In its fight with the DMV regarding misleading use of the term “self-driving,” Tesla says that the agency has disregarded its use of the term “Full Self-Driving” for so long that it should be allowed to continue using it.
Over the last few years, Tesla has been under pressure from the California DMV over its Autopilot and self-driving claims, which the agency believes could be deceptive.
Last summer, Tesla and the DMV went back and forth about the Full Self-Driving (FSD) Beta rollout and marketing around the Full Self-Driving Beta package. It came after the agency had been under some political pressure to force Tesla to report more data about its FSD program.
Over the years, Tesla has been criticized for how it advertises its Advanced Driver Assistance System (ADAS). One of the main concerns has been the actual names of the systems: Autopilot and Full Self-Driving Capability. Some people believe that the names suggest that the systems are autonomous, even though they are only driver-assist systems.
Tesla has also been using this description to avoid having to report data like disengagement, like other self-driving programs in California under the DMV’s jurisdiction.
In short, there’s a serious concern that Tesla is using the term “self-driving” when it benefits the company, but it is quick to claim its cars have nothing to do with self-driving when it is to its advantage, like when it’s time to share data on the program.
The DMV has been looking into the matter as a false advertising issue. Tesla was supposed to answer inquiries about the problem a long time ago, but the company delayed its answer.
Now, the LA Times has obtained Tesla’s response to the inquiry, and it reveals a strange defense for the automaker.
The DMV “has been aware that Tesla has been using the brand names Autopilot and Full Self-Driving Capability since Tesla started using those names in 2014 and 2016 respectively,” the company said in a response filed in a state administrative court Friday.
The company “relied upon [the DMV’s] implicit approval of these brand names” and “the DMV chose not to take any action against Tesla or otherwise communicate to Tesla that its advertising or use of these brand names was or might be problematic,” the response notice states.
The automaker seems to claim that it should be allowed to keep using the “Full Self-Driving Capability” name because the DMV never objected to it until now.
Tesla also claims that preventing the use of the term is an infringement on its free speech:
As to free speech, Tesla claims that the DMV’s false advertising rules on autonomous vehicles “impermissibly restrict constitutionally protected speech that is truthful and nonmisleading.”
How the case will move forward remains to be seen, but the California DMV doesn’t seem to be taking the situation lightly this time. The agency even talked about revoking Tesla’s manufacturer license, which is being extensively used in California.
Electrek’s Take
Apparently, Tesla believes that there’s a statute of limitations on misleading people about self-driving capabilities.
Top comment by Mike Tsai
FSD really is a catchy term to implies it does more than what it currently is. I can understand Tesla's reluctance not wanting to give it up the name. But since it's not really safe, they probably should label it a bit more clearer so the general public can understand. For instance, "beta" is pointless, when is it not in "Beta" :).
That’s kind of funny.
Tesla is taking so long to deliver on its self-driving promise that it believes the DMV shouldn’t go after it for selling a self-driving package for seven years without delivering it.
I really don’t get that logic.
When it comes to Tesla’s FSD at this point, I’m really in a “put up or shut up” mode.
FTC: We use income earning auto affiliate links. More.
Comments