Tesla sues ex-engineer for stealing Optimus robot secrets to launch rival startup
Tesla has filed a lawsuit against a former employee, accusing him of stealing confidential information related to its humanoid robotics project, Optimus, and using it to establish a competing startup. The lawsuit, filed on Wednesday and first reported by Bloomberg, targets Zhongjie 'Jay' Li, who was employed at Tesla between August 2022 and September 2024. Tesla alleges that Li misappropriated trade secrets involving the development of its advanced robotic hand sensors, and later used this proprietary knowledge to launch his own venture, Proception — a startup backed by Y Combinator, which specialises in humanoid robotic hands.advertisementAccording to the legal complaint, Li downloaded sensitive Optimus project data onto two personal smartphones during his tenure at Tesla. In addition to accessing confidential files, the lawsuit claims that, in the months leading up to his departure, Li used Tesla's internal systems to conduct research on humanoid robotic hand design and explored topics related to venture capital and startup funding, suggesting premeditated intentions to establish a competing business.'Less than a week after he left Tesla, Proception was incorporated,' the complaint reads. 'And within just five months, Proception publicly claimed to have 'successfully built' advanced humanoid robotic hands—hands that bear a striking resemblance to the designs Li worked on at Tesla.'
Proception's website describes its mission as seeking to "revolutionise human-robot interaction by building the world's most advanced humanoid hands." The similarities between Proception's designs and Tesla's proprietary work have prompted Tesla to take legal action to protect its intellectual property.advertisementTesla's humanoid robotics journey has faced several hurdles since it was first unveiled in 2021, when CEO Elon Musk introduced the Tesla Bot concept — later branded as Optimus. Initially, the company indicated that the humanoid robot would debut alongside other products in 2023. However, progress has been slower than expected, with the Optimus robot still in development.In July 2024, Musk provided an updated timeline, stating that Tesla hoped to begin commercial sales of the Optimus robot by 2026. However, by October 2024, at Tesla's 'We, Robot' event, the showcased Optimus robots were still largely operated by humans remotely, highlighting that the technology remains a work in progress.Tesla maintains that Li's alleged theft of intellectual property could jeopardise years of internal research and development invested in Optimus. The lawsuit underscores the high stakes involved in the race to develop advanced robotics, particularly as companies like Tesla seek to lead the emerging market for humanoid robots capable of performing complex, human-like tasks.While Tesla has faced technical setbacks in bringing Optimus to market, the ongoing development of robotic hands is seen as a critical component in making the humanoid robot fully functional. The advanced hand sensors Li allegedly accessed are believed to play a pivotal role in enabling robots to replicate precise, human-like dexterity, a key milestone that could set Tesla apart from competitors in the field.Proception has not yet publicly responded to the lawsuit, and the legal proceedings are now underway.Tune In
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Hindustan Times
an hour ago
- Hindustan Times
Nato remains ambiguous about goals in new world
At the close of the Nato (North Atlantic Treaty Organisation) Summit 2025 in The Hague, alliance members made a landmark decision: All 32 nations agreed to raise defence spending to 5% of their gross domestic product (GDP) by 2035. The new pledge, up from the long-standing 2% benchmark, marks the most ambitious military investment target in the alliance's history and reflects mounting security concerns across the Euro-Atlantic space. US President Donald Trump hailed the agreement as a 'monumental win' for Washington, claiming that it corrected longstanding imbalances in Nato's burden-sharing. Despite growing anxiety over global hotspots, the summit avoided direct mentions of several key geopolitical challenges (Bloomberg) The summit declaration outlined that the 5% commitment will be split into two distinct categories. Around 3.5% of GDP will go toward traditional defence spending aligned with Nato capability targets, covering military hardware, force readiness, and interoperability. The remaining 1.5% will be directed toward emerging non-military threats — securing critical infrastructure, cyber defence, civil preparedness, innovation, and the defence industrial base. Nato secretary-general Mark Rutte, hosting his first summit in the role, emphasised that this investment 'will ensure we have the forces, capabilities, resources, infrastructure, and resilience needed to deter and defend in line with our three core tasks: deterrence and defence, crisis prevention and management, and cooperative security.' Yet, despite the show of unity on funding, the summit exposed cracks beneath the surface. Several members, including Spain and Slovakia, pushed back on the timeline. Spain openly stated that it would not be able to meet the 5% target before 2035, while Slovakia argued that competing economic priorities such as improving living standards and reducing debt made the goal unrealistic. France's President Emmanuel Macron offered guarded support for the new defence goals but expressed concern about broader alliance coherence. Stressing that Russia remained Nato's principal threat, Macron warned against allowing intra-alliance trade tensions to escalate. 