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.
Illinois is expanding its EV charging network with $18.4 million in federal grants that were restored after being unlawfully frozen by the Trump administration. The grants come from the second round of the National Electric Vehicle Infrastructure (NEVI) program, which supports Illinois’s goal of registering 1 million EVs by 2030.
Governor JB Pritzker, Attorney General Kwame Raoul, and the Illinois Department of Transportation (IDOT) announced Wednesday that the money will fund 25 new fast charging stations along interstate corridors.
Each new station will include at least four DC fast charging ports, which can top up an EV from empty in under 30 minutes. In total, the projects will add 167 new charging ports across the state.
Illinois is slated to receive $148 million in NEVI funds through the federal Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act. Last year, the first round of awards sent $25.3 million to 37 charging station projects. With this new round, IDOT has awarded $43.8 million so far, covering 62 projects and 349 charging ports.
Pritzker said, “I’m thankful for the quick action of our attorney general in the fight to restore these funds that President Trump was unlawfully withholding. With these resources rightfully coming back to Illinois, I look forward to taking another step forward in our continued efforts to expand EV infrastructure and boost local economies across Illinois.”
In May, Illinois Attorney General Kwame Raoul joined 16 other attorneys general in suing the Federal Highway Administration for withholding the remainder of the appropriated funds. A judge in June ordered the administration to release funding appropriated to Illinois and 13 other states. Raoul said, “I am pleased that our coalition’s work has resulted in this money finally reaching Illinois, which ultimately boosts our state’s economy.”
Illinois EPA Director James Jennings noted that these NEVI-funded stations will complement the more than 450 charging stations already supported by the state. “Together, state agencies are working to offer EV drivers multiple charging options at numerous locations, ensuring accessible and convenient travel throughout Illinois.”
The 25 projects selected were chosen through a competitive process last fall. IDOT says the next round of NEVI funding applications will open in late 2025.
Read more: The biggest solar farm east of the Mississippi is now powering Chicago
The 30% federal solar tax credit is ending this year. If you’ve ever considered going solar, now’s the time to act. 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.
A Rivian owner and EV enthusiast recently shared images of a purple R1S Quad out in public with manufacturer plates. Could it be a new exterior color Rivian will offer customers, or is this just a rare shade applied to a one-off test vehicle? Regardless of its future, a purple Rivian is already garnering plenty of comments from the online community.
Rivian owner shares images of a purple R1S Quad
Hilbert (@Hilbe) shared the three images above on X, with the caption, “What do you think Rivian will name this color? Wrong answers only.” The answers are funny, and many are precisely what you probably imagined.
If you immediately thought Grimace from McDonald’s lore, so did I and several commenters to Hilbert’s post. Upon doing some digging, I found that images of this exact purple Rivian were actually leaked eight months ago, making their way through the Rivian community on Reddit. See below:
As you can see from the second image above, this Quad Motor R1S is donning manufacturer plates, meaning this isn’t a custom paint job from a personal owner, but a bona fide model still owned and operated by Rivian.
Furthermore, those plates are the same in multiple sightings, hinting that there is currently only one purple Rivian R1S Quad out in the world (at least on public roads).
Whether this is just a unique color the paint shop experimented with on a one-of-a-kind test vehicle or could become an actual option in the Gear Shop remains unclear at this time, although we did reach out to a representative for Rivian for more details and received an expected response:
We have nothing to add. As you know, we don’t comment on any speculation.
They didn’t say that purple was off the table (or the configurator!)
Rivian’s R1S and R1T configurator could use purple or any other unique exterior color options, as its boldest currently available option is “Rivian Blue.” Be sure to let us know what you think about a purple Rivian in the comments, much like X users did for Chris Hilbert, of which I read through all 130+ and have a few to highlight below.
I will stick to the PG responses and leave out anything related to an eggplant emoji and how that may have anything to do with any fictional purple characters (you sick puppies). Here we go:
- “Gross Purple”
- “Barney”
- “Purple Rain”
- “Plum Crazy”
- “Thanos Purple”
- “Violet Beauregarde”
- “Purivian”
- “Electric Eggplant”
- “Grape Ape”
- “Amethyst Twilight”
- “Afternoon Purple IV”
- “Grape Escape”
- and last but not least… “Poiple.”
