Tesla prevails in first Autopilot wrongful-death suit
A jury has found Tesla not at fault in a lawsuit over a 2019 wrongful death which alleged that Autopilot caused a crash, killing one passenger and seriously injuring two.
In question was the death of 37-year-old Micah Lee, who was driving a Model 3 in 2019 in Menifee, CA (in the Inland Empire to the east of Los Angeles), and hit a palm tree at approximately 65 miles per hour, causing his death and the injury of two passengers, including an 8-year-old boy. The lawsuit was brought by the passengers.
The lawsuit alleged that Tesla knowingly marketed unsafe experimental software to the public, and that safety defects within the system led to the crash (in particular, a specific steering issue that was known by Tesla). Tesla responded that the driver had consumed alcohol (the driver’s blood alcohol level was at .05%, below California’s .08% legal limit) and that the driver is still responsible for driving when Autopilot is turned on.
A survivor in the vehicle at the time of the accident claimed that Autopilot was turned on at the time of the crash.
Tesla disputed this, saying it was unclear whether Autopilot was turned on – a difference from its typical modus operandi, which involves pulling vehicle logs and stating definitively whether and when Autopilot was on or off. Though these claims have sometimes been lodged when Autopilot was disengaged moments before a crash, when avoidance was no longer possible for the driver.
After four days of deliberations, the jury decided in Tesla’s favor, with a 9-3 decision that Tesla was not culpable.
While Tesla has won an autopilot injury lawsuit before, in April of this year, this is the first resolved lawsuit that has involved a death. That last lawsuit used the same reasoning – that drivers are still responsible for what happens behind the wheel while Autopilot or Full Self-Driving are engaged (despite the name of the latter system suggesting otherwise). Full Self-Driving was not publicly available at the time of Lee’s crash, though he had purchased the system for $6,000 expecting it to be available in the future.
Both of Tesla’s autonomous systems are “level 2” on the SAE’s driving automation scale, like most other new autonomous driving systems on the market these days. Although Autopilot is intended for highway use, Tesla’s FSD system can be activated in more situations than most cars. But there is no point at which the car assumed responsibility for driving – that responsibility always lies with the driver.
Since the trial began last month, Tesla CEO Elon Musk made a notable comment during his disastrous presence on Tesla’s Q3 conference call. He was asked whether and when Tesla would accept legal liability for autonomous drive systems, as Mercedes has just started doing with its Level 3 DRIVE PILOT system, the first of its kind in the US (read about our test drive of it in LA). Musk responded saying:
Well, there’s a lot of people that assume we have legal liability judging by the lawsuits. We’re certainly not being let that off the hook on that front, whether we’d like to or wouldn’t like to.
Elon Musk, CEO, Tesla
Later in the answer, Musk called Tesla’s AI systems “baby AGI.” AGI is an acronym for “artificial general intelligence,” which is a theorized technology for when computers become good enough at all tasks to be able to replace a human in basically any situation, not just in specialized situations. In short, it’s not what Tesla has and has nothing to do with the question.
Tesla is indeed currently facing several lawsuits over injuries and deaths that have happened in its vehicles, many alleging that Autopilot or FSD are responsible. In one, Tesla tried to argue in court that Musk’s recorded statements on self-driving “might have been deep fakes.”
We also learned recently, at the release of Musk’s biography, that he wanted to use Tesla’s in-car camera to spy on drivers and win autopilot lawsuits. Though that was apparently not necessary in this case.
Electrek’s Take
Questions like the one asked in this trial are interesting and difficult to answer, because they combine the concepts of legal liability, versus marketing materials, versus public perception.
Tesla is quite clear in official communications, like in operating manuals, in the car’s software itself, and so on, that drivers are still responsible for the vehicle when using Autopilot. Drivers accept agreements as such when first turning on the system.
