Tesla Faces Regulatory Scrutiny Over Autopilot Marketing Claims

According to foreign media reports, American electric vehicle manufacturer Tesla is set to confront the California Department of Motor Vehicles (DMV) over allegations that it has exaggerated claims regarding its Autopilot driver assistance system and Full Self-Driving (FSD) technology, potentially misleading consumers. The five-day hearing began on July 21 in Oakland, California, and is significant as the DMV seeks to suspend or revoke Tesla's dealership license in the state, which could directly impact Tesla's sales in California, the most populous state in the U.S. Concurrently, Tesla is facing another jury trial in Miami, Florida, concerning whether a distracted Tesla Model S driver in a 2019 pedestrian fatality incident bears partial responsibility due to Autopilot. Tesla has denied any wrongdoing in both lawsuits. Regulatory agencies on the East and West Coasts of the U.S. are conducting dual reviews of Tesla's marketing of its driver-assistance software against its actual performance, posing a significant risk for Elon Musk, who has bet Tesla's future on autonomous driving technology and is pushing forward with long-awaited autonomous taxi services. Musk has claimed that Tesla produces the 'safest cars ever made.' The U.S. federal safety regulatory agency has investigated multiple incidents related to Autopilot and issued a recall for two million vehicles in 2023 after finding that the system failed to ensure driver attention. Lawsuits stemming from several fatal incidents are set to go to trial next year, keeping safety issues in the spotlight. The California DMV accuses Tesla of violating state laws, stating that its advertising of advanced driver-assistance systems from 2021 to 2022 included 'untrue and misleading' statements, including claims that vehicles could 'complete long and short trips without any driver intervention.' In a revised complaint filed in November 2023, the DMV stated: 'Tesla vehicles equipped with driver-assistance technology are not capable of operating as autonomous vehicles, either in advertising or in reality.' In court documents, Tesla argues that its controversial statements fall under the First Amendment protections of free speech; it contends that the DMV's cited claims are taken out of context and deliberately ignore Tesla's warnings and disclosures regarding the risks of its driver-assistance systems. In legal filings from February 2024, the company stated: 'Tesla has repeatedly and clearly emphasized that its vehicles are not autonomous and require active supervision by the driver.' The automotive industry classifies vehicle automation systems from Level 0 to Level 5, based on the extent of functional capabilities. Tesla's Autopilot is categorized as Level 2, as it requires driver control and constant monitoring of the system's operation. Both the California DMV and Tesla representatives declined to comment ahead of the Oakland hearing. Meanwhile, Tesla's marketing claims are a focal point in the Miami trial. The company's lawyers assert that Musk's and Tesla's statements regarding vehicles operating 'without human intervention' are forward-looking statements that do not reflect the current level of technology. Mary 'Missy' Cummings, an engineering professor at George Mason University and a safety expert witness called by the plaintiffs, pointed out to the jury that such statements could lead to driver complacency and instill a false understanding of the vehicle's capabilities. She emphasized that merely naming the software 'Autopilot' could create cognitive biases among consumers. Cummings, one of the first female fighter pilots in the U.S. Navy, stated: 'This could lead to a much more severe over-reliance on the car, as 'Autopilot' is an established and mature technology in aviation, but people mistakenly believe that the similarly named technology in cars can achieve the same level of performance.'