Connect with us
elon-musk-twitter-hq-austin-florida elon-musk-twitter-hq-austin-florida

News

Elon Musk’s legal team calls out Twitter over alleged pretrial delays

Credit: Kevin Krejci/Flickr CC BY 2.0

Published

on

Tesla CEO Elon Musk’s legal team has filed a letter to the Delaware Chancery Court, alleging that Twitter is engaging in unnecessary pretrial delays. The letter is addressed to Chancellor Kathaleen McCormick, who would be deciding the case between Musk and the social media company.

The legal battle between Twitter and Musk initially seemed to go in Twitter’s favor, with McCormick deciding last week that the trial would start in October, not early next year as the CEO’s legal team had requested. Twitter is looking to start the trial on October 10, 2022, but according to Musk’s legal team in its recent letter, the trial should begin a week later instead, on October 17, 2022.

Musk’s legal team noted that it had tried to begin the discovery process after McCormick’s decision last week, but Twitter had so far been uncooperative.

“Following this Court’s expedition ruling on July 19th, Defendants proceeded with due haste to abide by this Court’s order. Defendants served document requests on Plaintiff Twitter, Inc. (“Twitter”) that day, followed the next day by their second set of RFPs and first set of interrogatories.

Advertisement

“Defendants immediately reached out to Twitter’s counsel to schedule a meet and confer to discuss the discovery process and schedule. Defendants’ efforts to make sure this case is trial-ready by October, have not been reciprocated by Twitter, who at every turn has sought to delay,” Musk’s lawyers wrote.

Musk’s legal team pointed to three main issues that are holding up the legal process, such as the lack of a specific trial date, Twitter’s neglect to produce documents that should be otherwise easy to produce, and the lack of pertinent data needed for the case.

As such, Musk’s legal team has requested the court to adopt its proposed schedule, and set the trial date for October 17-21. The team also asked the court to require Twitter to cooperate with Tesla by providing the documents and data needed by Musk’s legal team.

“To break the logjam, Defendants respectfully request that the Court enter Defendants’ proposed schedule, which (i) sets trial for October 17-21, 2022; (ii) requires Twitter to immediately produce the core documents; (iii) requires Twitter to produce all raw data by August 1; and (iv) sets a document production deadline for 18 days after a request is served. Given the timeline until trial, every day counts,” Musk’s legal team wrote.

Advertisement

Musk’s legal team’s letter can be viewed below.

Musk Letter Enclosing Proposed Case Schedule by Simon Alvarez on Scribd

Don’t hesitate to contact us with news tips. Just send a message to simon@teslarati.com to give us a heads up.

Advertisement

Simon is an experienced automotive reporter with a passion for electric cars and clean energy. Fascinated by the world envisioned by Elon Musk, he hopes to make it to Mars (at least as a tourist) someday. For stories or tips--or even to just say a simple hello--send a message to his email, simon@teslarati.com or his handle on X, @ResidentSponge.

Advertisement
Comments

News

Tesla confirms Full Self-Driving still isn’t garnering interest from lagging competitors

Published

on

Credit: Tesla

Tesla executive Sendil Palani confirmed in a post on social media platform X that Full Self-Driving, despite being the most robust driver assistance program in the United States, still isn’t garnering any interest from lagging competitors.

Tesla has said on several occasions in the past that it has had discussions with a competing carmaker to license its Full Self-Driving suite. While it never confirmed which company it was, many pointed toward Ford as the one Tesla was holding dialogue with.

At the time, Ford CEO Jim Farley and Tesla CEO Elon Musk had a very cordial relationship.

Despite Tesla’s confirmation, which occurred during both the Q2 2023 and Q1 2024 Earnings Calls, no deal was ever reached. Whichever “major OEM” Tesla had talked to did not see the benefit. Even now, Tesla has not found that dance partner, despite leading every company in the U.S. in self-driving efforts by a considerable margin.

Elon Musk says Tesla Robotaxi launch will force companies to license Full Self-Driving

Palani seemed to confirm that Tesla still has not found any company that is remotely interested in licensing FSD, as he said on X that “despite our best efforts to share the technology,” the company has found that it “has not been proven to be easy.”

The question came just after one Tesla fan on X asked whether Tesla would continue manufacturing vehicles.

Because Tesla continues to expand its lineup of Model Y, it has plans to build the Cybercab, and there is still an immediate need for passenger vehicles, there is no question that the company plans to continue scaling its production.

However, Palani’s response is interesting, especially considering that it was in response to the question of whether Tesla would keep building cars.

Perhaps if Tesla could license Full Self-Driving to enough companies for the right price, it could simply sell the suite to car companies that are building vehicles, eliminating the need for Tesla to build its own.

While it seems like a reach because of Tesla’s considerable fan base, which is one of the most loyal in the automotive industry, the company could eventually bail on manufacturing and gain an incredible valuation by simply unlocking self-driving for other manufacturers.

The big question regarding why Tesla can’t find another company to license FSD is simply, “Why?”

Do they think they can solve it themselves? Do they not find FSD as valuable or effective? Many of these same companies didn’t bat an eye when Tesla started developing EVs, only to find themselves years behind. This could be a continuing trend.

Continue Reading

News

Tesla exec pleads for federal framework of autonomy to U.S. Senate Committee

Published

on

Credit: Tesla

Tesla executive Lars Moravy appeared today in front of the U.S. Senate Commerce Committee to highlight the importance of modernizing autonomy standards by establishing a federal framework that would reward innovation and keep the country on pace with foreign rivals.

