Welcome to Tesla Motors Club
Discuss Tesla's Model S, Model 3, Model X, Model Y, Cybertruck, Roadster and More.
Register

Supercharger "pirate adapters"?

This site may earn commission on affiliate links.
As I said before, if another manufacturer wants to use the Supercharger network, they will have to pay to use the Supercharger network. Creating a CCS adapter would require them to pay Tesla for access.

Tesla has already released a CCS adapter in Europe so it's only a matter of time before they release it in other countries.


The European adapter doesn't work in the US, the two places use a different standard that isn't quite the same- so it's not quite that simple.

I think ralph is suggesting VW ought to make one to let Teslas use CCS in the US so they can make $ off Model 3 owners here.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ralph142
Uh, yes, VHS was (is) absolutely a standard.

One developed by JVC and released in 1976 in Japan.

Sony had its own proprietary standard, which was Betamax....

Sony pushed for the Japanese Ministry of International Trade and Industry to adopt it as "the" standard for home video... which would have meant everyone else paying Sony to use it since it wasn't an open standard.

JVC countered with their VHS standard, which WAS open, and thus others could build machines using it cheaply in comparison.

Eventually Panasonic, Sharp, Mitsubishi, and Hitachi all supported JVCs idea, not wanting sony to have an advantage by owning the "winning" standard.




That's a popular urban legend- but unsupported by any actual data or evidence.

The reason VHS won is largely attributed to 2 things:

1) Beta cost more-a lot more- roughly 3 times more for a machine and

2) Beta launched with a 1 hour max recording capacity. Too short for movies. JVCs VHS did 2 hours. Enough for movies. (and RCA would be along shortly with 4 hours on VHS machines to handle things like football games)


Betamax remained significantly more expensive year after year, and It wasn't until the early 1980s that Beta caught up to VHS on recording times, and by then the fight was largely lost for them, with 75% of the market being VHS already.

If you want more evidence debunking the porn myth I suggest this link-
VHS vs Betamax: How influential was the pornography industry in the format war?


Several posts reiterate the facts I've told you (that it was mainly about recording length and price) with sourced links backing those facts up....then the answer near the bottom more directly debunks the porn aspect by pointing out these facts:

A) Porn was also available on Beta (with evidence and links to that fact)

B) Porn was only a tiny fraction of sales in the total home video market during the time the VCR format wars were going on compared to "regular" content

But Sony finally got back at the industry when it won the Blu Ray/HD-DVD war. I believe the final blow to that feud was when Disney decided to go Blu Ray. I believe the HD-DVD camp folded up shop shortly after that.

Though it's interesting that 10 years later, DVD (not HD-DVD) is still a plenty viable format, and Blu Ray may eventually become obsolete as more and more video content simply gets streamed.
 
VW doesn't even officially sell a BEV in most states (the egolf is a compliance car- only sold in 10 states- California, Connecticut, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, New Jersey, New York, Oregon, Vermont, and Washington D.C.)


EAs rollout of large #s of charging stations isn't about selling CURRENT cars, since they have virtually none to sell.

It's about-

A) Part of their settlement/apology over the diesel scandal

and

B) An attempt by VW to, once they actually get their large # of announced BEVs to market in the next couple of years, be able to say out of the gate they have a nationwide charging network to support them.... something it's a lot easier for them to do ahead of time since they have mountains of 'spare' cash compared to what Tesla did when they began rolling out cars/superchargers.


Thanks to the fact they're rolling out stations nearly all other coming BEVs can also use they also gain a potential revenue stream from any companies future EVs (except I suppose most Teslas if no US adapters come along).

The e-tron definitely exists, though I'm not sure if it is currently sold in more states than the 10 you listed.
 
The European adapter doesn't work in the US, the two places use a different standard that isn't quite the same- so it's not quite that simple.

I think ralph is suggesting VW ought to make one to let Teslas use CCS in the US so they can make $ off Model 3 owners here.
I never suggested the European adapter would work in the US. I thought it was obvious that I meant Tesla will release a CCS adapter in the US that would work in the US.
 
