Live data from Hacker News

Tesla is being investigated for securities and wire fraud for self-driving claim

theverge.com

91–100 of 189 posts

Re: Tesla is being investigated for securities and wire fraud for self-driving claim

#91

This is about defrauding people who bought a tesla, not investors. > In 2020, Musk told a crowd in Shanghai that he remains “confident” that Tesla will achieve “basic functionality for level five autonomy this year,” referring to the SAE’s rankings of autonomy. Tesla’s technology, in 2024, is still at level 2. This reminds me alot of the Thernos case where she tried to make the case not about fraud but about an overl…

There is an obvious difference between lying and being wrong.

Theranos claimed to already have created their magic machine, which was a blatant lie. They intentionally misled investors by pretending to put samples into a fake testing machine, secretly removing the samples to test them in a lab elsewhere, then putting them back into the machine to make it look like the machine was doing the testing. That's careful, calculated fraud, which was obviously a criminal act.

Musk, by contrast, never claimed to have something that he did not have. He made overly-optimistic claims about product development. There is no reason to assume that these projections were lies, given that everyone else in the space was making similarly aggressive projections.

Musk was wrong for selling FSD-related features before they were ready, and Tesla should obviously make that right. But pretending that being wrong (in good company) is the same thing as calculated fraud is just goofy.

Re: Tesla is being investigated for securities and wire fraud for self-driving claim

#92

This is about defrauding people who bought a tesla, not investors. > In 2020, Musk told a crowd in Shanghai that he remains “confident” that Tesla will achieve “basic functionality for level five autonomy this year,” referring to the SAE’s rankings of autonomy. Tesla’s technology, in 2024, is still at level 2. This reminds me alot of the Thernos case where she tried to make the case not about fraud but about an overl…

Shouldn't fraud (for the end user/customer) be determined by claims made about the product at the time of sale, and not promises of what might be possible a few years from now? If you want to say promises of future features is fraud, then surely that would only be in relation to investors?

In 2016 Tesla claimed that "as of today, all Tesla vehicles produced in our factory – including Model 3 – will have the hardware needed for full self-driving capability at a safety level substantially greater than that of a human driver":

https://www.tesla.com/blog/all-tesla-cars-being-produced-now...

That was a lie.

Re: Tesla is being investigated for securities and wire fraud for self-driving claim

#93

Earlier quoted context omitted.

He's been frequently far more specific than that on timelines. 2018: "By next year, a Tesla should be able to drive around a parking lot, find an empty spot, read signs to confirm it’s valid & park." https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1057690425710891009 2016: "In ~2 years, summon should work anywhere connected by land & not blocked by borders, eg you're in LA and the car is in NY." https://twitter.com/elonmusk/stat…

"a Tesla", not "all Teslas". And of course "should" not "will". And so on. If his press releases are to be treated like contracts that he can be held to, then the verbiage needs to be parsed as if his words were contracts. That's just not going to go very well for the people litigating that he made false claims. Which gives the impression that the litigation isn't so much about punishing the wrongs he has committed,…

> "a Tesla", not "all Teslas"

Cool. Is there a single Tesla currently capable of it eight years on?

> If his press releases are to be treated like contracts that he can be held to, then the verbiage needs to be parsed as if his words were contracts.

Contracts aren't the only way to make a fraudulent marketing promise. You can be sued for false advertising, for example.

Re: Tesla is being investigated for securities and wire fraud for self-driving claim

#94

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think Martha Stewart went to jail for insider trading idk how similar that is. With OTA updates still could claim this could happen. This imo is less than both Theranos and insider trading like the FSD has disclaimers right? Unless the argument is Tesla is only valuable because of FSD and not best in class EV experience The pay package being declined by a Delaware court and now this couldnt have come at a worse tim…

> Martha Stewart went to jail for insider trading "Stewart was found guilty on charges including conspiracy and obstruction of justice" [1]. She sold shares on inside information. She went to jail for lying to investigators about it. [1] https://people.com/martha-stewart-fraud-case-prison-sentence...

There was no insider trading. She thought she was in trouble and made up a story for the investigators that it was a limit order, which she was convicted of.

While lying is bad, this was a case of overzealous prosecution because it was a high-profile case and an inappropriate use of resources. Instead of prison, they should have just had her do some cheezy PSAs and enter in to a deferred prosecution agreement.

