Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Opening the North American charging standard

tesla.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

111–120 of 192 posts

Re: Opening the North American charging standard

#111

Post by akozak »

politician wrote: post #102
kelnos wrote: post #97

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yup, I don't think it matters which one is technically better. They both get the job done, and one is an actual standard that many car makers have agreed upon -- "many" meaning "every single one except Tesla". If Tesla wanted theirs to be standard, they should have made this move years ago. They missed the boat, and are now scrambling to avoid having to change their own sockets.

Looks at Apple.

It's an apt comparison, and obviously there has been movement (eg the EU) to push them onto usb, but I think cars are a slightly different context than laptops/phones where there us much more of a social incentive to standardize early, given the high cost, low turnover, lower availability of fuel/energy during transport with competing plugs, etc.

Re: Opening the North American charging standard

#112

Post by Dylan16807 »

sigmar wrote: post #75
Symmetry wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not a lawyer but that sure sounds like it would be a case of promissory estoppel to me. That is, if someone relies on Tesla's word and makes investments based on it they'd have a legal case to prevent Tesla from trying to exercise those patents against them. But I do hope there's an actual legal grant of rights as well.

Haven't heard the term and I'm googling it to understand better. Is there case law where this was tested in the context of patents on ports? I'm thinking Tesla could say, "we changed our minds but you can keep selling any of the Toyota 2023 models, you just can't make a new car model with the port. therefore we aren't causing you financial harm or injury by relying on our promise"

You're asking for a very specific citation there.

But it doesn't matter, they could give everyone who asks a 20 year license for $1.

Also courts aren't stupid.

Re: Opening the North American charging standard

#113

Post by darknavi »

masklinn wrote: post #76
darknavi wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's most T.C. videos I've seen. Often niche topics but I sat* through (and enjoyed) 20 minutes of why an obscure can opener is superior than the mainstream ones.

Also why the best toaster was created in the 50s, how petrol lamps work, the wild story of video on discs, and dumb US. automotive standards (or less dumb ones). Followed by a speed run through the entire history of analog photography. It’s wild not just how varied Alex’s interests are, but how he’ll find interest in the most mundane subjects (christmas lamps) and how well and thoroughly he’s able to present them.

A bit more electrics based but Big Clive also tears down the most random pieces of technology. It's quite fun to watch him take a dollar store toy apart and see how it ticks.

Re: Opening the North American charging standard

#114

Post by reindeerer »

ryukafalz wrote: post #20

Hilarious to call their thing the "North American Charging Standard" when every other manufacturer in North America has already standardized on something else.

Are you trying to imply that just calling something is a standard doesn't make it a standard ? Hmmmm

Re: Opening the North American charging standard

#115

Post by jsmith45 »

advisedwang wrote: post #68

It sounds like folks are assuming this will be free for implementors and license universally with little restriction. Nothing in this press release says it's free. "open" could just mean "open to apply", for example. " We invite charging network operators and vehicle manufacturers to put the Tesla charging connector..." could be read as an invitation to negotiate. I expect licensing terms to be announced, and I bet y…

The specification is posted publicly, with no listed restrictions, so the only method Tesla has of licensing this is via enforcing their patents.

While I expect car manufacturers would want to negotiate a custom patent license, others interesting in using the patents (like say EVSE manufacturers) could technically just utilize the Tesla patent pledge.

Of course if they do so they cannot later sue Tesla for any form of IP infringement, without getting countersued over the patents. Thus if you use tesla's patents under the license, you can sue them for copyright, patent, trademark, trade-secret or any other right, without getting countersued. This would mean Tesla could openly make full blown counterfeits of your companies products, and you cannot sue them without getting countersued for patent violation. So I'm doubting terribly many will want to take up this offer, but they technically could.

