2014 Tesla Model S on 2040-cars

Auto blog

FTC officials question 'bad policy' that stops Tesla's direct sales

It looks like Elon Musk has a new group of allies over at the Federal Trade Commission. Writing on the FTC blog, three high-level FTC officials came out against the "protectionist" network of laws in the US that govern automotive dealers and prevent, in some cases, Tesla Motors from selling its cars directly to customers. They called the rules, "bad policy for a number of reasons." They write: [The legal] protections expanded until in many states they included outright bans on the sale of new cars by anyone other than a dealer-specifically, an auto manufacturer. Instead of "protecting," these state laws became "protectionist," perpetuating one way of selling cars-the independent car dealer. The post is not a call to arms, but more of a position statement co-authored by Andy Gavil (director of the Office of Policy Planning), Debbie Feinstein (director of the Bureau of Competition), and Marty Gaynor (director of the Bureau of Economics). "The collective [cost] impact of [the state-by-state battles] is one of the major concerns here. [Tesla is] just trying to sell their cars" – Andy Gavin Gavil told AutoblogGreen that the main goal was to bring attention to the issue, which the post has certainly done. There are so many of state fights going on, he said, that this was a way to reach a lot of people at once. "We've been watching this for months," he said. "It's very clearly a state-by-state battle. We are concerned about Tesla litigating state-by-state. The collective [cost] impact of that is one of the major concerns here. They're just trying to sell their cars. The way the industry is reacting shows that it's about more than that." Gavil wouldn't go so far as to say that there should be new national rules – it's up to Congress to do that, he said - but he has also been looking at the taxi industry and the upstarts like Lyft and Uber. The competition angle sometimes doesn't get the attention it deserves, he said. "If there's a more open debate about it, that can only be a good thing." One of the groups opposed to Tesla's direct sales is the National Automobile Dealers Association (NADA), which represents 16,000 new car and truck dealerships with about 32,000 domestic and international franchises.

NY Gov. Cuomo in favor of revived anti-Tesla store legislation

When we last left the New York auto dealers and their fight against Tesla Motors, there scene was an uneasy ceasefire. The New York State Assembly and its backers from the Greater New York Automobile Dealers Association said last summer that they would allow the three currently operating Tesla stores to continue operating but would pick up the issue again when the legislature reconvened in early 2014. Well, guess what? That time has come a new bill is being promoted that tries once again to stop the California automaker from selling its electric vehicles in its non-traditional way. The dealers say the bill doesn't target EV companies unfairly. Capital New York says representatives of the state's dealers have met with Governor Andrew Cuomo about the new bill and he apparently said he would sign it if it reaches his desk. The dealers say the bill doesn't target EV companies unfairly and just asks them to play by the same rules as everyone else, which means selling cars through traditional dealerships. Tesla says that traditional dealerships don't work for EVs and currently sells its Model S out of small stores in places like shopping malls. Actor Mark Ruffalo (best known as the Hulk in the recent Avengers movie) tweeted his support, saying that EVs are good for New York and that what the bill is trying to do is akin to stopping Apple from selling its products directly to customers. He also asked his many, many Twitter followers to call and oppose the bills. Tesla is fighting against similar laws and proposals in many other states, including Texas and Ohio. We have asked Tesla for a comment on the new New York legislation and will update this post if we hear back.

Tesla Model S owners hack their cars, find Ubuntu

There are interesting subsets within the group of people that composes Tesla Model S owners. They include celebrities, Drudge Report-reading conservatives, and, more relevant to this post, tech-savvy geeks. Now, give that last bunch an electric car with an easily-exposed Ethernet connecter and they will try to plug into it and snoop around. Don't believe us? Well, several have already admitted to giving it a try on this thread over at the Tesla Motors Club forum. After wiring into the car's communications system, forum user "nlc" was able to find a number of ports and tap into the data flowing to the center console and navigation screens. Others soon joined in the fun and amongst the slightly esoteric bits of information the "hackers" eventually discovered was that the sub-system runs on a version of Ubuntu operating system, which is a Linux variant. While one person did manage to use the discoveries to get Firefox to display on the center console touchscreen (sideways), it doesn't seem likely anyone will be able to do more invasive things with the Ethernet entry point like, for example, transform an early 40-kWh Model S into a 60-kWh version (you can't hack extra batteries). For those who want to customize the big 17-inch display, or at least get it to play video, it seems they'll be better off waiting until Tesla is ready to release the software development kit (SDK) it has promised for third-party app builders. For its part, the California automaker isn't particularly thrilled to have its customers digging beneath the dash. Through its service center, it has already contacted the original Ethernet exploiter to let him know they were aware of his actions and that such activity could lead to a voiding of the warranty. Indeed, the Motor Vehicle Purchase Agreement (MVPA) which buyers sign does contain a clause which reads, in part, You may not, or may not attempt to, reverse engineer, disassemble, decompile, tamper with or engage in any similar activity in respect of a Tesla Vehicle, nor may you permit any third party to do so, save only to the extent permitted by applicable law. It could be argued that this light-handed geekery doesn't quite measure up to the legal extent permitted, but we know if we owned a car that costs as much as $100,000, we wouldn't be risking it. Not when there are salvage-titled cars out there on which to practice the black arts.