News
After Tesla trademarked ‘CYBERBACKPACK,’ the product’s inventor sits at a crossroads
Riz Nwosu was inspired when he went to the Tesla Cybertruck unveiling in 2019. After snagging some pictures with the newly-revealed Cybertruck and company CEO Elon Musk, Riz developed a backpack inspired by the futuristic pickup he saw in Hawthorne, California, in late 2019. By December 2021, he had a prototype and a website. Less than six months later, he found Tesla had trademarked the name of his product.
Since December, Riz says he has been developing the “CYBERBACKPACK,” an idea that blossomed from a product unveiling nearly two and a half years ago. “I began designing and building what would become the Cyberbackpack,” Riz said in a blog post he published shortly after reports of Tesla trademarking the name. This all occurred just six months ago, with the first prototypes arriving at his house in March 2022. Later that month, the product would launch on ProductHunt and Spotify, as Riz had received plenty of inquiries from potential customers.
Elon Musk’s talk at Tesla Giga Texas Cyber Rodeo: updates and details
In March, Riz reached out to Tesla CEO Elon Musk on Twitter and other prominent figures within the company, looking to collaborate on the idea. He felt as if the Cyberbackpack would be something both he and the automaker could benefit from. The Cybertruck, with its mass appeal and loyal following, would likely do well in a “backpack” version, and it would be a dream for Riz, who purchased his first Tesla in March 2016.
On April 5, Tesla trademarked the “CYBERBACKPACK” name, bringing some speculation that the automaker had approached the fan to purchase or collaborate on his idea. After all, Riz’s website, Cyberbackpack.com, was not active when the initial reports came out earlier this week, which only fueled the speculation that Tesla probably liked the idea and decided to approach him about it. Riz was alarmed, however, as Tesla didn’t contact him about the bag, nor his idea or the name of the product. They had instead trademarked the name of the backpack, which sent Riz into a state of confusion.
November 2019
I attended the unveiling of the Cybertruck where I got to meet Elon Musk, a person I have admired and respected for many years.Pop Quiz: How many Africans do you see in this photo? It’s definitely not equal to one. pic.twitter.com/MTLpB4lEUA
— Riz (@Riz) April 14, 2022
“I decided to temporarily take the site down after receiving a bunch of orders and reaching out to Tesla,” Riz told Teslarati in a statement. “I thought it best to rework the site and get my manufacturer setup properly and then relaunch.”
“Tesla never contacted me.”
Teslarati contacted several patent and trademark law firms, and representatives essentially explained Tesla may have trademarked the name to protect itself from any repercussions that could come from the product’s design. One lawyer explained to us it was a “strategic” and “defensive” strategy that Tesla may use to avoid a situation like Apple did with its AirPods. Apple had so many counterfeit AirPod designs on the market that eventually, it had to do damage control on knockoffs, as some were catching fire or having other dangerous malfunctions. The issue is that Apple could prove that consumers immediately think of “Apple” when they see designs of AirPod knockoffs. This is essentially dangerous to Apple, even though they did not create the AirPod knockoffs, because consumer sentiment relates that design to Apple, and not to a third-party company.
Tesla could technically argue the same thing, legal experts told us. People may see the Cyberbackpack’s design and immediately think Tesla designed it. If negativity were to come from that design in any way, people would likely relate the backpack to Tesla and not to a third-party company, which could damage Tesla’s name.
Riz ultimately filed his own trademark application several days ago, with a “first use” date of December 2021, when he built the website and came up with the design. A loyal Tesla fan and supporter, Riz just wants to work with the company to help fulfill the idea. “My goal is to work with Tesla on some fashion to distribute the product. That’s why I reached out initially. However if that does not happen, then I would like to continue marketing and selling on my site,” he told us.
Dear Twitter, do your thing ??
.@elonmusk @Tesla @Teslarati @InsideEVs @ElectrekCo #ElonMusk #elon #tesla #cyberbackpack pic.twitter.com/gPxJVcp50X— Riz (@Riz) April 16, 2022
I’d love to hear from you! If you have any comments, concerns, or questions, please email me at joey@teslarati.com. You can also reach me on Twitter @KlenderJoey, or if you have news tips, you can email us at tips@teslarati.com.
News
Verizon, AT&T and T-Mobile are trying to shut Starlink out before FCC vote
AT&T, Verizon and T-Mobile want 290 MHz cut from an FCC satellite plan before Thursday.
AT&T, Verizon and T-Mobile are asking the Federal Communications Commission to pull nearly 300 MHz of spectrum out of a proposal that would let satellite companies like SpaceX offer cell service directly to ordinary phones. The request lands one day before the agency votes on it.
The FCC will vote Thursday, October 29, on a notice of proposed rulemaking that would make an additional 482 MHz available for direct to device service, expanding the number of eligible bands from five to 13, according to the FCC fact sheet. It would also scrap the rule requiring a satellite operator to lease spectrum from carriers, replacing it with a certification that the operator has coexistence agreements in place or holds the terrestrial license itself.
That second path matters for SpaceX. As Teslarati reported earlier this month, SpaceX agreed to buy Grain Management’s nationwide 800 MHz portfolio to turn Starlink Mobile into a full US carrier, adding to the spectrum it already bought from EchoStar.
