Tesla to fight California's claim it overhypes autopilot
The stakes are high at a five-day hearing in Oakland starting Monday because the regulator is seeking to suspend or revoke Tesla's dealer license, which permits it to sell vehicles in the most populous state.
The hearing before an administrative agency judge comes as Elon Musk's electric vehicle maker is in the middle of a jury trial in Miami over whether Autopilot is partly to blame for a 2019 collision involving a distracted Tesla Model S driver that killed a pedestrian. Tesla has denied wrongdoing in the Florida case and in the California proceeding.
The bi-coastal scrutiny of how Tesla's driver-assistance software is marketed and how well it performs poses significant risks for Musk, who has bet the company's future on self-driving and is in the process of launching a long-promised robotaxi business. The world's richest person has called Teslas the safest cars ever made.
Autopilot crashes have been investigated repeatedly by federal safety regulators, culminating in a 2023 recall of 2 millions cars after a finding that the driver-assistance program failed to ensure drivers stay attentive. Several lawsuits over fatal accidents are scheduled for trials in the coming year, which will keep a spotlight on safety issues.
The California regulator says Tesla violated state law by making 'untrue or misleading' statements in 2021 and 2022 while advertising its vehicles with advanced driver-assistance systems, including describing the features as being 'able to conduct short and long-distance trips with no action required in the driver's seat.'
An amended complaint by the DMV filed in November 2023 said Tesla vehicles equipped with driver-assist technology 'could not at the time of those advertisements, and cannot now, operate as autonomous vehicles.'
Tesla has argued in filings that the company's remarks in dispute are protected free speech under the First Amendment of the US Constitution. Lawyers for the company also say the marketing statements cited by the DMV have been taken out of context and that regulator is failing to consider Tesla's warnings and disclosures about the systems.
'Tesla repeatedly and explicitly makes clear that its vehicles are not autonomous and require active driver supervision,' the company said in a February 2024 filing.
QuickTake: Why It's So Hard to Make a Safe Self-Driving Car
The automotive industry categorizes automation systems in vehicles from Level 0 to 5, based on what features are available. Level 0 features simply pass on information to the driver, like sounding a warning when you're driving out of a traffic lane. Tesla's Autopilot is classified as Level 2 because it requires constant driver input and supervision.
Representatives for the DMV and Tesla declined to comment ahead of the Oakland hearing.
Tesla's marketing has come up during the Miami trial. Lawyers for the company maintained that remarks by Musk and Tesla about its vehicles being able to drive without human involvement are future-facing, and don't reflect the current technology.
Mary 'Missy' Cummings, an engineering professor at George Mason University called by the plaintiffs as an expert witness on safety, told jurors that those kinds of statements can encourage driver 'complacency' and instill a false understanding of what a vehicle is capable of doing. She said even calling the software Autopilot creates 'a mismatch in the consumer's head.'
'It engenders a lot more inappropriate confidence in the car, because autopilot is such a good technology in aviation,' said Cummings, who was one of the first female fighter pilots in the US Navy. 'Somehow, we feel like that is going to translate to a really effective tech in the car.'
Mekelburg writes for Bloomberg.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
26 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Tesla plans to expand chartered transport service, California regulator says
SAN FRANCISCO (Reuters) -Tesla has told California it would expand operations of a chartered transportation service in the Bay Area, a state regulator said on Friday. The permit does not allow the company to run vehicles autonomously, the California Public Utilities Commission said. The update follows a report that Tesla was preparing to roll out robotaxis in the Bay Area with a safety driver as soon as this weekend. "Tesla is not allowed to test or transport the public (paid or unpaid) in an AV with or without a driver," the CPUC said in an email to Reuters. Error in retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data
Bloomberg
29 minutes ago
- Bloomberg
Intel's Results Fail to Convince Investors of Turnaround
Bloomberg's Caroline Hyde and Ed Ludlow discuss the fall in Intel shares after the company's earnings failed to convince investors that its turnaround plans are working. Plus, Tesla is reported to be launching its robotaxi service in San Francisco this weekend. And Skydance and Paramount get the go-ahead from the Trump administration to close their merger. (Source: Bloomberg)
Yahoo
an hour ago
- Yahoo
Dissenting FCC Commissioner: Paramount Chose 'Capitulation Over Courage' In Dealing With Trump
Though the Federal Communications Commission approved the Skydance-Paramount merger Thursday, one commissioner is speaking out against what she says has been an 'erosion of our First Amendment protections.' 'After months of cowardly capitulation to this Administration, Paramount finally got what it wanted. Unfortunately, it is the American public who will ultimately pay the price for its actions,' commissioner Anna M. Gomez said. More from The Hollywood Reporter Paramount Co-CEO Chris McCarthy Set to Exit After Skydance Merger Paramount-Skydance Merger Approved by FCC, Clearing Way for $8 Billion Deal Close 'South Park' Lives: Paramount Inks New Deal With Creators, Library Moving to Paramount+ Gomez notes that the transfer of Paramount's broadcast licenses to Skydance was approved by a vote of 2-1 at the FCC, which is led by Brendan Carr, and that she had dissented. She pointed to the 'unprecedented' moves taken by the FCC to help broker the deal, which she notes include the elimination of DEI programs and putting controls on newsroom decisions at CBS, including agreeing to appoint an ombudsman that will report directly to the president of CBS News and 'who will receive and evaluate any complaints of bias or other concerns.' On July 1, Paramount agreed to a $16 million deal to resolve a lawsuit filed by President Trump against 60 Minutes over an interview conducted with Kamala Harris. The settlement was largely seen as paving the way for the merger with Skydance. Trump has also said that he anticipates receiving at least $20 million in advertising, public service announcements or similar programming from Skydance as part of a settlement. 'In an unprecedented move, this once-independent FCC used its vast power to pressure Paramount to broker a private legal settlement and further erode press freedom. Once again, this agency is undermining legitimate efforts to combat discrimination and expand opportunity by overstepping its authority and intervening in employment matters reserved for other government entities with proper jurisdiction on these issues. Even more alarming, it is now imposing never-before-seen controls over newsroom decisions and editorial judgment, in direct violation of the First Amendment and the law,' Gomez wrote. 'After the FCC buried the outcome of backroom negotiations with other regulated entities, like Verizon and T-Mobile, I urged for us to bring the Paramount proceeding into the light. I've long believed the public has a right to know how Paramount's capitulation evidences an erosion of our First Amendment protections, and I'm pleased that FCC leadership ultimately agreed to my call for every Commissioner to vote on this transaction. Granting approval behind closed doors, under the cover of bureaucratic process, would have been an inappropriate way to shield this Administration's coordinated campaign to censor speech, control narratives, and silence dissent,' she continued. 'Despite this regrettable outcome, this Administration is not done with its assault on the First Amendment. In fact, it may only be beginning. The Paramount payout and this reckless approval have emboldened those who believe the government can—and should—abuse its power to extract financial and ideological concessions, demand favored treatment, and secure positive media coverage. It is a dark chapter in a long and growing record of abuse that threatens press freedom in this country. But such violations endure only when institutions choose capitulation over courage. It is time for companies, journalists, and citizens alike to stand up and speak out, because unchecked and unquestioned power has no rightful place in America,' Gomez wrote. Best of The Hollywood Reporter How the Warner Brothers Got Their Film Business Started Meet the World Builders: Hollywood's Top Physical Production Executives of 2023 Men in Blazers, Hollywood's Favorite Soccer Podcast, Aims for a Global Empire