What would you call this shade? Should Rivian bring purple to the Gear Shop configurator? Let us know in the comments below. As a Rivian owner, I highly recommend doing a test drive to see what this brand is about. Afterward, email me and let me know what you thought of your ride. I’m interested to hear about it!
FTC: We use income earning auto affiliate links. More.
The US virtual power plant (VPP) market is growing fast, with 37.5 gigawatts of behind-the-meter flexible capacity now online, according to a new Wood Mackenzie report. VPPs connect small energy systems and smart devices into a single network managed by an energy company or utility. That can include residential solar panels, battery storage, EVs, and smart thermostats. When the grid needs help during peak demand or emergencies, they can be tapped – and you get paid for participating.
Wood Mackenzie’s “2025 North America Virtual Power Plant Market” report shows that the market is expanding more broadly than deeply. The number of company deployments, unique buyers (offtakers), and market and utility programs each grew by more than 33% in the past year. But total capacity grew at a slower pace – just under 14%. “Utility program caps, capacity accreditation reforms, and market barriers have prevented capacity from growing as fast as market activity,” said Ben Hertz-Shargel, global head of grid edge at Wood Mackenzie.
Residential VPP customers are gaining ground
Residential customers are making a bigger dent in wholesale market capacity, increasing their share to 10.2% from 8.8% in 2024. But small customers still face roadblocks, mainly due to limits on data access for enrollment and market settlement.
Battery storage and EVs are also playing a bigger role. Deployments that include batteries or EVs now account for 61% as many as those that include smart thermostats, which have long dominated VPP programs.
Leading states and markets
California, Texas, New York, and Massachusetts are leading the pack, making up 37% of all VPP deployments. In wholesale markets, PJM (which manages the electric grid for 13 states and DC) and ERCOT (the Texas grid), both home to massive data center commitments, also have the highest disclosed VPP offtake capacity. “While data centers are the source of new load, there’s an enormous opportunity to tap VPPs as the new source of grid flexibility,” Hertz-Shargel said.
Offtake growth and new business models
The top 25 VPP offtakers each procured more than 100 megawatts this year. Over half of all offtakers expanded their deployments by at least 30% compared to last year. That’s fueling the rise of a new “independent distributed power producer” model, where companies aim to use grid service revenue and energy arbitrage to finance third-party-owned storage for electricity retailers.
Policy pushback
Not everyone is on board with how utilities are approaching distributed energy resources (DERs). Many VPP aggregators and software providers oppose utilities putting DERs into their rate base under the Distributed Capacity Procurement model.* “This model is seen as limiting access of private capital and aggregators from the DER market, rather than leveraging customer and third-party-owned resources,” Hertz-Shargel explained. He added that most wholesale market experts believe FERC Order 2222 was a missed opportunity and won’t significantly improve market access.
*I really like this model, personally. I leased two Tesla Powerwalls under Green Mountain Power’s Lease Energy Storage program in Vermont for $55 a month, and it’s an excellent VPP program that’s grown much more rapidly than other models, such as bring-your-own batteries.
Read more: California’s grid gets a record power assist from a 100k home battery fleet
The 30% federal solar tax credit is ending this year. If you’ve ever considered going solar, now’s the time to act. 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.
-
Sports3 years ago‘Storybook stuff’: Inside the night Bryce Harper sent the Phillies to the World Series
-
Sports1 year agoStory injured on diving stop, exits Red Sox game
-
Sports2 years agoGame 1 of WS least-watched in recorded history
-
Sports2 years agoButton battles heat exhaustion in NASCAR debut
-
Sports2 years agoMLB Rank 2023: Ranking baseball’s top 100 players
-
Sports4 years ago
Team Europe easily wins 4th straight Laver Cup
-
Environment2 years agoJapan and South Korea have a lot at stake in a free and open South China Sea
-
Environment12 months agoHere are the best electric bikes you can buy at every price level in October 2024