Or at least, I think they do, since the first time I accepted it was so long ago. And that is the rub. People are also used to accepting long agreements whenever they turn on any system or use any piece of technology, and nobody reads those. Sometimes, these terms even include legally unenforceable provisions, depending on the venue in question.
And then, in terms of public perception, marketing, and in how Tesla has deliberately named the system, there is a view that Tesla’s cars really can drive themselves. Here’s Tesla explicitly saying “the car is driving itself” in 2016.
We here at Electrek, and our readership, know the difference between all of these concepts. We know that “Full Self-Driving” was (supposedly) named that way so that people can buy it ahead of time and eventually get access to the system when it finally reaches full self-driving capability (which should happen, uh, “next year”… in any given year). We know that “Autopilot” is meant to be a reference to how it works in airplanes, where a pilot is still required in the seat to take care of tasks other than cruising steadily. We know that Tesla only has a level 2 system, and that drivers still accept legal responsibility.
But when the general public gets a hold of technology, they tend to do things that you didn’t expect. That’s why caution is generally favorable when releasing experimental things to the public (and, early on, Tesla used to do this – giving early access to new Autopilot/FSD features to trusted beta testers, before wide release).
Despite being told before activating the software, and reminded often while the software is on, that the driver must keep their hands on the wheel, we all know that drivers don’t do that. That drivers pay less attention when the system is activated than when it isn’t. Studies have shown this, as well.
And so, while the jury found (probably correctly) that Tesla is not liable here, and while this is perhaps a good reminder to all Tesla drivers to keep paying attention to the road while you have Autopilot/FSD on, you are still driving, so act like it, we still think there is room for discussion about Tesla doing a better job of ensuring attention (for example, it just rolled out a driver attention monitoring feature using the cabin camera, six years after it started including those cameras in the Model 3).
FTC: We use income earning auto affiliate links. More.
Ford is jumping into the battery energy storage business, betting that booming demand from data centers and the electric grid can absorb the EV battery capacity it says it’s not using.
To achieve this, Ford plans to repurpose its existing EV battery manufacturing capacity in Glendale, Kentucky, into a dedicated hub for manufacturing battery energy storage systems.
Ford pivots from EVs to battery storage for data centers
Ford says it will invest about $2 billion over the next two years to scale the new business. The Kentucky site will be converted to build advanced battery energy storage systems larger than 5 megawatt-hours, including LFP prismatic cells, BESS modules, and 20-foot DC container systems — the kind of hardware increasingly used by data centers, utilities, and large-scale industrial companies.
The company plans to bring initial production online within 18 months, leaning on its manufacturing experience and licensed battery technology. By late 2027, Ford expects the business to deploy at least 20 gigawatt-hours of energy storage annually.
The move follows a joint venture disposition agreement reached last week between Ford, SK On, SK Battery America, and BlueOval SK. Under the agreement, a Ford subsidiary will independently own and operate the Kentucky battery plants, while SK On will fully own and operate the Tennessee battery plant.
Ford is also planning a separate energy storage play in Michigan. At BlueOval Battery Park Michigan in Marshall, the company will produce smaller amp-hour LFP prismatic cells for residential energy storage systems. That plant is on track to begin manufacturing in 2026, and it will also supply batteries for Ford’s upcoming midsize electric truck — the first model built on the company’s new Universal EV Platform.
Electrek’s Take
Overall, the shift reflects Ford’s broader push toward what it calls “higher-return opportunities.” Alongside taking a step backward to add more gas-powered trucks and vans to its US manufacturing footprint, Ford says it will no longer produce some larger EVs, such as the Lightning F-150, where softer demand and higher costs are resulting from the lack of support for EVs by the Trump administration. (Batteries produced at the Glendale plant were for the all-electric Ford F-150 Lightning. The best-selling electric truck in the US in Q3, before the federal tax credit expired, was the Ford F-150 Lightning, with 10,005 EVs sold, a 39.7% year-over-year increase.)
