Connect with us

News

Tesla trade secrets case ends with two-year prison sentence

Credit: Andrea Conway/X

Published

on

Tesla has completed yet another lawsuit over trade secret theft, with a top U.S. legal agency this week sentencing one person to two years in prison after he started his own battery business using proprietary information from the U.S. automaker.

After German-Canadian dual citizen Klaus Pflugbeil was arrested in the U.S. earlier this year and pleaded guilty to stealing trade secrets in June, the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) said on Monday that it has officially sentenced Pflugbeil to two years in prison, according to a report from Reuters.

“In stealing trade secrets from an American electric vehicle manufacturer to use in his own China-based company, Pflugbeil’s actions stood to benefit the (People’s Republic of China) in a critical industry with national security implications,” said Matthew Olsen, U.S. Assistant Attorney General.

Pflugbeil, a resident of China, was charged in March after prosecutors said he conspired with business partner Yilong Shao to sell a Tesla battery manufacturing secret to undercover FBI agents who claimed to be businesspeople from Long Island. Shao met with the agents in Las Vegas in 2023, and Pflugbeil sent them a business proposal specifically listing the Tesla trade secrets.

RELATED: Tesla reaches ‘conditional settlement’ in Rivian trade secret suit: report

Prosecutors said the two built their electric vehicle (EV) battery business on trade secrets from a “leading U.S.-based electric vehicle company,” without disclosing the company. Despite not name-dropping Tesla, the suit said that the U.S. company had acquired a Canada-based battery production line manufacturer, fitting the description of Tesla’s 2019 acquisition of Hibar.

According to the DOJ, Pflugbeil and Shao had worked for the unnamed Canadian company prior to Pflugbeil joining Shao’s company in 2020. Prosecutors said that the company had locations in China, Canada, Germany, and Brazil, largely producing the exact same battery assembly equipment as their former employer.

Although Shao was also charged, he remains at large at the time of writing.

Tesla’s other trade secret lawsuits

Tesla has pursued quite a few trade secret lawsuits over the years, with the company last month coming to a settlement for an undisclosed amount with automaker Rivian, following a years-long case over claims that it stole intellectual property through poached workers.

The U.S. automaker also settled with Chinese EV startup Xpeng Motors in 2022, after filing a lawsuit saying that a specific employee had stolen Autopilot code to be used to develop similar software for the China-based manufacturer’s vehicles. Last year, Tesla also filed a lawsuit against Chinese chip designer Bingling, alleging that the company also stole “technical secrets” and other intellectual property from the company.

Advertisement

What are your thoughts? Let me know at zach@teslarati.com, find me on X at @zacharyvisconti, or send us tips at tips@teslarati.com.

Tesla Dojo trade secrets lawsuit officially settles out of court

Need accessories for your Tesla? Check out the Teslarati Marketplace:

Zach is a renewable energy reporter who has been covering electric vehicles since 2020. He grew up in Fremont, California, and he currently lives in Colorado. His work has appeared in the Chicago Tribune, KRON4 San Francisco, FOX31 Denver, InsideEVs, CleanTechnica, and many other publications. When he isn't covering Tesla or other EV companies, you can find him writing and performing music, drinking a good cup of coffee, or hanging out with his cats, Banks and Freddie. Reach out at zach@teslarati.com, find him on X at @zacharyvisconti, or send us tips at tips@teslarati.com.

Advertisement
Comments

News

Swedish unions consider police report over Tesla Megapack Supercharger

The Tesla Megapack Supercharger opened shortly before Christmas in Arlandastad, outside Stockholm.

Published

on

Credit: Tesla Charging/X

Swedish labor unions are considering whether to file a police report related to a newly opened Tesla Megapack Supercharger near Stockholm, citing questions about how electricity is supplied to the site. The matter has also been referred to Sweden’s energy regulator.

Tesla Megapack Supercharger

The Tesla Megapack Supercharger opened shortly before Christmas in Arlandastad, outside Stockholm. Unlike traditional charging stations, the site is powered by an on-site Megapack battery rather than a direct grid connection. Typical grid connections for Tesla charging sites in Sweden have seen challenges for nearly two years due to union blockades.

Swedish labor union IF Metall has submitted a report to the Energy Market Inspectorate, asking the authority to assess whether electricity supplied to the battery system meets regulatory requirements, as noted in a report from Dagens Arbete (DA). The Tesla Megapack on the site is charged using electricity supplied by a local company, though the specific provider has not been publicly identified.

Peter Lydell, an ombudsman at IF Metall, issued a comment about the Tesla Megapack Supercharger. “The legislation states that only companies that engage in electricity trading may supply electricity to other parties. You may not supply electricity without a permit, then you are engaging in illegal electricity trading. That is why we have reported this… This is about a company that helps Tesla circumvent the conflict measures that exist. It is clear that it is troublesome and it can also have consequences,” Lydell said.

