Tesla has made a public statement regarding claims by the Los Angeles Times regarding a recently concluded defamation suit against Elon Musk.
Elon Musk is no stranger to the courtroom, but luckily, he has recently been able to conclude a three-year defamation suit against him, with the plaintiff signing a “998” agreement, admitting defeat, and allowing Elon Musk to leave essentially without penalty. However, following the conclusion of this lawsuit, the LA Times published an article claiming Musk “elected to settle,” which has resulted in Tesla issuing an official statement on the matter.
The LA Times article titled “Musk said he’d never settle an unjust legal case against him. He just settled this one” was published yesterday and quickly gained traction, particularly within the community of those who are critical of Elon Musk. In the Times’ tweet regarding the article, it claimed that Elon Musk had been forced to accept defeat in the aforementioned defamation suit, resulting in a response from the Tesla Twitter account and a Community Note below its Tweet.
This article is biased and misleading. Mr. Hothi accepted a “998” offer under California law. These offers are used to shift the cost of litigation to the losing party. If Mr. Hothi had not accepted it, he could have been on the hook for significant legal costs when he eventually…
— Tesla (@Tesla) May 1, 2023
As noted by the official statement from Tesla, the plaintiff, Randeep Hothi, had signed the 998 agreement, which according to California law, “allow[s] judgment to be taken or an award to be entered in accordance with the terms and conditions stated at that time.” In this case, according to the automaker, the 998 involved Hothi agreeing that he “expressly denied any liability by Mr. Musk.”
The defamation case that the 998 agreement settles is regarding an email written by Elon Musk in 2019. In which the Tesla CEO alleged that Hothi “almost killed” a Tesla security guard. Hothi, at the time, was deeply involved in tracking Tesla production at the Tesla Fremont facility, which he hoped would prove that the Model 3 could not be built with such a limited staff and use of automation.
It should be noted that, despite signing the 998 agreement, Hothi’s lawyers took the news of the agreement as a win, going as far as commenting to the LA Times, “We welcome Musk’s belated acknowledgment that this case was just.”
The LA Times and Hothi’s lawyers are referring to a tweet from Elon Musk, published in 2022, in which he stated he would not back down from an unjust lawsuit.
My commitment:
– We will never seek victory in a just case against us, even if we will probably win.
– We will never surrender/settle an unjust case against us, even if we will probably lose.
— Elon Musk (@elonmusk) May 20, 2022
It remains unclear if Tesla or Elon Musk plans to retaliate legally regarding the statements made by the LA Times or Hothi’s lawyers. However, with the three-year court battle finally over, it’s unlikely that either side is looking to jump back into litigation.
What do you think of the article? Do you have any comments, questions, or concerns? Shoot me an email at william@teslarati.com. You can also reach me on Twitter @WilliamWritin. If you have news tips, email us at tips@teslarati.com!
Tesla has adjusted the functionality of a crucial climate feature as Winter weather has started to arrive throughout some parts of the United States. The new feature was highly requested by owners.
Tesla has a Cabin Overheat Protection feature that helps keep the temperature regulated if it reaches a certain threshold. Inversely, it can be used in cold weather as well, which will automatically warm the cabin if it sinks to a temperature that is too low for the owner’s comfort.
This is a great way to keep the cabin either warmed up just enough or cooled down just enough so that it never gets too hot or too cold. Extreme temperatures could damage certain parts of the vehicle or damage personal belongings that are kept inside the car.
Overheat protection is a great thing to have in hot climates like Arizona or Texas, especially with the Premium trims of the Model 3 and Model Y, which feature a glass roof.
Many owners appreciate the feature, but they argue that using it at home will utilize too much energy, especially during extreme temperatures. For a while, many Tesla fans have requested an option to disable this feature when the car is parked at home, which the company recently added, according to Not a Tesla App.
The feature is part of Software Version 2025.44.3, and the release notes state:
“You can now choose Exclude Home when Cabin Overheat Protection or No A/C is enabled.”
