StealthP3D
Well-Known Member
Losing a lawsuit is not accepting blame. It just means you lost a lawsuit. It’s not like Tesla entered a plea here.
You could also look at it like Tesla won 99% of the lawsuit.
You can install our site as a web app on your iOS device by utilizing the Add to Home Screen feature in Safari. Please see this thread for more details on this.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Losing a lawsuit is not accepting blame. It just means you lost a lawsuit. It’s not like Tesla entered a plea here.
The car should not be modified in anyway without the consent of the owner!I swear GM has more upcoming EVs than actual production any given month.
He was 18, not a child. The Mom added the limiter after he got a ticket for 112 in a 50. He should have lost his license and the car for that.
This is my feeling. He seems to do bad in court. Only winning against pedoguy.
I also think some posters are not getting the full picture of what happened. Car companies cannot replace parents and really what this douche kid did was con his parents and Tesla.He was 18, not a child. The Mom added the limiter after he got a ticket for 112 in a 50. He should have lost his license and the car for that.
Tesla has said that Barrett Riley went in person to the Tesla facility where the Model S was being serviced and “tricked” its staff into removing the speed limiter.
If he could do it over, there would be no Giga Berlin.
Yes, but Tesla still failed with the software limitation the OWNER had put in place. I don't see how you can claim that Tesla bears ZERO fault. If anything, the verdict is very much in Tesla's favor.I also think some posters are not getting the full picture of what happened. Car companies cannot replace parents and really what this douche kid did was con his parents and Tesla.
I want to make a drive to Denali National Park from Seattle some day. Is it possible and has anyone done it yet?
Ah hey buddy, you are like the parents putting the crux of the case on the speed limiter instead of the parents own negligence. You are not going to stop a tool like this kid, cuz he conned the techs into removing it. And thus what is the point, the speed limiter which is not a legal limiter. There's no laws governing this because its a parental issue. The parents are on record acknowledging that their teen was out of control.Yes, but Tesla still failed with the software limitation the OWNER had put in place. I don't see how you can claim that Tesla bears ZERO fault. If anything, the verdict is very much in Tesla's favor.
Not a lawyer, but in liability law negligence usually comes down for consequences that a reasonable person would forsee. If you remove a speed limiter you do not assume a crash will occur. Especially true if Reilly pretended to be his father (not clear how he tricked Tesla but I assume he pretended to be the owner, same last name etc.) so he was not acting in good faith.Yes, but Tesla still failed with the software limitation the OWNER had put in place. I don't see how you can claim that Tesla bears ZERO fault. If anything, the verdict is very much in Tesla's favor.
Say did not like me here so didn’t work for me. I’ll play with it later.
Mine failed at first but then I chose to try again, and it accepted everything.Say did not like me here so didn’t work for me. I’ll play with it later.
I’m curious what the advantage of doing this is here. Shareholder perks (discounts, special items in the store, preferred shipping on Cybertruck) would be rad. Probably not, but one can hope. Likely it’s just for simplifying things like the proxy vote and getting into shareholder events.
They totally knew, the mom even begged her son's friends to stop him from reckless driving/speeding. There are too many examples of 'rents letting their offspring go out of control in fast cars.Now, his parents probably could foresee this as they were aware that he had a ticket for going 112 in a 50. I know we all feel bad for him and his parents, but he could have killed a bystander, and in fact did kill his friend and almost killed another.
Yo buddy, Tesla allowed a non owner to access a car's software. The fact that the kid was a con artist changes nothing. Say what you will, they screwed up, and if not for that screw up things could have been very different as far as how this young man ultimately killed himself, if at all. The verdict is fair to Tesla. It is a ONE PERCENT liability. Hardly the crux that you claim.Ah hey buddy, you are like the parents putting the crux of the case on the speed limiter instead of the parents own negligence. You are not going to stop a tool like this kid, cuz he conned the techs into removing it. And thus what is the point, the speed limiter which is not a legal limiter. There's no laws governing this because its a parental issue. The parents are on record acknowledging that their teen was out of control.
Crazy it is all on the parents. My wife still afraid to let our 27, 24 and 20 year old sons use any of our Tesla's including the 2015.Not a lawyer, but in liability law negligence usually comes down for consequences that a reasonable person would forsee. If you remove a speed limiter you do not assume a crash will occur. Especially true if Reilly pretended to be his father (not clear how he tricked Tesla but I assume he pretended to be the owner, same last name etc.) so he was not acting in good faith.
Now, his parents probably could foresee this as they were aware that he had a ticket for going 112 in a 50. I know we all feel bad for him and his parents, but he could have killed a bystander, and in fact did kill his friend and almost killed another.
I am very sensitive on gdpr-compliance.another lawsuit, this time in Berlin by German "consumer group" vzbv
alleges Tesla:
- untruthful about CO2 impact as it sells carbon credits to other manufacturers allowing them to pollute
- does not tell buyers they must comply with European data regulations when using Sentry mode
CO2 claim is odd, as in reality all it does is pay Tesla rather than face government fines, credits do not increase/decrease CO2 just adjust the direction and amount of fines.
data regs should be easily dealt with in the small print I would guess.
![]()
I did it immediately (very easy and it let me select all accounts) so that I can be in the line for Starlink IPO to Tesla retail shareholders in the future!Say did not like me here so didn’t work for me. I’ll play with it later.
I’m curious what the advantage of doing this is here. Shareholder perks (discounts, special items in the store, preferred shipping on Cybertruck) would be rad. Probably not, but one can hope. Likely it’s just for simplifying things like the proxy vote and getting into shareholder events.
That is definitely a shareholder "perk" I'd be all over.I did it immediately (very easy and it let me select all accounts) so that I can be in the line for Starlink IPO to Tesla retail shareholders in the future!
This is not your first rodeo. All that's true......until it isn't!There's zero fear on Wall St when it comes to TSLA and it's not hard to see why.
The implied move after earnings is 9%.........so all Wall St does it affectively cap TSLA the day before to make it underperform it's beta by a huge amount on a big macro up day.
Let me guess....Tesla beats earnings in a big way......stock goes up 10% on Thursday morning but macros, having just had a big up days earlier in the week...pull back and TSLA slowly gets walked down all day to end up just where we started at the beginning of the week.
Now where have I seen this before?