5 ms·
tbh thats probably legalistically enough for them to avoid getting sued But the very idea that "yeah, you're right on all the facts, its just that we didn't re
by xkjkls 6y ago
tbh thats probably legalistically enough for them to avoid getting sued
But the very idea that "yeah, you're right on all the facts, its just that we didn't really 'lie'" isn't a great defense of the business
- lordnacho 6y agoThe law normally considers what a reasonable person would think, doesn't it? Who would think it was anything other than moving under its own power?
- xkjkls 6y agoIt depends on the circumstance. In the case of an investor, there's much more assumed due diligence than just "what a reasonable person would think".
- lordnacho 6y agoIf the guy shows you a video, are you gonna actually ask him whether it was what it looks like? I guess you ought to kick the tyres on the real thing though.
- awb 6y agoInvestors are supposed to conduct their own due diligence which could include talking to the engineers or setting up a demo under mutually agreed conditions at which point the difference between "in motion" and "driving" would be uncovered. It's definitely not a good look though.
- duskwuff 6y agoContext matters too. No reasonable person would expect a company to post a promotional video of their vehicle "in motion" just to show off that it has wheels that can roll.
- valuearb 6y agoThe CEO directly said it was a working truck at the time. Today’s press release is skirting that fact.