Firmware 9 in August will start rolling out full self-driving features!!!

[barjohn]

Does anyone here know what the contract for FSD says? If one is relying on the vehicle purchase contract, I believe it precludes class action suits and requires binding arbitration unless you specifically opted out of it via the process specified to opt out. I would not be surprised to find that the FSD contract has a limited liability to that which you paid for it. Meaning, that the most you could recover is your $3K to $5K purchase price.

 

[chillaban]

Does anyone here know what the contract for FSD says? If one is relying on the vehicle purchase contract, I believe it precludes class action suits and requires binding arbitration unless you specifically opted out of it via the process specified to opt out. I would not be surprised to find that the FSD contract has a limited liability to that which you paid for it. Meaning, that the most you could recover is your $3K to $5K purchase price.

There was no additional contract other than the MVPA. I'm a FSD purchaser.

I don't believe binding arbitration clauses can get around the various state laws governing false/misleading advertising, though (but I've got no legal background other than occasionally complaining about my employer )

Additionally, the wording for both EAP and FSD were a bit different on Tesla's site at the time AP2 was originally announced compared to how they were recently (they qualified EAP as something that begun rolling out feature-by-feature rather than expected to roll out Dec 2016). And recently, the new Tesla website no longer talks about Smart Summon, AutoSteer+, or onramp-to-offramp as Enhanced Autopilot features.

But these kinds of changes to the described features after-the-fact feel like they ought to be legally problematic.

 

[barjohn]

I am a non-practicing lawyer so don't take this as legal advice. The problem as I see it is that as in any contract, unless you can allege a tort and prove it (such as fraud), you only have a breach of contract action. The ready for breach of contract is almost always money and you are limited to the damage you can prove you suffered. So, best case, you paid $3K and did not receive anything, you are limited to a $3K refund. However, if you go to arbitration to collect, it could cost you more than the $3K so you might not be any further ahead. You could of course ask for legal fees but the general rule in contract actions is that each party pays there own legal costs unless the contract provided that the losing party pays. Assuming FSD provides some features, but not all, and you use those features for some period before taking any action for breach of contract (a likely scenario), then Tesla would be entitled to some set aside for the benefit you received. For example you hire a contractor to build a room addition to your house. He orders the materials, has them delivered to your site and starts working. He completes the foundation and starts on walls when you decide that you don't like the job he is doing (it is not workmanlike, fails inspections frequently, etc.) so you fire him and decide to complete the job yourself using the materials on your site. He would be entitled to not have to refund you for the materials as you have received them and are benefitting from them. He may be entitled to some compensation for his labor but the risk he faces is if you had to hire someone else to complete the job and the cost was more than the contract he might still have to pay your cost to complete the contract. Doesn't apply to FSD as you would not be able to get access to the car's systems for a third party to do that.

 

[chillaban]

That makes sense. I don't think it's easy to approach as a breach-of-contract situation with regards to your MVPA. It seems like it would be more fruitful to consider it a false-advertising / undelivered-prepurchase sort of situation through a complaint with the FTC or attorney general's office.

I've had pretty decent luck filing complaints against other companies (including ones as large as Amazon) this way and getting pretty good resolution.

As far as Tesla goes, I'm still in the patiently waiting category. I'm pretty happy with this year's progress on the AP2/EAP front. I'll see towards the end of the year how v9's features pan out.

Where I'll start drawing the line is if AP2.5 or "AP3" starts getting features before AP2, and Tesla doesn't provide a retrofit path in a timely option…. Or more years pass by with no progress… etc.

 

[emmz0r]

Autopilot page still up

Doesn't this feature set count if it's stated at the time of purchase? You can't reduce these features to a small subset and get away with it, right?

 

[chillaban]

Autopilot page still up

Doesn't this feature set count if it's stated at the time of purchase? You can't reduce these features to a small subset and get away with it, right?

And the Order page still is up too and says the same thing.


But this page changed: Model S | Tesla (along with the X and 3 equivalent changes)

These are describing current-day capabilities.

 

[MarcusMaximus]

Autopilot page still up

Doesn't this feature set count if it's stated at the time of purchase? You can't reduce these features to a small subset and get away with it, right?

The configurator also still lists freeway-freeway as a feature.

 

[rnortman]

Edit: Sorry, I sent this before I saw the following posts in the thread, so a lot of what I have below is redundant with what others have just said.

If you order FSD, they are obliged to give you FSD. FSD should do what's described, nothing less.

Agreed! I'll just point out that what's described does not explicitly include the car driving itself without you in it, or with you in it but not paying attention. Nowhere do they claim that you'll be allowed to take a nap or read a book while in the driver's seat*. Many people have assumed that is what they paid for, and Elon has certainly implied it (especially with the whole "Tesla Network" thing), but the official FSD option description never says that. This is what's going to save their a$$es. FSD will forever be a "driver assistance technology". The human driver will remain responsible for safe operation of the car at all times.