The carriers want two bands removed, 2.5 GHz and 3.45 GHz, which make up 290 MHz of the 482 MHz on the table. Through industry group CTIA, they argued that about 300 million users depend on those bands and that satellite operations in them are not technically feasible. T-Mobile, which calls 2.5 GHz the foundation of its Ultra Capacity 5G network, said in its own filing that satellite interference could wipe out up to 96% of a cell site’s uplink coverage area and cut uplink speeds by 88% to 99%.
Executives from all three carriers met with FCC staff on October 20, and T-Mobile CEO Srini Gopalan met separately with FCC Chairman Brendan Carr. T-Mobile’s role stands out because it is still SpaceX’s US launch partner for Starlink Mobile. The three carriers have also teamed up on their own satellite joint venture to pool spectrum, a move widely seen as a response to Starlink.
SpaceX is asking for the opposite. In an October 23 filing after meetings with FCC staff and commissioners’ offices, the company asked regulators to add the 902 to 928 MHz band to the proposal. “Doing so now saves time later,” SpaceX wrote. The company also asked the FCC to modernize interference rules and align satellite deployment requirements with those for terrestrial cell networks, saying the goal is to let satellite and ground networks work together so Americans stay connected wherever they are.
The carriers have not been shy about how they view SpaceX as a competitor. On Verizon’s third quarter earnings call Monday, its chief executive said Starlink Mobile “just can’t compete with a terrestrial network” and estimated SpaceX would need four to six years and $300 billion to $500 billion to build a full US carrier network.
Thursday’s vote will not settle which bands survive. Adopting the notice opens a public comment period, with final rules to come later in the proceeding. The FCC already considered and rejected 2.5 GHz for satellite coverage once, in 2024. SpaceX also is not the only satellite player watching: the FCC approved Amazon’s $11.6 billion acquisition of Globalstar on October 27, giving its planned direct to device fleet its own mobile satellite spectrum.
News
Tesla Semi catches fire in California: what we know
A Tesla Semi caught fire in Hayward, California, which caused both directions of traffic to shut down for hours before being completely reopened early on Wednesday, the California Highway Patrol said.
The fire occurred just after 5:30 local time in Hayward on Tuesday, as the Semi caught fire in the southbound lanes of I-880 before CHP officials made the decision to shut down both lanes of traffic due to potential risks from hazardous chemical smoke.
There were no injuries reported.
🚨 A Tesla Semi reportedly caught fire, with California Highway Patrol confirming. The Semi was on I-880 SB
An estimated 5,000 to 7,000 semi-truck and large commercial vehicle fires occur on U.S. roadways every year
— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) October 28, 2026
The cause of the fire is currently unknown, as neither Tesla nor the CHP have not determined a cause.
However, some images taken before the Semi was completely destroyed by the fire seem to indicate this might have been an older unit, as it appears to be one of the designs that Tesla shipped as part of its pilot program, before revising it and starting mass production just a month ago.
@Tslachan From on of the videos looks like it’s an old Semi (not the refresh version that recently started production) https://t.co/KzwmR2kXow
— Area Under The Curve 🎗️ (@AreaUnderCurve) October 28, 2026
At the time of publication, CHP had not returned our request for a comment for additional details, including the Semi involved and any potential collaboration on an investigation between the CHP and Tesla. We will update this story when we hear back from them.
The southbound lanes were reopened at 3:30 a.m. on Wednesday, with the northbound lanes opening last night a few hours after the fire began. The CHP did state that the lithium batteries were “incredibly difficult to extinguish,” according to NBC Bay Area.
The truck’s driver said that the Semi caught fire, but he did not have an explanation.
An estimated 5,000 to 7,000 semi-truck and large commercial vehicle fires occur on U.S. roadways every year.
News
Tesla’s ‘Emergency Drive Away’ function gets its first use in the real world
Tesla’s launch of the “Emergency Drive Away” function a few months back offered owners a safe option to evacuate an area if they were in reasonable danger. The function finally got its first use in the real world, but it appears it was by mistake.
A video shared by u/Joshalander in the r/TeslaLounge subreddit recorded the instance from his vehicle and said the incident took place in Austin this past weekend during the city’s F1 Race.
“Was charging around 6 AM this past Sunday in Austin before heading to the F1 race and heard a pop. Looked over and saw the new emergency drive-away feature in action. Genuinely felt bad for the dude when he got out and realized what happened, since he looked exhausted and only seemed to half-read the prompts.”
🚨 Here’s the first look at Tesla’s Emergency Drive Away function in action:
Apparently this driver accidentally enabled it and drove forward; you can see the Supercharger pull with the car.
Tesla said previously this would cost up to $25k if not used properly. https://t.co/B4qQRrsO6B
— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) October 28, 2026
Emergency Drive Away unlatches the Supercharger connector from the vehicle, but still causes damage to both the car and the Supercharger. Tesla has said that it will cost up to $25,000 in repairs to have everything fixed back to normal.
Additionally, the company said that if it were not used in an emergency situation, the driver of the vehicle who activated the Emergency Drive Away feature would be responsible for all repair costs.
Tesla constitutes the following situations as reasonable justifications for activating the feature:
- You face an immediate threat to your life or personal safety.
- You must leave the area immediately.
- Exiting the vehicle is unsafe.
- Unplugging the charge connector would unreasonably delay your departure or expose you to a risk to your personal safety.
After using the feature, Tesla requires the driver to schedule Service so the car can be inspected.