Re: Opening the North American charging standard

#116

Post by DannyBee »

sneak wrote: post #88
akozak wrote: post #74

Tesla is at least 5 years late here, maybe more like 10. All of the US federal funds will likely go to CCS now because they stuck to the proprietary network strategy, despite the OBVIOUS and natural social utility from an open industry-wide standard and charging networks open to all. For reference here is the DOT's NPRM from June laying out the proposed requirements for states to receive federal funds from the infras…

From the article: > NACS vehicles outnumber CCS two-to-one, and Tesla's Supercharging network has 60% more NACS posts than all the CCS-equipped networks combined. This suggests to me it’s not Tesla that’s late. If anything is a society-wide EV standard in North America, it’s the Tesla plug.

At one point that number was probably 100% or very close to it. Now it's 60%.

It has nowhere to go but now, and is almost certainly dropping fast.

The number is also a feint.

It's true that NACS outnumbers CCS, but that's because they are only comparing fast-charging spots, which they outnumber.

If you included the J1772 part, tesla is outnumbered at this point in the US.

Going by ports (because that's what tesla is counting in their numbers).

There are ~92000 public level 2 ports (not chargers) in the US. That does not include the DC fast charging ports. There are about 20k of these.

There are 35,000 tesla ports (which tracks, since this is 60% more than 20k) For tesla, there is no difference between dc fast charging and non ports.

So the number cited is, as per usual for tesla, misleading, since it ignores the level 2 ports that are commonly used. There are 2.5x more of those, and combined with CCS, there are 3x more ports total than tesla's standard.

I like the connector for sure, but it's way too late.

Re: Opening the North American charging standard

#117

Post by nomel »

margalabargala wrote: post #109
nomel wrote: post #99

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What "game" are they too late for? The number of ports is the game, and the reason my next EV will be a Tesla. It's very difficult to find charge stations that aren't Tesla, and when you do, they're often used for general parking.

Out of curiosity, where in the US are you? Where I am (Oregon), public CCS charger locations outnumber Tesla chargers several times over. There are huge areas of the state that have CCS chargers, but no Tesla charging capacity. My next EV will certainly not be a Tesla, for that reason.

California, near a city of over a million people. It's maybe 4 (Tesla) to 1 where I am, physically, with most non-tesla ports being 240V. I've even run into 120V. Available port wise, it's much much worse. Until these other companies implement a fee/reporting system, for sitting in the charge spot all day, it's going to remain very painful.

A family friend returned her EV after realizing how dumb the situation is here. Perhaps it's a regional problem.

Re: Opening the North American charging standard

#118

Post by reindeerer »

sigmar wrote: post #27

What legal guarantee is there that Tesla won't reverse course in the future? Say a charging station or car manufacturer adopts this connector and then in 5 years Tesla says "well actually, we've got these patents and we're going to start charging you to sell cars/charging stations"? Publishing the specs and saying "we won't enforce patents" isn't a legally binding guarantee

> What legal guarantee is there that Tesla won't reverse course in the future?

None. There would have to be a governing body set up for this to have any legs

Re: Opening the North American charging standard

#119

Post by Bud »

politician wrote: post #102
kelnos wrote: post #97

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yup, I don't think it matters which one is technically better. They both get the job done, and one is an actual standard that many car makers have agreed upon -- "many" meaning "every single one except Tesla". If Tesla wanted theirs to be standard, they should have made this move years ago. They missed the boat, and are now scrambling to avoid having to change their own sockets.

Looks at Apple.

No post body was provided.

Re: Opening the North American charging standard

#120

Post by chroma »

criddell wrote: post #43
boardwaalk wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Considering how early that decision was made in the timeline of electric vehicles (how early we still even are) — getting saddled with a backwards compatibility kludge kind of sucks.

It’s still early days and certainly not too late to change it.

That's true for the US, but the EU mandates that all vehicle charging stations support CCS Combo 2.[1] They'd have to undo their mandate to allow better chargers, and I don't think that'll happen any time soon.

1. https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/HTML/?uri=CEL...

Post reply on HN