I find the members of congress consistently beating the market to be much more troubling.

Re: Tesla is being investigated for securities and wire fraud for self-driving claim

#95

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A lot of people are really defensive about this. What's the big deal if X does well? Why are people so personally invested in pretending like Elon didn't do the world a huge service by removing Twitter from the control of possibly the most politically extreme and anti-constitutional subculture in the entire country?

I personally preferred the original politically extreme and anti-constitutional subculture better.

At least you're honest.

Everyone must remember that "they" and "their side" are capable of the same evil as their enemies. The existence of a truly open discussion must be sacred, or we might as well dismantle it all.

Or, if your goal is to dismantle instead of building or fixing things, remind me to never let you have any power.

Re: Tesla is being investigated for securities and wire fraud for self-driving claim

#96

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Martha Stewart went to jail for insider trading "Stewart was found guilty on charges including conspiracy and obstruction of justice" [1]. She sold shares on inside information. She went to jail for lying to investigators about it. [1] https://people.com/martha-stewart-fraud-case-prison-sentence...

There was no insider trading. She thought she was in trouble and made up a story for the investigators that it was a limit order, which she was convicted of. While lying is bad, this was a case of overzealous prosecution because it was a high-profile case and an inappropriate use of resources. Instead of prison, they should have just had her do some cheezy PSAs and enter in to a deferred prosecution agreement. I find…

> was no insider trading

"Martha Stewart, the founder of Martha Stewart Living Omnimedia, also became embroiled in the scandal after it emerged that her broker, Peter Bacanovic, tipped her off that ImClone was about to drop. In response, Stewart sold about $230,000 in ImClone shares on December 27, 2001, a day before the announcement of the FDA decision" [1].

It’s far from fact that she did not trade on inside information.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ImClone_stock_trading_case

Re: Tesla is being investigated for securities and wire fraud for self-driving claim

#97
post #20

Absolutely. If Martha Stewart went to jail for much less, a certain CEO[1] should be doing some hard time for ludicrous claims over the past 8 years. Some back-of-the-napkin-math: If we focus on the 4m Model 3 (& Y) vehicles sold that had these claims attached and assume that there was a peak uptake rate of 46% declining to 11% as these claims became obviously untrue. On FSD @ an ever-increasing price of $6000-$12000…

I think Martha Stewart went to jail for insider trading idk how similar that is. With OTA updates still could claim this could happen. This imo is less than both Theranos and insider trading like the FSD has disclaimers right? Unless the argument is Tesla is only valuable because of FSD and not best in class EV experience The pay package being declined by a Delaware court and now this couldnt have come at a worse tim…

> Unless the argument is Tesla is only valuable because of FSD

That's not how fraud works. Fraud doesn't require that the false claim us the only source of value of the product, it only requires that the false claim is material to the decision to purchase the product at the price offered.

Re: Tesla is being investigated for securities and wire fraud for self-driving claim

#98

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"It's almost ready" is a claim about the product at the time of sale.

"Almost ready" as a claim is pretty meaningless. It's a statement of feature status, not a prediction of when 100% completion occurs. In software, "almost" can last years or decades.

In 2019 Musk claimed there would "for sure" be over a million Tesla robotaxis on the road by the end of 2020:

https://www.thedrive.com/news/38129/elon-musk-promised-1-mil...

That was a lie.

Re: Tesla is being investigated for securities and wire fraud for self-driving claim

#99

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Of course not, a huge number of (if not most) contracts contain agreements regarding future delivery of product or services. This is valid and normal arrangement. The contract is a promise to deliver that. If you don't deliver, you have breeched the contract.

Elon Musk signed contracts claiming he would deliver this in the future? There are verbal contracts, so what you're really saying was that he was in the room with each buyer, individually or with a group of them (such that he was aware of the identities of those he was contracting with), and made a legally binding verbal contract where he told them he would deliver these software features, under what conditions they…

> Elon Musk signed contracts claiming he would deliver this in the future?

False statements were made that induced consumers to sign contracts to purchase cars and the FSD add-on. This is fraud.

Musk doesn't have to personally sign your car's contract for that to be a thing, or your credit card APR would be unenforcable.

Post reply on HN