With tax credits eliminated and regulatory uncertainty, Ford is pivoting to adjacent markets, including grid-scale and residential energy storage, to keep its battery plants running and justify billions in sunk investment.
If you’re looking to replace your old HVAC equipment, it’s always a good idea to get quotes from a few installers. To make sure you’re finding a trusted, reliable HVAC installer near you that offers competitive pricing on heat pumps, check out EnergySage. EnergySage is a free service that makes it easy for you to get a heat pump. They have pre-vetted heat pump installers competing for your business, ensuring you get high quality solutions. Plus, it’s free to use!
Your personalized heat pump quotes are easy to compare online and you’ll get access to unbiased Energy Advisors to help you every step of the way. Get started here. – *ad
FTC: We use income earning auto affiliate links. More.
Stellantis may have backed away from planned EVs like the all-electric Ram REV and range-topping Dodge Charger Daytona R/T EV, but the company isn’t standing still. A newly awarded patent outlines an innovative, foam-based thermal runaway suppression system that’s built into an EV’s battery pack.
The indisputable fact of the matter is that electric vehicles catch fire far less often — and far less frequently — than their combustion-powered brethren. Still, a number of highly-publicized early Tesla fires and poorly managed recall on the first-gen Chevy Bolt have linked “electric car” and “fire” in the minds of many Americans, and the ones who have been waiting to test the EV waters until a better safety solution came along are going to absolutely love this latest setup from Chrysler parent company Stellantis.
MoparInsiders is reporting on a new Stellantis patent awarded on a proactive battery safety system that’s designed to stop thermal runaway (read: fire) before it can cascade through an entire EV battery pack.
Rather than relying solely on passive barriers or post-event containment, Stellantis’ freshly patented system uses strategically placed foam channels and deployment mechanisms that can flood the affected cells with high insulation foam when abnormal heat is detected in a cell, isolating the problem area and dramatically slowing (if not outright stopping) the chain reaction that leads to catastrophic battery failure.
The patent describes an electric car battery that, on the outside, will look familiar to EV enthusiasts, but there are some key differences “layered in” around the familiar bits. These include:
- A bladder filled with a fire-retardant chemical; located close to the battery cells, typically between the cells and the top of the pack. It’s made from a flexible polymer, so it can be punctured when needed
- Two sets of blades; the first aimed at the bladder, ready to pierce it and release the fire-retardant chemical while the second targets specific points on the coolant inlet line, outlet line, or heat sinks to rupture them and release cooling foam directly where it’s needed
- Special coolant line sections; designed with small sealed apertures that closed off with a soft plug material that’s easy for the blades to pierce but strong enough to maintain pressure during normal operation
- Actuation devices tied to a controller; that push the blades into the bladder and coolant components when a thermal event is detected
Special coolant lines
The system relies on a suite of existing temperature sensors throughout the battery pack, and seems like a viable enough solution to a problem that, while rare, certainly exists — and which looms large over America’s Early Majority tech adopters.
As for me, I think Stellantis should focus on bringing more compelling products to market and stop looking for ways to blame the customer, market, and government for its inability to sell Jeep products that, apparently, have enough markup to cover nearly $30,000 in discounts to help dealers move their metal. I look forward to hearing about your take in the comments.
SOURCE | IMAGES: US Patent Office, via MoparInsiders.
If you’re considering going solar, it’s always a good idea to get quotes from a few installers. To make sure you find a trusted, reliable solar installer near you that offers competitive pricing, check out EnergySage, a free service that makes it easy for you to go solar. It has hundreds of pre-vetted solar installers competing for your business, ensuring you get high-quality solutions and save 20-30% compared to going it alone. Plus, it’s free to use, and you won’t get sales calls until you select an installer and share your phone number with them.
Your personalized solar quotes are easy to compare online and you’ll get access to unbiased Energy Advisors to help you every step of the way. Get started here.
FTC: We use income earning auto affiliate links. More.
