← Back to topic list

Tesla sues California DMV to reverse ruling that company engaged in false advertising on FSD

ansyhrrian | 2026-02-24 16:28 | 233 views

Comments (24)
ansyhrrian 2026-02-24 16:28

Can't wait for them to take the L and pay legal fees for both sides.

TangerineMindless639 2026-02-24 16:53

Promises something called, "Full Self Driving" and it's not. The lie is laterally in the name... If "Self" means you then my old car is "Full Self Driving".

Scanner771_The_2nd 2026-02-24 16:54

So they got sued for not following the law, then changed their wording to avoid false advertising... but now are suing because they followed the law after the fact?

Suspicious-Appeal386 2026-02-24 16:59

Discovery will be fun.

EvanStran 2026-02-24 17:00

It is actually a perfect name. While the feature is active, the car fully drives itself with no human intervention needed at all. All that is required is supervision, but 0% human driving. So, 100% self driving.

Suspicious-Appeal386 2026-02-24 17:12

If I may quote the official release from Tesla Lawyers on the subject when 1st raised in 2022. **“Mere failure to realize a long-term, aspirational goal is not fraud”** Actually, it is the very definition of fraud. As the FSD was not sold an an "aspiration" but as a factual and function option for thousands of $. Had FSD been "aspirational", there would never been a single order placed. I was sold (M3 2019 FSD Owner) on the premise of a functional system, it is not. And will never be. https://www.latimes.com/business/story/2022-12-08/tesla-lawsuit-full-self-driving-technology-failure-not-fraud#:\~:text=In%20its%20defense%2C%20Tesla%20lawyers,on%20his%20or%20her%20own.

Suspicious-Appeal386 2026-02-24 17:12

Bingo!

FutureBiotechVenture 2026-02-24 17:42

TSLA up 5% on the news?

EESax 2026-02-24 18:08

I haven't paid attention to their recent marketing, but at least up through 2021 (when we bought our Model 3), it was marketed as "full self-driving *capability*" – that is, the hardware was *capable* of full self-driving when that feature is fully developed and delivered at some unspecified and un-promised future time, but doesn't actually do it *yet*. Of course, even that was a lie (or at best, grossly wishful thinking), as it turns out the 2021 and earlier hardware is *not* actually capable of FSD. (Nor is the current hardware, almost certainly.) Personally, I was highly skeptical of the FSD claims (and it was ridiculously expensive, and I enjoy driving anyway, so why would I want the car to do that for me?), so we skipped it. (Even when it's been given to us a couple of times in recent years as a free limited-time trial, we always turn it off. It's too stressful and unpredictable. Basic Autopilot is plenty, and even that is frustrating and dangerous sometimes when it decides to randomly slam on the brakes after seeing a ghost.)

morgan423 2026-02-24 18:58

Yeah, I've used that feature and it's not completely autonomous like the name claims. The latest versions are as good as they've ever been, and it works phenomenally well on the highway. That being said, you still have to watch it like a hawk while you're using it. It can do really stupid things in low visibility or if the cameras are obstructed. Sometimes it won't catch signs and actually does illegal stuff (like right turns on red at sign-prohibited intersections, that kind of stuff). And you've always got to be prepared to stop it from making a decision you wouldn't in a tricky situation. You're not setting this thing and taking a nap, like that name implies. And they've been selling it for almost a decade under that name, when the tech is only really starting to come along at all in the last year or so.

EverythingMustGo95 2026-02-24 19:03

Absolutely it was fraud. Car sellers have a long history of lying to make the sale; lawsuits are rare because it’s so expensive and risky. Lemon laws were written because car companies made some crap cars, knew they were crap cars, and would sell them anyway. And stop trying to fix or refund them. All that mattered was - did you make the sale? Elon got caught with his hand in the cookie jar, after a decade he still has to label it “supervised” to blame the driver.

mikegalos 2026-02-24 19:05

You actually should be paying more attention than when you are driving because to be able to take over in an Ai failure you need to be instantly ready and aware of all the usual factors but additionally need to be watching for the AI doing something stupid.

Big_footed_hobbit 2026-02-24 19:21

It was a mere puffery by his majesty

nlaak 2026-02-24 21:03

> at least up through 2021 (when we bought our Model 3), it was marketed as "full self-driving capability" – that is, the hardware was capable of full self-driving when that feature is fully developed and delivered at some unspecified and un-promised future time Eh, I'd still argue that is fraud. It's not capable of something, until it can do it. Without proper functional software the hardware isn't capable of jack shit. Good choice on skipping FSD as well as not trusting it. >Basic Autopilot is plenty My car as adaptive cruise, lane center/follow/keep and several other techs - in the rare case where I don't want to deal with traffic, it handles most of it for it, letting me relax. >even that is frustrating and dangerous sometimes when it decides to randomly slam on the brakes after seeing a ghost. My car as Automatic Emergency Braking. AEB is (AFAIK) a federally required standard and has never falsely braked, though it is more aggressive than I am in responding to people in front of me in the process of, yet not having complete, a turn to get out of my way. Of course, my car has radar, so ghosts aren't likely to be a thing.

morgan423 2026-02-24 22:33

Exactly. That's how I was while I was trialing it. It was actually more tiring using it than just driving most of the time.

Designer-Salary-7773 2026-02-24 22:36

Having purchased a new non Tesla vehicle I find that even Simple lane keeping is deceptively Unpredictable.  Its crap.  Not just Tesla .. its swell when it works.  When it cannot be relied upon is …. A guessing game but it has to do with visibility of lane markings

EESax 2026-02-24 22:47

Our car has radar, too … except that some software update not too long after we bought it (maybe a year?) disabled the radar in favor of using the cameras only. But it still did the phantom braking thing even before the radar was turned off. Guess they never figured out sensor fusion. Plus, the radar modules were hard to get during COVID, so better to just remove them and shave a few dollars from the BOM than to delay deliveries. Haven't really noticed much of a difference without the radar, though. The phantom braking happens *just* infrequently enough to lull us into comfortably not thinking about it, and then it gives us a nice jump scare to remind us that it's still around.

BringBackUsenet 2026-02-24 23:11

"The first thing we do, let's kill all the lawyers" -- Shakespeare

BringBackUsenet 2026-02-24 23:13

So when a bug splats on the camera, the car heads into oncoming traffic and people splat too.

corgi-king 2026-02-24 23:59

Using the same playbook as Trump. No matter how wrong I am, I will sue you to bankruptcy. But he forgot he is suing a government agency, which pretty much has unlimited resources.

daototpyrc 2026-02-25 05:30

Taking a page out of agent orange's book.. What scum, it's the only way his company stays relevant

vxicepickxv 2026-02-25 09:29

Ride that billionaire con artist dick.

RedSix2447 2026-02-26 05:36

It’s a lesson out of the book of Trump. Lmao

Potential_Limit_9123 2026-02-27 14:52

In the US, it's exceedingly rare for one party to have to pay both sides. It's possible, but quite a challenge to get.

Add comment

Login is required to comment.

Login with Google