News
Finally, a Tesla owner on Autopilot admits fault in crash
The owner of a Tesla Model S that crashed on August 7 while operating in Autopilot mode says he will not sue Tesla Motors. Mark Molthan says he was driving along highway 175 near rural Kaufman, Texas when his Tesla in Autopilot swerved into a cable guardrail resulting in significant damage to the car. Luckily Molthan was not hurt and escaped with only a bloody nose though he thinks the vehicle might be a total loss.
Unlike other Tesla owners who blame their vehicle for causing the accident, Molthan admits he wasn’t paying close attention to his driving at the time. He tells Bloomberg that he reached into the glove compartment to get a cloth and was busy cleaning the dashboard just prior to the first collision. Molthan claimed that he didn’t think much of taking his eyes off the road since his Model S had negotiated that section of road multiple times before on Autopilot without incident.
“I used Autopilot all the time on that stretch of the highway,” Molthan, 44, said in a phone interview. “But now I feel like this is extremely dangerous. It gives you a false sense of security. I’m not ready to be a test pilot. It missed the curve and drove straight into the guardrail. The car didn’t stop — it actually continued to accelerate after the first impact into the guardrail.” Molthan also owns a Model X but says he has lost confidence in Autopilot and will not replace his damaged Model S with another one.
Molthan’s insurance company is none too happy about being on the hook for the price of a new Model S. Lawyers for his auto insurance carrier, a unit of Chubb Ltd., say they have sent Tesla Motors a letter requesting a joint inspection of the vehicle. Tesla said it’s looking into the Texas crash. As usual, it stresses that Autopilot is only an assist feature. Drivers still need to keep their hands on the wheel while using Autopilot and must be prepared to take over direct control of the vehicle at any time.
The situation presents what lawyers like to call a case of first impression. So far as we know, Tesla has not been required to defend any law suits brought as a result of collisions resulting from the use of Autopilot. Any such case would only be a binding precedent in Texas where the accident happened. But other courts could still use that decision as a guide when similar claims are brought in their own states.
Tesla’s Autopilot has many supporters who complain there is no way to demonstrate to the public and to regulators how many potentially life threatening accidents are avoided by the technology. Diana Becker of Los Angeles told Bloomberg in a phone interview, “I’m disgusted that the only time Autopilot is in the news is when there are crashes. Nobody hears about the accidents that don’t happen.”
Becker says she recently completed a 27 day road trip throughout the West with her two children. She credits the Autopilot in her Model X with saving her family from colliding with a driver who crossed suddenly in front of them. “I drove 400 miles a day on our road trip, and Autopilot was my second pair of eyes,” said Becker. “I depend on it.”
In July, a Missouri man let his Tesla drive him to a hospital after suffering a pulmonary embolism while driving home from work. Others have commented that going on a road trip without Autopilot is akin to torture. None of which will have any bearing on how the courts resolve future claims involving damages to self driving cars.
Source: Bloomberg Photo credit: Mark Molthan
Elon Musk
Brazil Supreme Court orders Elon Musk and X investigation closed
The decision was issued by Supreme Court Justice Alexandre de Moraes following a recommendation from Brazil’s Prosecutor-General Paulo Gonet.
Brazil’s Supreme Federal Court has ordered the closure of an investigation involving Elon Musk and social media platform X. The inquiry had been pending for about two years and examined whether the platform was used to coordinate attacks against members of the judiciary.
The decision was issued by Supreme Court Justice Alexandre de Moraes following a recommendation from Brazil’s Prosecutor-General Paulo Gonet.
According to a report from Agencia Brasil, the investigation conducted by the Federal Police did not find evidence that X deliberately attempted to attack the judiciary or circumvent court orders.
Prosecutor-General Paulo Gonet concluded that the irregularities identified during the probe did not indicate fraudulent intent.
Justice Moraes accepted the prosecutor’s recommendation and ruled that the investigation should be closed. Under the ruling, the case will remain closed unless new evidence emerges.
The inquiry stemmed from concerns that content on X may have enabled online attacks against Supreme Court justices or violated rulings requiring the suspension of certain accounts under investigation.