I never suggested the European adapter would work in the US. I thought it was obvious that I meant Tesla will release a CCS adapter in the US that would work in the US.

I suppose... but then again they've had an actual working US Chademo adapter for the S/X for many years that still doesn't work on the 3, despite having promised since 2017 that it was "coming soon"
 
The e-tron definitely exists, though I'm not sure if it is currently sold in more states than the 10 you listed.


The e-tron is an audi, not a VW (though yeah they're owned by the same parent)

Dunno how many states you can buy one in but they already recalled the very few they've sold/delivered a few weeks ago-

Audi E-tron recalled for battery seal, potential “thermal event”

They also cut back their planned production about 20% due to battery shortages and delayed their second Audi model to next year-

Audi revises e-tron production targets downwards - electrive.com
 
As I said before, if another manufacturer wants to use the Supercharger network, they will have to pay to use the Supercharger network. Creating a CCS adapter would require them to pay Tesla for access.

Tesla has already released a CCS adapter in Europe so it's only a matter of time before they release it in other countries.

why would they have to pay tesla to make and sell an aftermarket ccs adapter for the car, not for the sc network ?
 
I assume that they would have to license the proprietary Tesla connector.
Exactly. Just like some other companies which have proprietary ports on their devices. Cables that connect to those proprietary ports end up costing $$ because they require a licensing fee. I'm sure a company could make a knock-off adapter but who wants to cheap out on a non-licensed adapter that could cause their $50k or $150k car to go up in flames?

Also @ralph142 , there's more to CCS charging than just the cheap/simple external adapter that Tesla sells. Additional hardware is already installed in the car to support CCS or needs to be retrofitted on older cars. If VW were to make an external adapter that would work on cars without the necessary internal CCS hardware, it would need lots of extra circuitry and could end up looking more like the CHAdeMO adapter. It might also need the ability to transmit billing information.
 
Exactly. Just like some other companies which have proprietary ports on their devices. Cables that connect to those proprietary ports end up costing $$ because they require a licensing fee.


Except Tesla has already released all their patents for anyone to use in good faith.

So I don't see any reason anybody would need to pay Tesla anything if they wanted to make a CCS to Tesla adapter to allow a Tesla car to use a CCS charger in the US.


Now, someone making an adapter that let a CCS car use a Tesla supercharger without any payment/agreement, THAT would be an example of not in good faith, and Tesla would likely be all over that.

But other way around? All that does is give Tesla owners more charging options.... a thing Tesla themselves claims they're "working on"
 
I assume that they would have to license the proprietary Tesla connector.
Except Tesla has already released all their patents for anyone to use in good faith.

So I don't see any reason anybody would need to pay Tesla anything if they wanted to make a CCS to Tesla adapter to allow a Tesla car to use a CCS charger in the US.


Now, someone making an adapter that let a CCS car use a Tesla supercharger without any payment/agreement, THAT would be an example of not in good faith, and Tesla would likely be all over that.

But other way around? All that does is give Tesla owners more charging options.... a thing Tesla themselves claims they're "working on"

This was how I understood it, but perhaps not...
 
No, I believe it's all of them.

All Our Patent Are Belong To You

From the actual information page: Privacy & Legal | Tesla

"Tesla Patents" means all patents owned now or in the future by Tesla (other than a patent owned jointly with a third party or any patent that Tesla later acquires that comes with an encumbrance that prevents it from being subject to this Pledge). A list of Tesla Patents subject to the Pledge will be maintained at the following URL: Privacy & Legal | Tesla.

So it isn't all of them, it is a specific list. (But is probably most of them.)

And the poison pill:

A party is "acting in good faith" for so long as such party and its related or affiliated companies have not:

  • asserted, helped others assert or had a financial stake in any assertion of (i) any patent or other intellectual property right against Tesla or (ii) any patent right against a third party for its use of technologies relating to electric vehicles or related equipment;

So if you use one of Tesla's patents you can never sue Tesla, or any other EV related company, for patent infringement on any patent you own.