responsibility to take over or adjust based on this.
Elluswamy essentially confirmed that there are no plans to bring back Max Speed control, because it is what he referred to as “an anti pattern.” He then echoed something that CEO Elon Musk has started to really push with FSD, and that’s the idea that Tesla is really honing in on the preferences of the driver.
Max speed control is an anti pattern.
We are working on better learning of user’s implied preferences.
— Ashok Elluswamy (@aelluswamy) August 3, 2026
Owners were confused by Tesla’s decision, stating that there must be a better way, especially considering disengagements for incorrect speeds are common:
This…. is not the way
— Kyle Conner (@itskyleconner) August 4, 2026
😭 I appreciate this mentality ! But currently the no.1 reason I disengage in Australia is incorrect speed zones.
— Ryan’s Model Y (@ryanjaycowan) August 3, 2026
This is fine but you need to start accepting liability for speeding tickets then. https://t.co/lyCgdA83gQ
— Jeremy Judkins (@jeremyjudkins_) August 4, 2026
Okay https://t.co/nOvoXQkNg1 pic.twitter.com/jGRtF2xtox
— Chad Moran (@ChadMoran) August 3, 2026
From personal experience and using FSD for over 72 percent of my driving miles since v14 was released late last year, I make Speed Profile adjustments constantly. If FSD is traveling a tad too quickly, I will scale it back, and if it’s too conservative, I’ll make it more aggressive.
I don’t complain about making the Speed Profile changes too frequently, but it would certainly be nice to have it happen less frequently. There are far too many times I am concerned about getting a ticket, even in Standard mode.
The biggest issue for me, personally, which seems to be echoed throughout the community, is the fact that Tesla’s goal is to minimize disengagements. Many drivers are stating that speed is a major reason for disengagements.
However, Tesla is not willing to bring back this one level of input because it would technically be a regression.
Whether it’s right or wrong in your opinion, it is what Tesla is going with, and it seems like it has pivoted quite a bit from its other strategies for minimizing interventions by pushing its AI to behave in a way that would fit the occupant’s personal preferences.
Tesla is one of several automakers whose vehicles qualify for an awesome new first-time EV buyer incentive program in California.
The Golden State launched the MyFirstEV incentive program, which helps those buying an electric vehicle for the first time with a $3,500 incentive on new-inventory purchases of a Model 3 or Model Y.
First-time electric vehicle buyers in California can now get $3,500 off eligible Model 3 and Model Y new inventory vehicle purchases.
To be eligible, you must place your order on or after August 3, 2026 and take delivery while funds are still available. The incentive applies to… pic.twitter.com/yuXF00XA50
— Sawyer Merritt (@SawyerMerritt) August 4, 2026
The incentive requires an order on or after August 3, and delivery must be taken while the program is still being funded. California has set aside $135.5 million to help strengthen its SEV market and support automotive innovation.
Incentives are offered at the point of sale, and used EVs are also available for a partial incentive of $1,750. Half of the $3,500 and $1,750 incentive amounts are covered by California, with the other half being covered by participating OEMs.
Additionally, rules apply for MSRP and how the vehicle will qualify for the incentive. Any vehicle from a non-California headquartered OEM must have an MSRP of $50,000 or less. Used vehicles must be priced at $25,000 or less and must be at least two model years older than the year of purchase.
The cars must also be purchased from manufacturers as certified pre-owned vehicles. Private dealerships are not eligible.
In total, California expects to incentivize over 73,000 ZEVs.
Participating Manufacturers
Fourteen total automakers are participating in California’s MyFirstEV program:
- Chevrolet – Launching August 2026
- Ford – Launching August 2026
- Honda – Launching September 2026
- Hyundai – Launching August 2026
- Kia – Launching August 2026
- Lexus – Launching September 2026
- Lucid – Launching August 2026
- Mitsubishi – Launching November 2026
- Nissan – Coming Soon
- Rivian – Coming Soon
- Subaru – Launching September 2026
- Tesla – Launching August 2026
- Toyota – Launching September 2026
- Volvo – Coming Soon
Elon Musk’s space exploration company, SpaceX (NASDAQ: SPCX), is set to report its earnings for the second quarter today in what will be its first-ever earnings call since going public in July.
SpaceX is trading down roughly 25 percent from its IPO. These early stock signals are usually a bit tumultuous, and considering this is the first company actively launching rockets that is available on the stock exchange, investors might have a tendency to be a bit skittish.
However, there are going to be some details that investors will hear for the first time today on the earnings call. Here’s what to look for:
Wall Street Expectations
Revenue is expected to fall somewhere around $6.8 billion, and will be heavily driven by Starlink, which is SpaceX’s widely popular satellite internet platform that has been adopted by numerous airlines, cruise ships, and other maritime operations. It is also available for consumers at home or in their cars.
Earnings Per Share (EPS) expectations fall at a net loss of $0.23 per share. Wall Street sees this as a total net loss of roughly $1.9 billion.
EBITDA is expected to come in between $2 billion and $2.1 billion.
What Investors Want to Know
Tesla uses the Say platform to help work with both retail and institutional investors to answer relevant and quality questions that address concerns or questions that they might have.
However, SpaceX is doing things differently, as the company launched its own Investor Relations website where these questions are being fielded. Just like the Tesla questions, they seem to be less focused on the operational tasks and overall progress of the company, and more novelty.
Here are the top five:
- Has the team thought about what possibilities there are with your mascot Asteroid? Whether it’s starting additional foundations for kids in its name, helping kids learn about space, etc. Kids are our future, and Asteroid would be a fun and easy way to help.
- Baby Asteroid is already making a difference through charity around the world. Could SpaceX take it even further with programs that inspire kids to explore space?
- SpaceX has some legendary vehicle names. Would you ever allow the public to name a Starship, even knowing there is a 99% chance it becomes Shipy McShipface?
- When can we expect to see more footage of the Human Landing System?
- Will Asteroid (your mascot) go to Mars?
SpaceX will report its earnings today, August 4, at 4:30 P.M. EDT.
Tesla’s AI lead doubles down on FSD’s speed strategy, and owners are confused
Tesla qualifies for awesome new first-time EV buyer incentive in California
