News
Tesla blocked (again) in Connecticut after judge rules in-state activities illegal
Connecticut state court judge Joseph M. Shortall disagreed with Tesla’s “educational venue” defense of a vehicle display gallery in Greenwich, concluding in a December 6, 2018 ruling that its business activities are illegal under state law. The gallery, opened in October 2016, was ordered in May 2017 to “cease all functions” by Connecticut’s Department of Motor Vehicles (DMV), claiming it was operating its 340 Greenwich Ave. location like a dealership, an activity requiring a license for which Tesla is not eligible. Tesla subsequently filed a lawsuit primarily arguing the definition of sales-oriented terms; however, the Superior Court of the New Britain Judicial District affirmed the DMV’s ruling, beginning a period wherein Tesla may file an appeal.
Connecticut state law forbids direct vehicle sales by vehicle manufacturers in favor of a “franchise system”, a set of laws meant to protect independent car dealerships from predatory practices of larger car manufacturing companies. Elon Musk, Tesla’s CEO, has made it a company policy not to sell their electric vehicles to independent dealerships primarily because he believes franchises face a “fundamental conflict of interest” when selling both gas and electric vehicles. Also, Tesla would miss an important opportunity to educate potential buyers about its products in a traditional dealership setting.
“Existing franchise dealers have a fundamental conflict of interest between selling gasoline cars, which constitute the vast majority of their business, and selling the new technology of electric cars. It is impossible for them to explain the advantages of going electric without simultaneously undermining their traditional business. This would leave the electric car without a fair opportunity to make its case to an unfamiliar public.” – Elon Musk, October 22, 2012
It was the “educational” angle that the company took while operating their Greenwich location, claiming that prospective buyers were merely being given information about their unique technology along with a test drive opportunity. Any sales which followed were conducted online and delivery was out-of-state. The DMV, and later the Superior Court judge, disagreed, citing related activities conducted by the Greenwich team that were more sales-specific, such as commissions and bonuses tied to sales resulting from discussions at the gallery and the ability of Tesla to reclaim vehicles if they weren’t picked up by the customer within one week of delivery.
In the Superior Court’s ruling, decided by Judge Trial Referee Joseph M. Shortall, the term “selling” was also agreed to be all-inclusive of advertising and merchandising activities, a definition promoted by the Connecticut Automotive Retailers Trade Association (CARA). The association has been on the front-line of debates involving franchise systems, arguing that they ensure fair competition while demanding that Tesla comply with existing laws and license to independent dealerships as has been the tradition for decades. CARA was the party responsible for initiating the complaint about Tesla’s activities in the state, prompting the DMV’s investigation and order.
With regard to the recent ruling, a Tesla spokesperson tells Teslarati, “Tesla disagrees with the judge’s decision, and we stand by our mission to educate the public and raise awareness about the benefits of EVs because getting more EVs on the road is the right thing to do for the environment and for the battle against climate change.” Although the issue driving CARA’s objection surrounds the issue of “sales”, Tesla does not sell any vehicles at their Greenwich location.
Since Tesla does not license their vehicle sales to independent dealers, the company position is that its business should not be subject to the same laws as manufacturers with licensed franchises. As seen by this latest court ruling, Tesla’s position isn’t exactly a shared one. To date, the company has not been successful in convincing Connecticut’s legislature to revise the direct-sales laws and with organizations like CARA lobbying against such changes, the battle certainly seems uphill.
Connecticut state legislation to amend the direct-sales ban has been proposed twice before, both times stalling from lack of votes. Despite the potential for increased sales tax revenue and jobs from a distribution facility that would come from a Tesla presence in the state, CARA and the state legislators that are friendly to its positions are on the winning side of the matter, even if its tactics to paint a negative picture of the company are questionable. According to Tesla’s former vice president of business development, Diarmuid O’Connell, in a letter to state legislators, CARA previously sent secret shoppers into the Greenwich gallery to sway Tesla employees into illegally selling a vehicle from the storefront. The attempt, of course, failed.
News
Tesla to improve one of its best features, coding shows
According to the update, Tesla will work on improving the headlights when coming into contact with highly reflective objects, including road signs, traffic signs, and street lights. Additionally, pixel-level dimming will happen in two stages, whereas it currently performs with just one, meaning on or off.
Tesla is looking to upgrade its Matrix Headlights, a unique and high-tech feature that is available on several of its vehicles. The headlights aim to maximize visibility for Tesla drivers while being considerate of oncoming traffic.
The Matrix Headlights Tesla offers utilize dimming of individual light pixels to ensure that visibility stays high for those behind the wheel, while also being considerate of other cars by decreasing the brightness in areas where other cars are traveling.
Here’s what they look like in action:
-
- Credit: u/ObjectiveScratch | Reddit
-
- Credit: u/ObjectiveScratch | Reddit
As you can see, the Matrix headlight system intentionally dims the area where oncoming cars would be impacted by high beams. This keeps visibility at a maximum for everyone on the road, including those who could be hit with bright lights in their eyes.