It’s official. The all-electric pickup is dead, but Ford is promising the F-150 Lightning EREV will be “every bit as revolutionary” as it shakes up EV plans once again.
Ford reveals next-gen F-150 Lightning EREV
Ford confirmed production of the current F-150 Lightning has ended as part of its updated Ford+ plan, which the company revealed on Monday.
The changes come as part of a broader shift from larger EVs, like the Lightning, to smaller, more affordable models.
While Ford still plans to launch lower-cost EVs based on its Universal EV Platform, the company is expanding its hybrid and extended range electric vehicle (EREV) lineup. By 2030, Ford expects 50% of its global volume to be hybrids, EREVs, and EVs, up from 17% in 2025.
As part of its new plans, Ford said the next-generation F-150 Lightning will switch to an EREV powertrain. It will be assembled at the Rouge EV Center in Dearborn, Michigan, replacing the current all-electric pickup.
With production of the current-generation Lightning now concluded, Ford is sending workers from the Rouge EV Center to its Dearborn Truck Plant as it doubles down on gas and hybrids.
During its Q3 earnings call last month, Ford said the electric pickup would remain paused following a fire at Novelis’ plant in New York that disrupted aluminum supply.
The F-150 Lightning is a “groundbreaking” vehicle, according to Doug Field, Ford’s chief EV, digital, and design officer, that showed an electric pickup can be a great F-Series.
Field claims the “next-generation Lightning EREV is every bit as revolutionary.” It will still offer 100% electric power delivery, sub-5-second acceleration, an estimated combined range of 700+ miles, and it “tows like a locomotive.”
Ford also plans to replace its electric commercial van for North America with affordable gas- and hybrid-powered versions. It will be assembled at Ford’s Ohio Assembly Plant.
The move comes as part of Ford’s plans to launch five new affordable vehicles by the end of the decade, four of which will be assembled in the US. Ford also plans to offer gas, hybrid, and EREV options across nearly every vehicle in its lineup by then.
The first vehicle based on Ford’s new Universal EV Platform will be a midsize electric pickup, starting at around $30,000. It’s expected to be about the size of the Ranger or Maverick.
The news comes after SK On announced last week that it planned to end its joint venture with Ford to build EV batteries at three US gigafactories.
Ford is now planning to use the wholly owned EV battery plants in Kentucky and Michigan to launch a new battery energy storage business. The company plans to begin shipping BESS systems in 2027, with an annual capacity of 20 GWh.
“The operating reality has changed, and we are redeploying capital into higher-return growth opportunities: Ford Pro, our market-leading trucks and vans, hybrids, and high-margin opportunities like our new battery energy storage business,” CEO Jim Farley said on Monday.
The changes are designed to improve profitability and returns. Ford’s EV business, Model e, is now expected to reach profitability by 2029 with improvements in 2026.
Model e lost another $1.4 billion in Q3, bringing the total to $3.6 billion through September. Around $3 billion was due to its current EVs, while the other $600 million was spent on its next-gen models.
Although sales of the F-150 Lightning dropped 60.8% last month following the expiration of the $7,500 federal EV tax credit, Ford’s electric pickup remained the best-selling pickup in the US through September.
FTC: We use income earning auto affiliate links. More.
-
Sports2 years agoStory injured on diving stop, exits Red Sox game
-
Sports3 years ago‘Storybook stuff’: Inside the night Bryce Harper sent the Phillies to the World Series
-
Sports2 years agoGame 1 of WS least-watched in recorded history
-
Sports3 years agoButton battles heat exhaustion in NASCAR debut
-
Sports3 years agoMLB Rank 2023: Ranking baseball’s top 100 players
-
Sports4 years ago
Team Europe easily wins 4th straight Laver Cup
-
Environment3 years agoJapan and South Korea have a lot at stake in a free and open South China Sea
-
Environment1 year agoHere are the best electric bikes you can buy at every price level in October 2024