The other thing they have going for them is that the law is not always reasonable. Very likely if it comes down to a class action suit, what we'll get out of it is at most a refund of what we paid for EAP and/or FSD, which is bogus because a big part of the value of the car for a lot of us was these features, and the car is substantially less valuable without them. If they are found guilty of negligent misrepresentation then there might be a case for treble damages (3x what we paid for the options). And then they'll argue that they partially delivered and so we don't deserve even the full option price to be refunded.

*The notables exceptions are "Smart Summon" (which was part of the original EAP, though they have taken it out of the new EAP description, which is super interesting), and of course Park Seek, which very clearly stated that you could get out of the car and it would go find a spot and park in it. We'll see what happens with those. If they deliver anything here, again I suspect the human is going to be responsible for what the car does. Meaning you're supposed to follow your car around with your finger on the button while it looks for a parking spot. What an awesome feature that will be.

If anybody thinks I'm being too pessimistic, go read the current EAP/FSD descriptions on the newly updated website and compare to the originals. Tesla is moving the goal posts in a serious way.

 

[d21mike]

There was no additional contract other than the MVPA. I'm a FSD purchaser.

I don't believe binding arbitration clauses can get around the various state laws governing false/misleading advertising, though (but I've got no legal background other than occasionally complaining about my employer )

Additionally, the wording for both EAP and FSD were a bit different on Tesla's site at the time AP2 was originally announced compared to how they were recently (they qualified EAP as something that begun rolling out feature-by-feature rather than expected to roll out Dec 2016). And recently, the new Tesla website no longer talks about Smart Summon, AutoSteer+, or onramp-to-offramp as Enhanced Autopilot features.

But these kinds of changes to the described features after-the-fact feel like they ought to be legally problematic.

Which web site are you looking at?

Autopilot

On-ramp to Off-ramp
Once on the freeway, your Tesla will determine which lane you need to be in and when. In addition to ensuring you reach your intended exit, Autopilot will watch for opportunities to move to a faster lane when you're caught behind slower traffic. When you reach your exit, your Tesla will depart the freeway, slow down and transition control back to you.

 

[chillaban]

Which web site are you looking at?

Autopilot

On-ramp to Off-ramp
Once on the freeway, your Tesla will determine which lane you need to be in and when. In addition to ensuring you reach your intended exit, Autopilot will watch for opportunities to move to a faster lane when you're caught behind slower traffic. When you reach your exit, your Tesla will depart the freeway, slow down and transition control back to you.

I mentioned in my second followup, #326

The redesigned product pages for Model S/X/3 no longer mention these capabilities. But the order sheet and the Autopilot page still do.

 

[MarcusMaximus]

Edit: Sorry, I sent this before I saw the following posts in the thread, so a lot of what I have below is redundant with what others have just said.



Agreed! I'll just point out that what's described does not explicitly include the car driving itself without you in it, or with you in it but not paying attention. Nowhere do they claim that you'll be allowed to take a nap or read a book while in the driver's seat*. Many people have assumed that is what they paid for, and Elon has certainly implied it (especially with the whole "Tesla Network" thing), but the official FSD option description never says that. This is what's going to save their a$$es. FSD will forever be a "driver assistance technology". The human driver will remain responsible for safe operation of the car at all times.

The other thing they have going for them is that the law is not always reasonable. Very likely if it comes down to a class action suit, what we'll get out of it is at most a refund of what we paid for EAP and/or FSD, which is bogus because a big part of the value of the car for a lot of us was these features, and the car is substantially less valuable without them. If they are found guilty of negligent misrepresentation then there might be a case for treble damages (3x what we paid for the options). And then they'll argue that they partially delivered and so we don't deserve even the full option price to be refunded.

*The notables exceptions are "Smart Summon" (which was part of the original EAP, though they have taken it out of the new EAP description, which is super interesting), and of course Park Seek, which very clearly stated that you could get out of the car and it would go find a spot and park in it. We'll see what happens with those. If they deliver anything here, again I suspect the human is going to be responsible for what the car does. Meaning you're supposed to follow your car around with your finger on the button while it looks for a parking spot. What an awesome feature that will be.

If anybody thinks I'm being too pessimistic, go read the current EAP/FSD descriptions on the newly updated website and compare to the originals. Tesla is moving the goal posts in a serious way.

Notably, the FSD option does say that it is designed to be fully self driving “without any input from the person in the driver’s seat”.

And smart summon is still on the main autopilot page, it was just moved from the vehicle pages(which now only list currently available features).

 

[BigD0g]

I mentioned in my second followup, #326

The redesigned product pages for Model S/X/3 no longer mention these capabilities. But the order sheet and the Autopilot page still do.

Ok, i'm not a lawyer, and I need @croman to weigh in here, but does it matter what it says today if I already purchased? As far as I am concerned they must deliver what they sold me at the time of purchased defined on the website / agreement and that faked video, all the changes they are making today, don't imply to any who's purchased before the changes IMHO, since I purchased based on the past verbiage, but maybe i'm very naive in that thinking? Otherwise, manfs could always go change the website after sale and say well the website says this now, to bad so sad...