Police report under consideration

The Swedish Electricians’ Association has also examined the Tesla Megapack Supercharger and documented its power setup. As per materials submitted to the Energy Market Inspectorate, electrical cables were reportedly routed from a property located approximately 500 meters from the charging site.

Tomas Jansson, ombudsman and deputy head of negotiations at the Swedish Electricians’ Association, stated that the union was assessing whether to file a police report related to the Tesla Megapack Supercharger. He also confirmed that the electricians’ union was coordinating with IF Metall about the matter. “We have a close collaboration with IF Metall, and we are currently investigating this. We support IF Metall in their fight for fair conditions at Tesla,” Jansson said.

Continue Reading

News

Tesla HW4.5 spotted in new Model Y, triggers speculation

Owners taking delivery of recent Model Y builds have identified components labeled “AP45.”

Published

on

Credit: Tesla

Tesla’s Hardware 4.5 computer appears to have surfaced in newly delivered Model Y vehicles, prompting fresh speculation about an interim upgrade ahead of the company’s upcoming AI5 chip.

Owners taking delivery of recent Model Y builds have identified components labeled “AP45,” suggesting Tesla may have quietly started rolling out revised autonomy hardware.

Hardware 4.5 appears in new Model Y units

The potential Hardware 4.5 sighting was first reported by Model Y owner @Eric5un, who shared details of a Fremont-built 2026 Model Y AWD Premium delivered this January. As per the Model Y owner, the vehicle includes a new front camera housing and a 16-inch center display, along with an Autopilot computer labeled “AP45” and part number 2261336-02-A.

The Tesla owner later explained that he confirmed the part number by briefly pulling down the upper carpet liner below the Model Y’s glovebox. Other owners soon reported similar findings. One Model Y Performance owner noted that their December build also appeared to include Hardware 4.5, while another owner of an Austin-built Model Y Performance reported spotting the same “AP45” hardware.

These sightings suggest that Tesla may already be installing revised FSD computers in its new Model Y batches, despite the company not yet making any formal announcements about Hardware 4.5.

What Hardware 4.5 could represent

Clues about Hardware 4.5 have surfaced previously in Tesla’s Electronic Parts Catalog. As reported by NotATeslaApp, the catalog has listed a component described as “CAR COMPUTER – LEFT HAND DRIVE – PROVISIONED – HARDWARE 4.5.” The component, which features the part number 2261336-S2-A, is priced at $2,300.00.

Longtime Tesla hacker @greentheonly has noted that Tesla software has contained references to a possible three-SoC architecture for some time. Previous generations of Tesla’s FSD computer, including Hardware 3 and Hardware 4, use a dual-SoC design for redundancy. A three-SoC layout could allow for higher inference throughput and improved fault tolerance.

Such an architecture could also serve as a bridge to AI5, Tesla’s next-generation autonomy chip expected to enter production later in 2026. As Tesla’s neural networks grow larger and more computationally demanding, Hardware 4.5 may provide additional headroom for vehicles built before AI5 becomes widely available.

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Elon Musk

Elon Musk’s Grokipedia is getting cited by OpenAI’s ChatGPT

Some responses generated by OpenAI’s ChatGPT have recently referenced information from Grokipedia.

Published

on

UK Government, CC BY 2.0 , via Wikimedia Commons

Some responses generated by OpenAI’s ChatGPT have recently referenced information from Grokipedia, an AI-generated encyclopedia developed by rival xAI, which was founded by Elon Musk. The citations appeared across a limited set of queries.

Reports about the matter were initially reported by The Guardian

Grokipedia references in ChatGPT

Grokipedia launched in October as part of xAI’s effort to build an alternative to Wikipedia, which has become less centrist over the years. Unlike Wikipedia, which is moderated and edited by humans, Grokipedia is purely AI-powered, allowing it to approach topics with as little bias as possible, at least in theory. This model has also allowed Grokipedia to grow its article base quickly, with recent reports indicating that it has created over 6 million articles, more than 80% of English Wikipedia. 

The Guardian reported that ChatGPT cited Grokipedia nine times across responses to more than a dozen user questions during its tests. As per the publication, the Grokipedia citations did not appear when ChatGPT was asked about high-profile or widely documented topics. Instead, Grokipedia was referenced in responses to more obscure historical or biographical claims. The pattern suggested selective use rather than broad reliance on the source, at least for now.

Broader Grokipedia use

The Guardian also noted that Grokipedia citations were not exclusive to ChatGPT. Anthropic’s AI assistant Claude reportedly showed similar references to Grokipedia in some responses, highlighting a broader issue around how large language models identify and weigh publicly available information.

In a statement to The Guardian, an OpenAI spokesperson stated that ChatGPT “aims to draw from a broad range of publicly available sources and viewpoints.” “We apply safety filters to reduce the risk of surfacing links associated with high-severity harms, and ChatGPT clearly shows which sources informed a response through citations,” the spokesperson stated.

Anthropic, for its part, did not respond to a request for comment on the matter. As for xAI, the artificial intelligence startup simply responded with a short comment that stated, “Legacy media lies.”

Continue Reading