News
Tesla is willing to help other automakers, but ask nicely
Earlier this week, I wrote an article talking about the German car companies and their obsession with mentioning Tesla. Volkswagen, Audi, and BMW are all gunning for Tesla in terms of electric vehicle technology and manufacturing. While the three German giants admit that Tesla holds a multi-year lead in the EV sector, they all believe they can catch up to Elon Musk and the rest of the crew.
After publishing the article, Elon responded and said that Tesla was willing to help companies transition to sustainable forms of transportation because it would help the world as a whole. However, there is evidence to suggest that Tesla and Elon are going to help those who ask for it, not those who attempt to take information in a manner that could be considered “sneaky.”
Tesla is open to licensing software and supplying powertrains & batteries. We’re just trying to accelerate sustainable energy, not crush competitors!
— Elon Musk (@elonmusk) July 29, 2020
Additionally, one of Musk’s followers had asked if Tesla’s Autopilot could be shared with other automakers in an attempt to not only accelerate the charge towards semi and fully-autonomous driving. Musk simply replied, “Sure,” indicating that there did not seem to be any boundaries in terms of what Tesla would be willing to share with its “competitors” as capitalism would refer to them as.
Sure
— Elon Musk (@elonmusk) July 29, 2020
To me, I found that simple “Sure” reply as one of the most interesting Tweets of Musk’s illustrious Twitter career. Not only has the CEO provided many of my friends and me with a fair share of laughs and me because of his great sense of humor, but his digs at other companies, as well as some of the more ironic things that he has said, have always intrigued me.
When he said, “Sure,” all I thought of was the lawsuit that Tesla currently holds against an Xpeng engineer who formerly worked for Tesla.
For those of you that are not familiar, Tesla sued Xpeng engineer Cao Guangzhi earlier this year, who used to work for Tesla.
Guangzhi allegedly stole pieces of Tesla’s Autopilot source code and attempted to sell it to Xpeng for financial gain. Guangzhi had downloaded portions of the code to his personal laptop and then shared it through Apple Airdrop, which is hard to track because of the encryption that Apple uses. However, he ensures that he removed it from his personal laptop before leaving Tesla to join Xpeng.
This is a preview from our weekly newsletter. Each week I go ‘Beyond the News’ and handcraft a special edition that includes my thoughts on the biggest stories, why it matters, and how it could impact the future.
A big thanks to our long-time supporters and new subscribers! Thank you.
The case is still ongoing.
But what I found most interesting about Musk’s simple one-word answer was the fact that he stated he would be willing to share Autopilot’s developments with other automakers. But it seems it needs to be done in good and harmless fashion, and not in a sneaky way. This is entirely understandable, in my opinion.
If Guangzhi did what Tesla is accusing him of doing, it would be seriously sneaky and flawed. Tesla is the leader in semi-autonomous driving thanks to the developments of its Artificial Intelligence team, led by Andrej Karpathy. What separates Tesla from every other company in self-driving is the fact that it is continuously improving thanks to the company’s Neural Network. As information is communicated to the Neural Network with every Tesla vehicle on the road, the company’s self-driving software becomes more sophisticated and more accurate as it can predict the next movements of the drivers around a car.
If this source code were to be leaked or given to another company, it could be detrimental to Tesla’s lead in the self-driving universe. I’m excited to see how the case plays out.
More recently, Tesla sued Rivian for poaching former employees and stealing trade secrets. Interestingly enough, I had some time to read over several pages of the complaint from Tesla to Rivian, and some employees openly admitted to taking confidential documents when they left Tesla.
I am a big Rivian fan. I think R.J. Scaringe, the company’s CEO, is a brilliant person who has a lot of potential to do amazing things. I have recommended to a couple of my friends that they should invest in an R1T instead of getting a Cybertruck because they don’t like the Tesla pickup’s design. But either way, it seems from my understanding of legal documentation, it is going to be up to Tesla to prove that Rivian asked these employees to take things and that they are openly going after past Tesla employees. I think that is going to be a tough cookie to crack.
But either way, Rivian didn’t go to Tesla for help directly. I feel that if they needed help with electrification or self-driving code, they should have reached out to Elon directly.
