By John Q. Hosedrinker 
In a recent trial, a federal jury found Tesla partially liable for a 2019 crash involving its Autopilot system, awarding the plaintiffs $43 million in compensatory damages and $200 million in punitive damages. The jury determined that Tesla was one-third responsible for the fatal crash, which occurred when the driver and the Autopilot software failed to brake at an intersection. This verdict is a setback for the company, as they are attempting to convince the public and regulators that their self-driving technology is safe. Tesla plans to appeal the decision, maintaining that the driver was solely at fault.
Read the original article here
Tesla hit with $243 million in damages after a jury found its Autopilot feature contributed to a fatal crash. That’s a massive hit, especially considering the company’s recent financial performance. The judgment is nearly double their free cash flow from the most recent quarter. It’s the kind of sum that, if we scale it to Elon Musk’s personal wealth, would be like spending 25 cents. Considering he is worth over 400 billion dollars.
The implications are significant, especially for a company that has consistently pushed the boundaries of self-driving technology. The core of the case revolves around a crash in the Florida Keys six years ago. The jury concluded that Tesla shared some responsibility, finding the Autopilot system partially at fault, alongside the driver. The driver was determined to be two-thirds responsible, while Tesla received one-third of the blame.
The details of the crash are pretty striking. The driver was reaching for his cell phone at the time of the accident. He had his foot on the accelerator, overriding the system’s ability to stop for obstacles. Essentially, this means the driver was extremely distracted, leading to a collision that the Autopilot system, in its current form, couldn’t prevent. The jury found that the plaintiffs experienced pain and suffering totaling $129 million, though Tesla will only be required to pay a third of that, or $43 million in compensatory damages.
This outcome raises a lot of questions about the true autonomy of Tesla’s Autopilot. If the system can’t prevent crashes when the driver is distracted, how ‘autonomous’ is it really? On one hand, there’s the driver’s negligence: missing flashing lights, stop signs, and the potential to brake before the collision. It seems clear that the driver was primarily at fault, but Tesla also contributed to the accident.
The market’s reaction to this news is always interesting. Even though the stock might take a hit in the short term, people are convinced it’ll bounce back. However, for Tesla, and its CEO, this verdict is a major setback in their ongoing effort to convince the public, regulators, and investors that their self-driving software is safe.
It’s understandable why they are so focused on defending their technology, because the future of the automotive industry is at stake. Tesla’s defense often involves pointing out that the system disengages just before a crash, placing the responsibility entirely on the driver. This strategic move enables Tesla to shape crash data and portray its system as safer than it might be. However, this case highlights that Tesla made the hardware and wrote the software, and must now pay the price when it goes wrong.
Of course, many people have their own personal experiences with Tesla’s autopilot. There are anecdotes of the system being excellent but still requiring constant monitoring. The technology’s limitations and the need for the driver’s attention is a recurring theme. But there’s also criticism surrounding the claims made about the technology, with claims that the name “Autopilot” itself is misleading.
Tesla is planning to appeal, arguing about legal errors and irregularities during the trial. However, the company’s response, particularly the use of the term “beta test” for a system used on public roads, is very revealing. This isn’t just about the financial implications of the ruling; it’s a question of how much blame a company should bear when its software directly contributes to a death. This is especially true given that the driver was, by all accounts, primarily responsible for the crash.
In a system where the car failed, and where the driver was overwhelmingly responsible, this feels like a lot of money. Tesla’s self-driving technology has the potential to revolutionize transportation and save lives, but it won’t happen if the cost of liability is too high. The conversation also extends to the broader implications for the self-driving vehicle industry.
The question becomes, how much responsibility should be shouldered when the technology is still evolving? It’s a complex issue, as this verdict shows. The implications ripple across the automotive industry and impact public perceptions of safety, technological progress, and corporate accountability.