There are still a handful of complaints from owners, however, but Tesla appears to be looking to resolve these with the coming updates in a Software Version that is currently labeled 2026.2.xxx. The coding was spotted by X user BERKANT:
🚨 Tesla is quietly upgrading Matrix headlights.
Software https://t.co/pXEklQiXSq reveals a hidden feature:
matrix_two_stage_reflection_dip
This is a major step beyond current adaptive high beams.
What it means:
• The car detects highly reflective objects
Road signs,… pic.twitter.com/m5UpQJFA2n— BERKANT (@Tesla_NL_TR) February 24, 2026
According to the update, Tesla will work on improving the headlights when coming into contact with highly reflective objects, including road signs, traffic signs, and street lights. Additionally, pixel-level dimming will happen in two stages, whereas it currently performs with just one, meaning on or off.
Finally, the new system will prevent the high beams from glaring back at the driver. The system is made to dim when it recognizes oncoming cars, but not necessarily objects that could produce glaring issues back at the driver.
Tesla’s revolutionary Matrix headlights are coming to the U.S.
This upgrade is software-focused, so there will not need to be any physical changes or upgrades made to Tesla vehicles that utilize the Matrix headlights currently.
Elon Musk
xAI’s Grok approved for Pentagon classified systems: report
Under the agreement, Grok can be deployed in systems handling classified intelligence analysis, weapons development, and battlefield operations.
Elon Musk’s xAI has signed an agreement with the United States Department of Defense (DoD) to allow Grok to be used in classified military systems.
Previously, Anthropic’s Claude had been the only AI system approved for the most sensitive military work, but a dispute over usage safeguards has reportedly prompted the Pentagon to broaden its options, as noted in a report from Axios.
Under the agreement, Grok can be deployed in systems handling classified intelligence analysis, weapons development, and battlefield operations.
The publication reported that xAI agreed to the Pentagon’s requirement that its technology be usable for “all lawful purposes,” a standard Anthropic has reportedly resisted due to alleged ethical restrictions tied to mass surveillance and autonomous weapons use.
Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth is scheduled to meet with Anthropic CEO Dario Amodei in what sources expect to be a tense meeting, with the publication hinting that the Pentagon could designate Anthropic a “supply chain risk” if the company does not lift its safeguards.
Axios stated that replacing Claude fully might be technically challenging even if xAI or other alternative AI systems take its place. That being said, other AI systems are already in use by the DoD.
Grok already operates in the Pentagon’s unclassified systems alongside Google’s Gemini and OpenAI’s ChatGPT. Google is reportedly close to an agreement that will result in Gemini being used for classified use, while OpenAI’s progress toward classified deployment is described as slower but still feasible.
The publication noted that the Pentagon continues talks with several AI companies as it prepares for potential changes in classified AI sourcing.
Elon Musk
Elon Musk denies Starlink’s price cuts are due to Amazon Kuiper
“This has nothing to do with Kuiper, we’re just trying to make Starlink more affordable to a broader audience,” Musk wrote in a post on X.
Elon Musk has pushed back on claims that Starlink’s recent price reductions are tied to Amazon’s Kuiper project.
In a post on X, Musk responded directly to a report suggesting that Starlink was cutting prices and offering free hardware to partners ahead of a planned IPO and increased competition from Kuiper.
“This has nothing to do with Kuiper, we’re just trying to make Starlink more affordable to a broader audience,” Musk wrote in a post on X. “The lower the cost, the more Starlink can be used by people who don’t have much money, especially in the developing world.”
The speculation originated from a post summarizing a report from The Information, which ran with the headline “SpaceX’s Starlink Makes Land Grab as Amazon Threat Looms.” The report stated that SpaceX is aggressively cutting prices and giving free hardware to distribution partners, which was interpreted as a reaction to Amazon’s Kuiper’s upcoming rollout and possible IPO.
In a way, Musk’s comments could be quite accurate considering Starlink’s current scale. The constellation currently has more than 9,700 satellites in operation today, making it by far the largest satellite broadband network in operation. It has also managed to grow its user base to 10 million active customers across more than 150 countries worldwide.
Amazon’s Kuiper, by comparison, has launched approximately 211 satellites to date, as per data from SatelliteMap.Space, some of which were launched by SpaceX’s Falcon 9 rocket. Starlink surpassed that number in early January 2020, during the early buildout of its first-generation network.
Lower pricing also aligns with Starlink’s broader expansion strategy. SpaceX continues to deploy satellites at a rapid pace using Falcon 9, and future launches aboard Starship are expected to significantly accelerate the constellation’s growth. A larger network improves capacity and global coverage, which can support a broader customer base.
In that context, price reductions can be viewed as a way to match expanding supply with growing demand. Musk’s companies have historically used aggressive pricing strategies to drive adoption at scale, particularly when vertical integration allows costs to decline over time.
Tesla to improve one of its best features, coding shows
xAI’s Grok approved for Pentagon classified systems: report
