Well, there's our trouble!
You say "intent or policy" as if they're interchangeable. They're totally different things. Using one of these adapters in a way that's against the policy of the charger owner would be bad, no doubt. But I see no problem with using one against the intent of the owner. It is the owner's responsibility to translate intent into policy, not ours.
If Tesla's intent with their destination chargers is that people don't use adapters to charge other cars, then they should put a policy into place to enforce that. Until and unless they do that, we shouldn't be required to play guessing games about the state of their corporate mind.
They did this with superchargers. They didn't just set them up and make us figure it out. They are quite clear that if you want to use superchargers you either need to buy a car that explicitly has supercharging capability, or pay money to enable it after the fact. They are also quite clear that other manufacturers can allow their cars to use these stations, but only if they work with Tesla and meet their conditions. Any adapter that allowed non-supercharger-capable cars to use superchargers would clearly be against Tesla's actual policy, not just their nebulous and ultimately unknowable intent.
If HPWC owners start saying explicitly that they only allow Teslas to charge with them, and people with an adapter start saying that they're going to ignore that and keep charging at those specific HPWC's anyway, then and only then do I see any sort of problem. Until then, I don't understand what the big deal is.
You have ignored the reality:
The whole problem with any and all unauthorized use of a Model S to J1772 adapters is the Tesla UMC and HPWC User Manuals states these charger are: "
designed only for charging a Tesla vehicle (excluding Tesla Roadster). Do not use it for any other purpose or with any other vehicle or object." Also, the Charger stalls are signed with
"Tesla Only". These words have consequences to imply order and authorized use.
The reality is, the NRTL certification/listing that allowed these EVSEs to be installed to the NEC requires that they only be used following the manufacture instructions; always and forever!!
Also, also, the insurance companies that provide liability insurance for whom ever should purchase these policies (vehicle owner, property owner, hotel operator etc.) will hawk eye and refuse to provide liability coverage for any unauthorized Model S to J1772 adapter use that violates the installation approval should it come to their attention during an loss investigation.
IMHO, the Municipality, Local Permitting authority, AHJ's approval authority and the insurance companies underwriting authority will not allow anyone to repurpose the Tesla EVSE for other vehicles just because they personally see it as a cool thing to do. I anticipate Ticketing and Towing to follow if the problem persist.
I anticipate that Tesla, the property owners, business operators and the Local Authorities will soon be required to enforce the “Tesla Only” requirement because the NRTL certification/listing is no longer valid with unauthorized EV charging and Tesla, the property owner and the Local Authorities (control of intended use, should be aware of actual use) will be complicit to allow and/or turn a blind eye to a Model S to J1772 adapter being used at a charging stall with "Tesla Only" signage as they will find themselves civilly responsible for whatever should occur during and/or after the unauthorized EV charging.
IMHO, I don't believe Tesla, the property owner and/or the municipality will want to condone violating Tesla’s EVSE intended use "Tesla Only" requirement and/or installation approval process for a few EV owners that want to leach off the Tesla charging network for their personal benefit.
I could be wrong but without order the whole "ownership and authorized Use" issue goes out the window, i.e, I could steal and commandeer anything form anyone I want just by gaining access.
Hummm, sounds like third world behavior!!!
