So they are either dodging warranty claims or there is a very real safety issue they are covering up via software.
Which is it?
And either way Tesla is trying to force THEIR costs onto the car’s owner!
Isn’t that part of Elon’s (and other’s) argument against ICE cars, coal-fired power plants, etc.?? Allowing a few to push their costs onto everyone else??
Tesla should own up to either (or both) a longevity or a safety problem with the cars it sold and fix them or, if not economically feasible (a la VW), buy them back.
Heck, as it is right now, with this “update” and similar “update” removing all DC charging from prior salvage-titled cars, Tesla is already acting like it still owns the cars and can act with impunity. Otherwise they’d have to recognize that they accessed
someone else’s computer system without permission and altered or removed an essential function: the very definition of felony computer hacking (18 U.S.C. 1030). Not only is this a federal crime of unabashed arrogance, for a publicly-traded company it is colossally stupid for its officers, directors and shareholders.
And, as so many others, including OP, have pointed out, from a long-term business perspective of maintaining loyal customers, it will cost them untold repeat business. Pretty important for a company which doesn’t advertise. Just dumb all the way around around.
And before anyone tries to blame “the lawyers” for Tesla’s criminal conduct, know that Tesla’s lawyers should have read ABA Model Rule 1.16(a)(1), California Rule 3-700(B) and Comments [9] and [10] to ABA Model Rule 1.2 (among other ethical guidance) regarding their ethical obligations. By their failure to, at the very least, resign from representing Tesla, I fear they have not correctly analyzed the ethical jeopardy in which they may find themselves.