Elon has stated for years that the biggest enemy of Tesla is not competitors who are developing sustainable electric vehicles. The companies that are the biggest threat to Tesla are the biggest threat to us all, which are the ones who refuse to adapt to the sustainable transportation revolution. Companies that want to develop and improve internal combustion engine machines are a threat. Not financially, but environmentally, because they’re ignoring the apparent crisis that is going on in the world.
Does it seem like Elon wouldn’t be willing to help other automakers develop their vehicles if they asked for help? I don’t think so. Personally, when I look at Musk’s mission, I see a man who is interested in collaborating with anyone and everyone, as long as they are willing to admit that their push toward sustainability is the focus and not on the backburner.
Please consider Subscribing and joining me next week as I go ‘Beyond the News’
Investor's Corner
Tesla and SpaceX take “Terafab” Trademark fight to Federal Court
Tesla and SpaceX sue a small Illinois firm after cease and desist letters over Terafab.
Tesla and SpaceX are asking a federal judge to rule that their planned Terafab chip factory does not infringe a small Illinois company’s trademark, a request that arrives only after months of quiet negotiation broke down this summer.
The dispute traces to May 18, when Tesla filed three U.S. trademark applications for “Terafab” and “Tesla Terafab,” covering semiconductor chips and related chip making services. TERA-print LLC, a nanotechnology company that has held a federal trademark for “Tera-Fab” since 2021, responded five days later with a cease and desist letter. According to the lawsuit, first reported by Reuters, TERA-print argued that Tesla and SpaceX’s use of “Terafab” would confuse consumers familiar with its own trademark, which covers a desktop photolithography printer sold to researchers for sensor and bioengineering work.
What stands out in the filing is the timing of TERA-print’s own paperwork. One day before sending that cease and desist letter, on May 22, TERA-print applied to expand its existing registration to cover semiconductor materials, silicon chips, nanoelectronic devices and AI design services, categories it had not previously claimed. Tesla and SpaceX call that filing opportunistic in their complaint, noting it arrived two months after Tesla’s public Terafab announcement and just days after Tesla’s own trademark applications went in.
Elon Musk launches TERAFAB: The $25B Tesla-SpaceXAI chip factory that will rewire the AI industry
By June 10, TERA-print was threatening to sue for federal trademark infringement, false designation of origin and unfair competition, the complaint states. Rather than wait to be sued, Tesla, SpaceX and SpaceXAI met with TERA-print six separate times between June and August trying to resolve the dispute directly. Those talks collapsed, and the companies filed for declaratory judgment this week in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Texas, asking a judge to find that “Terafab” does not infringe TERA-print’s mark before TERA-print can file a claim of its own.
TERA-print isn’t backing down. The company told PCMag it discussed a settlement with Tesla as recently as September 2 and feels misled by what it called Tesla’s professed interest in settling. Its CTO, Andrey Ivankin, said TERA-print holds a Defense Department contract to fabricate semiconductors and partially owns Mattiq Inc., an AI company built on TERA-print’s products, and that the company will vigorously defend its rights.
Tesla and SpaceX argue the overlap is superficial. Terafab is planned as a $16.8 billion complex spanning roughly 100 million square feet at the Grimes County site SpaceX confirmed last month, built to produce chips for Optimus robots, Tesla’s AI computing needs and SpaceX’s orbital data center ambitions, a scale and purpose the companies say no reasonable consumer would confuse with a tabletop lab printer. TERA-print’s product line has stayed focused on lithography tools for biological and sensor research since it registered its mark in 2021.
The trademark fight is the second legal dispute tied to the Terafab project in the past week, following a separate SpaceX suit aimed at keeping company records about the facility out of public view, as KBTX reported. Whether construction proceeds under the Terafab name now depends on a federal judge in Austin.
News
NHTSA just escalated its Tesla Cybercab investigation in a big way
NHTSA escalated its Cybercab audit into a sworn Special Order with a September 30 deadline.
Federal regulators have moved from asking Tesla questions about its Cybercab to demanding sworn answers. The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration issued a Special Order that requires a Tesla officer to sign an affidavit attesting to the completeness of the company’s responses, with a deadline of September 30.
