In another headache for Teslaits CEO Elon Musk has been ordered by a California judge to testify under oath regarding a statement he made concerning autopilot.
Reuters Tesla reportedly objected to the request in court filings, claiming that Musk could not recall the details of the statements he allegedly made.
In addition, the company cited an unusual reason for its CEO not to request a hearing.
“Like many public figures, [Musk] was the subject of numerous ‘deepfake’ videos and recordings purporting to show him saying and doing things he never actually said or did,” the company said.
The lawsuit was filed by Walter Huang’s family in Santa Clara Superior Court.
Mr. Huang, an Apple engineer, died in a car crash in 2018 and the family argued that Tesla’s Autopilot driving software was faulty.
Tesla said its system was not at fault and Mr. Huang ignored the vehicle’s warnings and was playing a game on his phone before the collision.
Judge Evette Pennypacker’s ruling is tentative, with a hearing set for the weekend to determine whether Musk will have to sit through the three-hour trial.
She calls Tesla’s arguments troubling.
“Their position is that because Mr. Musk is well known and may have been the target of deeper spoofs, his public statements are immune,” Judge Pennypacker wrote. .
She added that such arguments would allow Musk and other celebrities to “avoid taking ownership of what they’ve actually said and done.”
Reuters Musk will be asked about a specific 2016 statement cited by the plaintiffs.
“At this point, Model S and Model X can drive autonomously with greater safety than humans. Right now,” Musk allegedly said.
The plaintiffs also cited a 2016 promotional video that said: “The person in the driver’s seat was only there for legal reasons. He did nothing. Self-driving cars.”
At the time of the video’s release, Musk also tweeted, “Tesla drives itself (without human intervention) through urban streets to highways and then finds a parking spot.”
While the driver maintains a light touch on the steering wheel, the vehicle performs all steering operations, including steering, braking and acceleration.
A Tesla engineer recently testified under oath “The purpose of the video is not to accurately depict what is available to customers in 2016,” with the car loaded with 3D maps for a predetermined route.
Instead, the aim was to “describe what could be integrated into the system,” said Ashok Elluswamy, then a senior engineer on the Tesla Autopilot program.
Autopilot and Full Self-Driving Level 2 autopilot features have been making headlines lately.
The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, a US regulator, has two active investigations underway into the system, one of which is at the technical analysis stage. and is looking into collisions with stationary emergency vehicles, while the other investigation is looking at virtual brake reports.
The agency confirmed it was investigating the 17th fatal crash involving Autopilot, after a Model S collided with a parked fire truck in Contra Costa County, California in February.
Shareholders also recently filed a lawsuit against Tesla in federal court in San Francisco, alleging that they were misled by the company with false and misleading claims about the technology “creating a risk of accidents and serious injury”.
Tesla is also said to be the subject of an investigation by the US Department of Justice, which is said to be examining whether Tesla misled consumers, investors and regulators by making statements There is no basis for the capabilities of driver assistance technology.
In a pardon for Tesla, the California jury see benefits for Tesla earlier this month in a case involving its Autopilot system.
The jury rejected the claim by plaintiff, Justine Hsu, that her Tesla Model S autopilot failed to operate safely and gave her no damage.
It is believed to be the first trial involving an accident in which Autopilot is operating, and legal experts say that while the ruling is not binding in other cases, it could help determine strategy of the other plaintiffs’ legal groups.
The jurors said they believe distracted driver was the cause, and Tesla has explicitly warned that its Level 2 system is not driverless technology.
THAN: Poor culture at Tesla leads to ‘unsafe’ technology – report
THAN: California grand jury against plaintiff in Tesla Autopilot case
THAN: Tesla is under criminal investigation in the US for claiming to be self-driving – reports
THAN: Tesla engineer admits 2016 self-driving video was staged
THAN: Tesla cars are not ready to be approved as fully automatic
THAN: Teslas temporarily lose functionality when the sensors are removed
THAN: Class action lawsuit brought against Tesla’s Autopilot, Full Self-Driver claims
