3 ms·

"It is not common practice for automakers — in China or elsewhere — to sue their customers. But Tesla has pioneered an aggressive legal strategy and leveraged t

by chvid 2y ago

"It is not common practice for automakers — in China or elsewhere — to sue their customers. But Tesla has pioneered an aggressive legal strategy and leveraged the patronage of powerful leaders in China’s ruling Communist Party to silence critics, reap financial rewards and limit its accountability."

johnnyanmac 2y ago
Everyone missing the big picture here with this statement. This is not usual at all, doesn't matter about stuff like "driver error".
simondotau 2y ago
That's an example of the article being egregiously misleading. It implies that Tesla used the courts to silence an innocent customer, when in fact the customer sued Tesla first. And also second. Given the actions of the customer, I'd argue that Tesla's strategy was quite restrained. There's no evidence of this being a "strategy". As for the latter half of the paragraph, is there any evidence for any of that? Because it's certainly not presented in the article. Was any patronage "leveraged" here? Was any genuine critic silenced? Was any accountability limited? Maybe, but there's no evidence for it.
- FireBeyond 2y ago
  The customer initially sued Tesla because they were refusing to provide the data. Apparently, to you, that’s overreaching by the customer. And then when they did, they didn’t release it to her, they published it publicly, with identifying information leading to her allegedly receiving threats (when we all know Tesla fans would never ever harass detractors). Regardless of who was actually at fault, the contortions you go through to paint this as a “restrained” response would likely put a pretzel to shame.
  - simondotau 2y ago
    To be clear, I think Tesla should be providing that information to customers upon request. And I think all carmakers should be obligated to do so. But Tesla aren't currently obligated to do so under normal circumstances, and I can imagine why they wouldn't want to set a precedent prematurely. (As the saying goes, hard cases make bad law.) > Apparently, to you, that’s overreaching I didn't say that. I wouldn't say that. Putting words into my mouth isn't conducive to truth seeking, or basic conversational decency. I would never consider exercising one's legal rights to be overreach. The same goes for Tesla when they exercise their legal rights. My point is that this particular matter isn't a useful point to extrapolate Tesla's "strategy". Tesla has sold a massive number of cars in China and across the world; presumably a large fraction going to reasonably wealthy people with the means to seek redress. If there was a systemic issue here, we'd expect to see far more evidence of it than this. > allegedly receiving threats I don't know the finer details of this specific case, but it seems this customer has a proven track record of making misleading statements for media attention. They don't get my benefit of the doubt, and they don't deserve yours. > the contortions you go through to paint this as a “restrained” response All I said to justify Tesla's actions as 'restrained' was "Given the actions of the customer". I'm confused where you allege the the pretzel-like contortion to be.

by chvid 2y ago

johnnyanmac 2y ago

Everyone missing the big picture here with this statement. This is not usual at all, doesn't matter about stuff like "driver error".

simondotau 2y ago

That's an example of the article being egregiously misleading. It implies that Tesla used the courts to silence an innocent customer, when in fact the customer sued Tesla first. And also second. Given the actions of the customer, I'd argue that Tesla's strategy was quite restrained. There's no evidence of this being a "strategy". As for the latter half of the paragraph, is there any evidence for any of that? Because it's certainly not presented in the article. Was any patronage "leveraged" here? Was any genuine critic silenced? Was any accountability limited? Maybe, but there's no evidence for it.

FireBeyond 2y ago
The customer initially sued Tesla because they were refusing to provide the data. Apparently, to you, that’s overreaching by the customer. And then when they did, they didn’t release it to her, they published it publicly, with identifying information leading to her allegedly receiving threats (when we all know Tesla fans would never ever harass detractors). Regardless of who was actually at fault, the contortions you go through to paint this as a “restrained” response would likely put a pretzel to shame.
- simondotau 2y ago
  To be clear, I think Tesla should be providing that information to customers upon request. And I think all carmakers should be obligated to do so. But Tesla aren't currently obligated to do so under normal circumstances, and I can imagine why they wouldn't want to set a precedent prematurely. (As the saying goes, hard cases make bad law.) > Apparently, to you, that’s overreaching I didn't say that. I wouldn't say that. Putting words into my mouth isn't conducive to truth seeking, or basic conversational decency. I would never consider exercising one's legal rights to be overreach. The same goes for Tesla when they exercise their legal rights. My point is that this particular matter isn't a useful point to extrapolate Tesla's "strategy". Tesla has sold a massive number of cars in China and across the world; presumably a large fraction going to reasonably wealthy people with the means to seek redress. If there was a systemic issue here, we'd expect to see far more evidence of it than this. > allegedly receiving threats I don't know the finer details of this specific case, but it seems this customer has a proven track record of making misleading statements for media attention. They don't get my benefit of the doubt, and they don't deserve yours. > the contortions you go through to paint this as a “restrained” response All I said to justify Tesla's actions as 'restrained' was "Given the actions of the customer". I'm confused where you allege the the pretzel-like contortion to be.