The order builds on Audit Query AQ26002, which NHTSA opened on September 3, the same day Tesla began commercial Cybercab service in Austin. Teslarati covered that initial inquiry when it surfaced, noting the agency wanted to understand how Tesla certified a vehicle with no permanently attached steering wheel, pedals, or mirrors as compliant with Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards. A Special Order is a different tool and converts a fact finding review into a legally enforceable demand, the same mechanism NHTSA used against Tesla in 2023 during its Autopilot investigation.
Several of the 21 requests target a specific gap in Cybercab’s design. One asks whether Tesla used temporarily attached human controls at any point to help certify the vehicle, and if so, which standards depended on that equipment being present. Another quotes an existing rule directly: “The service brakes shall be activated by means of a foot control.” Cybercab has no foot pedal. NHTSA wants a detailed explanation of how the vehicle satisfies that requirement, and how it complies without the kind of exemption granted to Zoox in July under Part 555, the regulatory pathway built for steering wheel free vehicles.
The order does not claim Cybercab is unsafe or that Tesla broke a rule. It requires Tesla to explain, under oath, the reasoning behind decisions the company already made when it self-certified the vehicle. That distinction matters, but so does the exposure. Motor1’s reporting, summarized here, put potential civil penalty exposure as high as $139 million if NHTSA later finds the certification was flawed, on top of whatever criminal risk comes with a false sworn statement.
Tesla has not said publicly how it plans to respond. Cybercab is still carrying passengers in Austin through the Robotaxi app while the September 30 deadline approaches, and the company has continued expanding the vehicle’s footprint even as the regulatory question remains open. The Special Order does not pause any of that and just sets a date by which Tesla has to put its certification logic on the record, with a company officer’s name attached to it.
In a new interview on Wednesday, Tesla uber bull Ron Baron said that anyone looking to buy the company’s stock should do so as soon as they can.
Baron, founder and CEO of Baron Capital and one of Tesla’s most persistent institutional bulls, used a CNBC Squawk Box appearance on Wednesday to deliver a familiar message with fresh urgency: In his opinion, Tesla stock is a buy:
“The time to buy the stock is now. FSD is catching on, and it’s going to be bigger and bigger. 55% of new buyers are buying it (Teslas) with FSD. It’s going to be everywhere. It’s safer.”
The Baron Capital frontman’s case is built around Full Self-Driving. Tesla reported 1.48 million active FSD subscriptions in the second quarter, up 56 percent year over year, and company officials have said roughly 55 percent of new North American deliveries left with a subscription enabled.
Baron framed that attach rate as proof the product is moving from enthusiast extra to default expectation, and as a reason software, not just vehicle volume, should drive the next phase of value.
His conviction on Tesla shares is not theoretical, as Baron Capital made its first Tesla investment in 2014, after years of meetings that began around the 2010 IPO roadshow. The firm later built a large SpaceX position starting in 2017.
Ron Baron today in new interview on Tesla:
“The time to buy the stock is now. FSD is catching on, and it’s going to be bigger and bigger. 55% of new buyers are buying it (Teslas) with FSD. It’s going to be everywhere. It’s safer.” pic.twitter.com/Rv5PB0bVZ2
— Sawyer Merritt (@SawyerMerritt) September 16, 2026
Baron said those Musk-led bets have generated about $30 billion of the $71 billion in profits Baron Capital has produced for clients. He put the firm’s current exposure at roughly $25 billion in SpaceX and $5 billion in Tesla. Personally, he described SpaceX as his largest holding, at about $5 billion, with about $1.5 billion in Tesla and additional Tesla exposure through the firm’s funds.
That concentration is also a statement of loyalty. Asked about talk of a SpaceX-Tesla combination, Baron said he had already walked Elon Musk through arguments for and against a deal, then declined to repeat them on air. His public position was simpler: “Whatever you decide is better is what I’m going to support,” he said to Musk.
Baron also said that he picked up the farewell edition of the Model S after Tesla decided to sunset the vehicle earlier this year, calling it his favorite car he’s ever driven.
Tesla and SpaceX take “Terafab” Trademark fight to Federal Court
NHTSA just escalated its Tesla Cybercab investigation in a big way