'We can't say we're going to spend more on defence and then start a trade war within Nato,' he said, alluding to new US tariffs on European goods. 'It's an aberration. It's time we returned to the principle of trade peace among allies.' In a subtle rebuke of recent US actions, Macron added that he had raised this concern directly with President Trump. 'We cannot build a stronger Europe within Nato while undermining our economic unity,' he said. Despite growing anxiety over global hotspots, the summit avoided direct mentions of several key geopolitical challenges. There was no formal communique on Russia, China, the Indo-Pacific, or flashpoints like Gaza and Iran. While leaders addressed some of these issues in sideline meetings, their omission from the official agenda raised eyebrows. German Chancellor Friedrich Merz acknowledged the shifting focus. Merz also lobbied the US for stronger economic measures against Moscow and added that there needs to be more economic pressure, especially 'on those enabling Russia by buying its fossil fuels — namely China and India.' Trump, for his part, maintained ambiguity on Nato's Article 5 — its core clause of mutual defence. When asked during a bilateral with Dutch Prime Minister Dick Schoof whether he remained committed to Article 5, Trump responded: 'I stand with it. That's why I'm here.' This came just a day after he had publicly remarked there were 'numerous definitions' of the clause, leading to unease among allies. He also made headlines with a controversial comment about the ongoing Israel-Iran tensions. He claimed both nations were 'tired' and ready to 'go home,' though he warned that the conflict could 'perhaps soon' reignite. Is the US hands off or on in the Middle East? In contrast to past summits, where unity against adversaries like Russia or growing concern over China's Indo-Pacific ambitions dominated discussions, this year's gathering seemed adrift in a sea of rising budgets but unclear strategic purpose. Is Nato marooned on an island of anxiety, preparing for unknown threats without a clear definition of who the enemy is? This strategic ambiguity underscored a deeper issue — while Nato is now better funded, questions linger about what exactly it is preparing to confront. With global power dynamics in flux, and transatlantic relationships under increasing strain, the alliance is investing heavily in its future, but the direction of that future remains uncertain. Gurjit Singh is a former ambassador to Germany, Indonesia, Ethiopia, Asean and the African Union. The views expressed are personal.
&w=3840&q=100)
Business Standard
an hour ago
- Business Standard
Trump says he doesn't expect to extend July 9 trade tariff deadline
"I don't think I'll need to," he said in an interview on Fox News's Sunday Morning Futures with Maria Bartiromo that was taped Friday. He then added, "I could, no big deal." Bloomberg
India.com
3 hours ago
- India.com
Pakistan to get another loan worth billions from..., it is because...
New Delhi: Pakistan and China have finalized commercial loan agreements worth $3.7 billion this week. This means that China is going to give Pakistan a huge loan. After this loan from China, Pakistan's foreign exchange reserves will increase to $12.4 billion, which had come down to just $8.9 billion last week due to which Pakistan was facing the threat of bankruptcy. How much is Pakistan's foreign exchange? A Bloomberg report has confirmed, citing sources, that the Industrial and Commercial Bank of China (ICBC) and the Bank of China have signed a $1.6 billion deal on Friday, June 27. This loan is expected to help Pakistan meet its IMF target of ending the fiscal year with gross reserves of $14 billion. These agreements have come at a time when Pakistan's foreign exchange reserves have reached a mere $8.9 billion, more than half of which is being repeatedly 'rolled over' by China. According to reports, Beijing has kept Pakistan financially alive by continuously advancing cash deposits of $4 billion, commercial loans of $5.4 billion, and trade finance facility of $4.3 billion. What does Chinese loan mean to Pakistan? According to the report, on May 19, Pakistan's Deputy Prime Minister Ishaq Dar, who is also the country's Foreign Minister, visited Beijing and during this time an agreement was reached between the two countries regarding the loan. According to the report, the loans taken by Pakistan from China have an average floating interest rate of 7.5%. Pakistan's entire economic strategy now revolves around China. Cash loans from Beijing, unfinished projects under CPEC (China-Pakistan Economic Corridor), and emergency credit lines being continuously taken from Chinese banks have made Pakistan's economic policy completely dependent on China. How much is Pakistan's total debt? At present, Pakistan's total debt to China is around $26 billion, which includes cash deposits, commercial loans and export-import financing. China is repeatedly 'rolling over' this debt, but this has become a permanent debt spiral rather than a relief. Reports from June 2025 say that Pakistan's current account deficit is growing, the rupee is unstable, and food and fuel prices are constantly rising. Foreign investment has almost stopped, and domestic industries are dying due to lack of power and raw materials while policymakers have ignored warnings from international agencies. But interest rates are rising, and repayment deadlines are approaching. Pakistan has to pay back about $25-27 billion in the next 12 months, with most of the debt taken from China, Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates (UAE).
