According to a report by Bloomberg on July 21, Tesla is set to engage in a standoff with the California Department of Motor Vehicles (DMV).
The DMV has accused Tesla of overstating the capabilities of its Autopilot and FSD (Full Self-Driving) technologies and misleading consumers.
The hearing, which began on Monday and lasts for five days, is described as “of great importance” by Bloomberg. The California regulators are seeking to suspend or revoke Tesla’s dealer license, which is a prerequisite for selling vehicles in the state. Currently, California is the most populous state in the U.S.
The California regulators have pointed out that Tesla made “false or misleading” statements during the promotion of its advanced driving assistance system in 2021 and 2022, including describing the feature as “capable of completing short and long trips without driver intervention.”
In a complaint filed in November 2023, the California DMV stated that Tesla vehicles equipped with driving assistance technology could not be operated as autonomous vehicles at the time of their release and still cannot do so now.
Tesla argued in its submitted documents that its controversial statements were protected by the First Amendment’s freedom of speech. Company lawyers also noted that the marketing claims cited by the DMV were taken out of context and that the regulators overlooked Tesla’s warnings and explanations regarding the system.
“Tesla has repeatedly made clear that its vehicles are not autonomous and require active supervision from the driver,” Tesla wrote in a document dated February 2024.
Furthermore, Tesla is also facing a jury trial in Miami, Florida.
It is reported that the crux of the dispute in this case lies in whether Autopilot bears partial responsibility for a fatal pedestrian accident in 2019 caused by a Model S driver’s lack of attention, and Tesla’s promotion of its assisted driving technology has also been discussed during the Miami trial.
Tesla’s lawyers emphasized that Musk and the company’s claim that vehicles can operate without human intervention is forward-looking and does not represent current technological capabilities.
Plaintiffs hired safety expert and George Mason University Professor Cummings to argue to the jury that such statements could foster drivers’ “neglect” and lead to an incorrect perception of vehicle capabilities.
She also pointed out that even the name “Autopilot” itself could create an illusion in consumers.
“This would lead people to place more undue trust in the vehicle, as in the aviation industry, Autopilot is a very excellent technology,” said Cummings, one of the first female fighter pilots in the U.S. Navy. “But we mistakenly believe that this technology is equally effective on cars.”
Bloomberg reports that the scrutiny of Tesla’s assisted driving system in Florida and California poses “significant risks” for Musk, who bets his future on autonomous driving technology and is preparing for the launch of Robotaxi (autonomous taxis).
Currently, Tesla denies any improper conduct in the California proceedings and the Florida case.
It is known that several lawsuits involving Tesla’s assisted driving have been filed, with trials set to take place within the next year, highlighting ongoing safety concerns.