Tesla has been great at listening to what owners want with new features, and this is one that will reserve some charge and prevent unnecessary utilization of available power, especially as the car is parked at home. If owners want to condition the cabin or get the car ready for operation with a comfortable interior, they can utilize the Tesla app to adjust the climate.
Tesla CEO Elon Musk revealed today on the social media platform X that legacy automakers, such as Ford, General Motors, and Stellantis, do not want to license the company’s Full Self-Driving suite, at least not without a long list of their own terms.
“I’ve tried to warn them and even offered to license Tesla FSD, but they don’t want it! Crazy,” Musk said on X. “When legacy auto does occasionally reach out, they tepidly discuss implementing FSD for a tiny program in 5 years with unworkable requirements for Tesla, so pointless.”
I’ve tried to warn them and even offered to license Tesla FSD, but they don’t want it! Crazy …
When legacy auto does occasionally reach out, they tepidly discuss implementing FSD for a tiny program in 5 years with unworkable requirements for Tesla, so pointless. 🤷♂️
🦕 🦕
— Elon Musk (@elonmusk) November 24, 2025
Musk made the remark in response to a note we wrote about earlier today from Melius Research, in which analyst Rob Wertheimer said, “Our point is not that Tesla is at risk, it’s that everybody else is,” in terms of autonomy and self-driving development.
Wertheimer believes there are hundreds of billions of dollars in value headed toward Tesla’s way because of its prowess with FSD.
A few years ago, Musk first remarked that Tesla was in early talks with one legacy automaker regarding licensing Full Self-Driving for its vehicles. Tesla never confirmed which company it was, but given Musk’s ongoing talks with Ford CEO Jim Farley at the time, it seemed the Detroit-based automaker was the likely suspect.
Tesla’s Elon Musk reiterates FSD licensing offer for other automakers
Ford has been perhaps the most aggressive legacy automaker in terms of its EV efforts, but it recently scaled back its electric offensive due to profitability issues and weak demand. It simply was not making enough vehicles, nor selling the volume needed to turn a profit.
Musk truly believes that many of the companies that turn their backs on FSD now will suffer in the future, especially considering the increased chance it could be a parallel to what has happened with EV efforts for many of these companies.
Unfortunately, they got started too late and are now playing catch-up with Tesla, XPeng, BYD, and the other dominating forces in EVs across the globe.
Tesla is backtracking on a strange adjustment it made to its in-car Navigation feature after numerous complaints from owners convinced the company to make a change.
Tesla’s in-car Navigation is catered to its vehicles, as it routes Supercharging stops and preps your vehicle for charging with preconditioning. It is also very intuitive, and features other things like weather radar and a detailed map outlining points of interest.
However, a recent change to the Navigation by Tesla did not go unnoticed, and owners were really upset about it.
For trips that required multiple Supercharger stops, Tesla decided to implement a naming change, which did not show the city or state of each charging stop. Instead, it just showed the business where the Supercharger was located, giving many owners an unwelcome surprise.
However, Tesla’s Director of Supercharging, Max de Zegher, admitted the update was a “big mistake on our end,” and made a change that rolled out within 24 hours:
The naming change should have happened at once, instead of in 2 sequential steps. That was a big miss on our end. We do listen to the community and we do course-correct fast. The accelerated fix rolled out last night. The Tesla App is updated and most in-car touchscreens should…
— Max (@MdeZegher) November 20, 2025
The lack of a name for the city where a Supercharging stop would be made caused some confusion for owners in the short term. Some drivers argued that it was more difficult to make stops at some familiar locations that were special to them. Others were not too keen on not knowing where they were going to be along their trip.
Tesla was quick to scramble to resolve this issue, and it did a great job of rolling it out in an expedited manner, as de Zegher said that most in-car touch screens would notice the fix within one day of the change being rolled out.
Additionally, there will be even more improvements in December, as Tesla plans to show the common name/amenity below the site name as well, which will give people a better idea of what to expect when they arrive at a Supercharger.
Tesla adjusts crucial feature as winter weather arrives
Tesla CEO Elon Musk sends rivals dire warning about Full Self-Driving