Moravy, who is Tesla’s Vice President of Vehicle Engineering, strongly advocated for Congress to enact a national framework for autonomous vehicle development and deployment, replacing the current patchwork of state-by-state rules.

These rules have slowed progress and kept companies fighting tooth-and-nail with local legislators to operate self-driving projects in controlled areas.

Tesla already has a complete Robotaxi model, and it doesn’t depend on passenger count

Moravy said the new federal framework was essential for the U.S. to “maintain its position in global technological development and grow its advanced manufacturing capabilities.

He also said in a warning to the committee that outdated regulations and approval processes would “inhibit the industry’s ability to innovate,” which could potentially lead to falling behind China.

Being part of the company leading the charge in terms of autonomous vehicle development in the U.S., Moravy highlighted Tesla’s prowess through the development of the Full Self-Driving platform. Tesla vehicles with FSD engaged average 5.1 million miles before a major collision, which outpaces that of the human driver average of roughly 699,000 miles.

Moravy also highlighted the widely cited NHTSA statistic that states that roughly 94 percent of crashes stem from human error, positioning autonomous vehicles as a path to dramatically reduce fatalities and injuries.

Skeptics sometimes point to cybersecurity concerns within self-driving vehicles, which was something that was highlighted during the Senate Commerce Committee hearing, but Moravy said, “No one has ever been able to take over control of our vehicles.”

This level of security is thanks to a core-embedded central layer, which is inaccessible from external connections. Additionally, Tesla utilizes a dual cryptographic signature from two separate individuals, keeping security high.

Moravy also dove into Tesla’s commitment to inclusive mobility by stating, “We are committed with our future products and Robotaxis to provide accessible transportation to everyone.” This has been a major point of optimism for AVs because it could help the disabled, physically incapable, the elderly, and the blind have consistent transportation.

Overall, Moravy’s testimony blended urgency about geopolitical competition, especially China, with concrete safety statistics and a vision of the advantages autonomy could bring for everyone, not only in the U.S., but around the world, as well.

Continue Reading

News

Tesla Model Y lineup expansion signals an uncomfortable reality for consumers

Published

on

Credit: Tesla

Tesla launched a new configuration of the Model Y this week, bringing more complexity to its lineup of the vehicle and adding a new, lower entry point for those who require an All-Wheel-Drive car.

However, the broadening of the Model Y lineup in the United States could signal a somewhat uncomfortable reality for Tesla fans and car buyers, who have been vocal about their desire for a larger, full-size SUV.

Tesla has essentially moved in the opposite direction through its closure of the Model X and its continuing expansion of a vehicle that fits the bill for many, but not all.

Tesla brings closure to Model Y moniker with launch of new trim level

While CEO Elon Musk has said that there is the potential for the Model Y L, a longer wheelbase configuration of the vehicle, to enter the U.S. market late this year, it is not a guarantee.

Instead, Tesla has prioritized the need to develop vehicles and trim levels that cater to the future rollout of the Robotaxi ride-hailing service and a fully autonomous future.

But the company could be missing out on a massive opportunity, as SUVs are a widely popular body style in the U.S., especially for families, as the tighter confines of compact SUVs do not support the needs of a large family.

Although there are other companies out there that manufacture this body style, many are interested in sticking with Tesla because of the excellent self-driving platform, expansive charging infrastructure, and software performance the vehicles offer.

Additionally, the lack of variety from an aesthetic and feature standpoint has caused a bit of monotony throughout the Model Y lineup. Although Premium options are available, those three configurations only differ in terms of range and performance, at least for the most part, and the differences are not substantial.

Minor Expansions of the Model Y Fail to Address Family Needs for Space

Offering similar trim levels with slight differences to cater to each consumer’s needs is important. However, these vehicles keep a constant: cargo space and seating capacity.

Larger families need something that would compete with vehicles like the Chevrolet Tahoe, Ford Expedition, or Cadillac Escalade, and while the Model X was its largest offering, that is going away.

Tesla could fix this issue partially with the rollout of the Model Y L in the U.S., but only if it plans to continue offering various Model Y vehicles and expanding on its offerings with that car specifically. There have been hints toward a Cyber-inspired SUV in the past, but those hints do not seem to be a drastic focus of the company, given its autonomy mission.

Tesla appears to be mulling a Cyber SUV design

Model Y Expansion Doesn’t Boost Performance, Value, or Space

You can throw all the different badges, powertrains, and range ratings on the same vehicle, it does not mean it’s going to sell better. The Model Y was already the best-selling vehicle in the world on several occasions. Adding more configurations seems to be milking it.

The true need of people, especially now that the Model X is going away, is going to be space. What vehicle fits the bill of a growing family, or one that has already outgrown the Model Y?

Not Expanding the Lineup with a New Vehicle Could Be a Missed Opportunity

The U.S. is the world’s largest market for three-row SUVs, yet Tesla’s focus on tweaking the existing Model Y ignores this. This could potentially result in the Osborne Effect, as sales of current models without capturing new customers who need more seating and versatility.

Expansions of the current Model Y offerings risk adding production complexity without addressing core demands, and given that the Model Y L is already being produced in China, it seems like it would be a reasonable decision to build a similar line in Texas.

Listening to consumers means introducing either the Model Y L here, or bringing a new, modern design to the lineup in the form of a full-size SUV.

Continue Reading