 

[chillaban]

Ok, i'm not a lawyer, and I need @croman to weigh in here, but does it matter what it says today if I already purchased? As far as I am concerned they must deliver what they sold me at the time of purchased defined on the website / agreement and that faked video, all the changes they are making today, don't imply to any who's purchased before the changes IMHO, since I purchased based on the past verbiage, but maybe i'm very naive in that thinking? Otherwise, manfs could always go change the website after sale and say well the website says this now, to bad so sad...

That's my understanding too. Sure they can limit their liability for new purchasers going forward, but they can't retroactively change the marketing materials and expect that to take effect for previous purchasers, at least without the right qualifications.

Note that these days, FSD says things like we believe or in almost all situations, which of course limits their liability (now you can only go after them if you have evidence they intentionally/fraudulently made those claims and knew them to be false)


(IANAL either)

 

[rnortman]

Notably, the FSD option does say that it is designed to be fully self driving “without any input from the person in the driver’s seat”.

Not sure which way you're arguing here... this clearly assumes a person is in the driver's seat, so that argues against a truly driverless capability such as you'd need for practical "Tesla Network" ride sharing. I would argue that it since says that in "most situations" it will not "require any action" from the driver (or something close to that, don't have the text in front of me). This certainly leaves room for them to say that the driver is still required to be alert and take over when necessary, just that in many cases it won't be required. So it still leaves room for them to argue that an L3 driver assistance system fulfills the promises they made with the FSD description.

And smart summon is still on the main autopilot page, it was just moved from the vehicle pages(which now only list currently available features).

Can you still navigate to that page from the home page? Not that I can see. They've removed links to it. Also note that the new pages don't really say anything about what FSD actually means. If you click through to the Model 3 order page, the following is literally what you are buying when you order FSD option on a Model 3:

In the future, Model 3 will be capable of conducting trips with no action required by the person in the driver’s seat.​

It doesn't say anything about what weather and traffic, conditions it will be able to operate in, on what kind of roads, how long the trips are, etc. And again it clearly implies that there is somebody in the driver's seat. And I would argue that it leaves them plenty of room to still insist that the person in the driver's seat monitor conditions and remain responsible for safety, taking over if necessary.

Smart Summon and On-ramp to Off-ramp are also not mentioned on any of the order pages anymore. Model S order page still talks about freeway transitions in the EAP description, but I suspect they just haven't gotten around to updating that yet and it will soon be updated to conform to the new Model 3 descriptions.

 

[Bladerskb]

Many people have assumed that is what they paid for, and Elon has certainly implied it (especially with the whole "Tesla Network" thing), but the official FSD option description never says that. This is what's going to save their a$$es. FSD will forever be a "driver assistance technology". The human driver will remain responsible for safe operation of the car at all times.

Except their CEO Elon went around bragging that they had Level 5 hardware capability. His words not mine. I'm pretty sure legally you can use his words against him.

 

[timvracer]

My prediction, there will be nothing of note for EAP or FSD before the end of the year

 

[rnortman]

My prediction, there will be nothing of note for EAP or FSD before the end of the year

What?! Not even the coast-to-coast autonomous demo drive?! You are such a hater!

/s

I do think V9 will probably introduce some form of traffic light and/or stop sign detection. It will be so unreliable that it will be useless. I can't imagine what other FSD differentiator they could roll out at this point, but I think they really want to be able to claim that they've "started rolling out FSD features". And this is actually kind of low-hanging fruit -- easy to do with the GPU kit they have. Well, easy to do unreliably at least. You know, like 90% of the time it works and the other 10% it blows through the red light.

 

[mtndrew1]

What?! Not even the coast-to-coast autonomous demo drive?! You are such a hater!

/s

I do think V9 will probably introduce some form of traffic light and/or stop sign detection. It will be so unreliable that it will be useless. I can't imagine what other FSD differentiator they could roll out at this point, but I think they really want to be able to claim that they've "started rolling out FSD features". And this is actually kind of low-hanging fruit -- easy to do with the GPU kit they have. Well, easy to do unreliably at least. You know, like 90% of the time it works and the other 10% it blows through the red light.

My money is on “exiting the highway at the correct offramp and coming to a complete stop” without driver intervention. Highway offramps generally have prominent markings and signals.

 

[landis]

Well, easy to do unreliably at least. You know, like 90% of the time it works and the other 10% it blows through the red light.

The thing is, that would be enough for a useful convenience feature, for me.

It is 'inconvenient' to turn EAP off and then back on again, over and over. So a 90% rate could mean that i could have less than three manual re-engagements during daily comute. Still would be watching carefully of course.

The first half of my commute is a four lane non-divided highway with 30 traffic lights. Second half is two six lane divided highways. EAP (21.9) actually does pretty well once i drive the first half mile to a major road.

I find all of this hand wringing ammusing. I orded FSD in my M3LR and have been expecting to wait a 'while'. Enjoying EAP in the meantime.

 

[croman]

Except their CEO Elon went around bragging that they had Level 5 hardware capability. His words not mine. I'm pretty sure legally you can use his words against him.

Yes. That's true.