Justice Moraes had previously taken several enforcement actions related to the platform during the broader dispute involving social media regulation in Brazil.
These included ordering a nationwide block of the platform, freezing Starlink accounts, and imposing fines on X totaling about $5.2 million. Authorities also froze financial assets linked to X and SpaceX through Starlink to collect unpaid penalties and seized roughly $3.3 million from the companies’ accounts.
Moraes also imposed daily fines of up to R$5 million, about $920,000, for alleged evasion of the X ban and established penalties of R$50,000 per day for VPN users who attempted to bypass the restriction.
Brazil remains an important market for X, with roughly 17 million users, making it one of the platform’s larger user bases globally.
The country is also a major market for Starlink, SpaceX’s satellite internet service, which has surpassed one million subscribers in Brazil.
Elon Musk
FCC chair criticizes Amazon over opposition to SpaceX satellite plan
Carr made the remarks in a post on social media platform X.
U.S. Federal Communications Commission (FCC) Chairman Brendan Carr criticized Amazon after the company opposed SpaceX’s proposal to launch a large satellite constellation that could function as an orbital data center network.
Carr made the remarks in a post on social media platform X.
Amazon recently urged the FCC to reject SpaceX’s application to deploy a constellation of up to 1 million low Earth orbit satellites that could serve as artificial intelligence data centers in space.
The company described the proposal as a “lofty ambition rather than a real plan,” arguing that SpaceX had not provided sufficient details about how the system would operate.
Carr responded by pointing to Amazon’s own satellite deployment progress.
“Amazon should focus on the fact that it will fall roughly 1,000 satellites short of meeting its upcoming deployment milestone, rather than spending their time and resources filing petitions against companies that are putting thousands of satellites in orbit,” Carr wrote on X.
Amazon has declined to comment on the statement.
Amazon has been working to deploy its Project Kuiper satellite network, which is intended to compete with SpaceX’s Starlink service. The company has invested more than $10 billion in the program and has launched more than 200 satellites since April of last year.
Amazon has also asked the FCC for a 24-month extension, until July 2028, to meet a requirement to deploy roughly 1,600 satellites by July 2026, as noted in a CNBC report.
SpaceX’s Starlink network currently has nearly 10,000 satellites in orbit and serves roughly 10 million customers. The FCC has also authorized SpaceX to deploy 7,500 additional satellites as the company continues expanding its global satellite internet network.
Energy
Tesla Energy gains UK license to sell electricity to homes and businesses
The license was granted to Tesla Energy Ventures Ltd. by UK energy regulator Ofgem after a seven-month review process.
Tesla Energy has received a license to supply electricity in the United Kingdom, opening the door for the company to serve homes and businesses in the country.
The license was granted to Tesla Energy Ventures Ltd. by UK energy regulator Ofgem after a seven-month review process.
According to Ofgem, the license took effect at 6 p.m. local time on Wednesday and applies to Great Britain.
The approval allows Tesla’s energy business to sell electricity directly to customers in the region, as noted in a Bloomberg News report.
Tesla has already expanded similar services in the United States. In Texas, the company offers electricity plans that allow Tesla owners to charge their vehicles at a lower cost while also feeding excess electricity back into the grid.
Tesla already has a sizable presence in the UK market. According to price comparison website U-switch, there are more than 250,000 Tesla electric vehicles in the country and thousands of Tesla home energy storage systems.
Ofgem also noted that Tesla Motors Ltd., a separate entity incorporated in England and Wales, received an electricity generation license in June 2020.
The new UK license arrives as Tesla continues expanding its global energy business.
Last year, Tesla Energy retained the top position in the global battery energy storage system (BESS) integrator market for the second consecutive year. According to Wood Mackenzie’s latest rankings, Tesla held about 15% of global market share in 2024.
The company also maintained a dominant position in North America, where it captured roughly 39% market share in the region.
At the same time, competition in the energy storage sector is increasing. Chinese companies such as Sungrow have been expanding their presence globally, particularly in Europe.
Brazil Supreme Court orders Elon Musk and X investigation closed
FCC chair criticizes Amazon over opposition to SpaceX satellite plan
