3 ms·

> If you want to challenge that notion in court, be my guest. I mean, you do realize that there is a class action against Tesla for misleading customers with t

> If you want to challenge that notion in court, be my guest. I mean, you do realize that there is a class action against Tesla for misleading customers with the names of their products, right? This is actively being fought in the courts. That alone should prove that people feel misled by the marketing. https://finance.yahoo.com/news/tesla-must-face-vehicle-owners-225222673.html https://finance.yahoo.com/news/tesla-must-face-vehicle-owner... > There is no credible case to be made that any Tesla driver is unaware of Tesla's stance, that the driver assist features cannot provide autonomous driving and that the driver must always remain engaged. You’re free to believe what you want, but this is far from the closed case you are portraying it to be. In short, that’s just like your opinion man.

ETH_start 2y ago
Anyone can bring forth a class action lawsuit. Nothing has been ruled on that, so it doesn't support that claim. But more to the point: being misled into purchasing it is entirely different than being misled while driving it, and blaming an accident on thinking the auto assist didn't need their attention as a result. That is not what the lawsuit is alleging. It stands to reason that if there was anything approaching a credible case that any driver thinks they don't need to be engaged while driving a Tesla, because of misleading naming of its driver assist features, some law firm somewhere would have organized a lawsuit on behalf of accident victims by now. So the evidence supports my position.
- deleted 2y ago
  [deleted]
- mynameisvlad 2y ago
  Your argument was, and I quote, > If you want to challenge that notion in court, be my guest. I pointed out that it is, in fact, being challenged. Right now. And has already been several times before, with Tesla settling out of court specifically to prevent any repercussions from a guilty verdict. If you wanted to talk about successful cases, then that should have been your argument. At this point, you’re just moving the goal posts.
  - ETH_start 2y ago
    The notion that no Tesla driver got into an accident because the name of the driver assistance program misled them into thinking they could be inattentive while driving has not been challenged in court. That lawsuit doesn't allege that, and if it did, I would wager money it would lose.

ETH_start 2y ago

Anyone can bring forth a class action lawsuit. Nothing has been ruled on that, so it doesn't support that claim. But more to the point: being misled into purchasing it is entirely different than being misled while driving it, and blaming an accident on thinking the auto assist didn't need their attention as a result. That is not what the lawsuit is alleging. It stands to reason that if there was anything approaching a credible case that any driver thinks they don't need to be engaged while driving a Tesla, because of misleading naming of its driver assist features, some law firm somewhere would have organized a lawsuit on behalf of accident victims by now. So the evidence supports my position.

deleted 2y ago
[deleted]
mynameisvlad 2y ago
Your argument was, and I quote, > If you want to challenge that notion in court, be my guest. I pointed out that it is, in fact, being challenged. Right now. And has already been several times before, with Tesla settling out of court specifically to prevent any repercussions from a guilty verdict. If you wanted to talk about successful cases, then that should have been your argument. At this point, you’re just moving the goal posts.
- ETH_start 2y ago
  The notion that no Tesla driver got into an accident because the name of the driver assistance program misled them into thinking they could be inattentive while driving has not been challenged in court. That lawsuit doesn't allege that, and if it did, I would wager money it would lose.