Tesla Denies California Sales Suspension Amidst 'Autopilot' Terminology Dispute

Tesla has officially refuted reports suggesting a 30-day sales suspension in California. The controversy stems from a penalty issued by the state's Department of Motor Vehicles (DMV) following a judge's ruling that the company "misled consumers about its driver-assistance technology." While the DMV initially considered a 90-day "on ice" period for Tesla to comply, the electric vehicle manufacturer has confirmed that sales operations in the state will proceed without interruption.

Key Takeaways

• Tesla denies reports of a sales suspension in California.

• The dispute centers on the use of the term "Autopilot" and "Full Self-Driving.

• The California DMV had considered a penalty but put it on hold for compliance.

• Tesla maintains its sales in California will continue uninterrupted.

The 'Autopilot' Controversy

The situation arose after a judge ruled that Tesla had misled consumers regarding its driver-assistance features, specifically the use of the term "Autopilot." The California DMV reportedly considered imposing a penalty, which would have involved a 90-day suspension to allow Tesla time to "come into compliance." However, Tesla has publicly stated that this was a "consumer protection" order related to terminology, emphasizing that no customers had reported issues with the technology itself.

Tesla's Response and Continued Operations

In response to the reports, Tesla North America posted on X (formerly Twitter) on Tuesday evening, stating, "This was a ‘consumer protection’ order about the use of the term ‘Autopilot’ in a case where not one single customer came forward to say there’s a problem. Sales in California will continue uninterrupted."

Community Reaction and Historical Context

The news sparked considerable reaction within the Tesla community, with some expressing frustration and suggesting the company should consider relocating its operations from California. Tesla has been using terms like "Autopilot" and "Full Self-Driving" for years. Earlier this year, the company added "(Supervised)" to the end of its FSD suite, potentially as a preemptive measure against such disputes. The naming of these features has faced scrutiny at both state and federal levels, with officials questioning the potentially "deceptive" nature of the terminology.