Tesla's High-Tech Lawsuits in Silicon Valley War 79
An anonymous reader writes "After pressing charges against its chief competitor in the race for the world's first production electric sports car that we broke down here recently, Tesla Motors seems to be shifting from the high-tech company re-writing Detroit's script to another Silicon Valley startup trying to sniff out the competition. So says Engadget's legal analyst in an in-depth column breaking down the legal ramifications. From the article: "This could upset the whole race for major production of an electric car in the U.S., which may be the main result of this whole drama. If anything, that's a win for Tesla. Let's just hope the company that set out to upend the automotive industry achieves its competitive goals in the lab and in the marketplace — and keeps its future fights out of the courtroom.""
What's the problem? (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Anyways... tesla builds electrics cars that out race porsches how could you think it wouldnt be popular?
Re: (Score:2)
Fast electric cars is nothing special. hell it's EASIER to make a fast electric car. Making one that can go 300 miles between charges, that's hard.
Re: (Score:2)
Exactly. The 0-60 time of any car is the last thing I consider. I need to go from 0-60 *once* in any trip I make. How well it copes with being driven flat out for 300 miles is a far more pressing concern.
I'll start looking at electric cars when they can produce one that takes no more than 60 quid to charge from fully flat, can carry four or five large adults
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Exactly. The 0-60 time of any car is the last thing I consider. I need to go from 0-60 *once* in any trip I make. How well it copes with being driven flat out for 300 miles is a far more pressing concern.
I'll start looking at electric cars when they can produce one that takes no more than 60 quid to charge from fully flat, can carry four or five large adults plus their luggage plus at least 200kg of equipment, and can average no less than 100mph for 350 miles on a charge. That would be getting close to being able to replace my ordinary car, assuming it's actually nice to drive and doesn't give me a numb backside.
Chrysler just announced such a car at the Detroit Auto Show (aired on TV a few days ago) - up to 250 miles on a charge, all electric, carries 4 plus luggage. They also claim it will be very inexpensive (normal car price for a car of it's class).
Now, if it IS real, I see it as something finally pushing other car manufacturers to follow suit. I'd see such a product forcing them to - IF (even though they announced a planned release year) it ever sees the light of day (which such "concept cars" never seem to
Re: (Score:2)
nobody will buy a $190,000 electric sedan that the Gas c
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
As for the amount of batteries. Let's go with something like the Aptera at 200Wh/mi. Cars like the Aptera are only 80Wh/mi, but we'll go with 200. That's 70kWh. For the pack
Re: (Score:2)
No, they have worse power density. They have better *energy* density.
anyways, the test electric bike we built with those batteries went 50 miles at 35mph and weighed only 15 pounds more than a standard bike. It rocked, and when you kicked in the batteries only on hills you could go for a really long distance.
Yeah, but have you seen what bikes like the Killac
Re: (Score:2)
Actually, there are plenty of methods of using one electric motor coupled to the drive train/shafts. I am not sure why you think it would require 4.
But regardless, there is still the battery issue - which I also will not touch - since someone else covered that nicely.
If you take into account ONE motor (as their concept car has, IIRC), and the battery options Rei noted, then you come out with a car that costs about as much (or slightly more) than Chrysler's current offerings. Do the math off that basis..
Re: (Score:2)
Anyways if those really are your needs, right now, your best choice is a PHEV like the Volt. I don't know how much a quid is or how much your power costs, but car-sized EVs are usually 200Wh/mi or less. So, for something like the Tesla, a kilowatt hour will take you about five miles.
Re: (Score:2)
Lucky bastard. ...red lights... stop signs... traffic... school buses...
Re: (Score:1)
Exactly. The 0-60 time of any car is the last thing I consider. I need to go from 0-60 *once* in any trip I make. How well it copes with being driven flat out for 300 miles is a far more pressing concern.
I'll start looking at electric cars when they can produce one that takes no more than 60 quid to charge from fully flat, can carry four or five large adults plus their luggage plus at least 200kg of equipment, and can average no less than 100mph for 350 miles on a charge. That would be getting close to being able to replace my ordinary car, assuming it's actually nice to drive and doesn't give me a numb backside.
Your requirements are absurd. To summarize, a feasible replacement car for you must:
- take no more than 60 quid to charge (or fuel)
- carry 4 or 5 large adults + luggage + 200kg of equipment
- reliably handle being driven for 3 hours at 100mph (average speed) on a single trip
From these specifications I surmise your current "ordinary car" is substantially bigger, more powerful and more fuel efficient than any Range Rover (or equivalent).
Every car, electric or otherwise, is a compromise in Speed, Carrying Capa
Re: (Score:2)
Not really. My current car is a 1981 Citroen CX Break. It *is* bigger than a Range Rover, or at least about six inches longer (much lower though). Having an engine a little bigger thann half the size (2400cc) and a far better drag coefficient (the name "CX" comes from the French term for Cd, the coefficient of drag) does the rest. Because it
Re: (Score:2)
There are two types of ways to protect information on a piece of paper. You can not let anyone see it (trade secret) or let everyone see it but no one copy it (copyright). When someone violates a trade secret, there was an actual loss. Before, they had a secret. After, that secret is gone. There is something that can be identified that belonged to them before that wasn't there after. But you
Re: (Score:2)
Not a litigious person but, (Score:2, Insightful)
Re: (Score:1, Informative)
Re: (Score:1, Insightful)
Re: (Score:1, Informative)
Re: (Score:1)
Come on... (Score:1, Insightful)
SNUFF! The cliche is "snuff out the competition," as in to extinguish a candle.
Re: (Score:2)
A "cliche" is a demeaning way to refer to a phrase that you think is hokey, dated, or just shouldn't be part of the language. "snuff out" is embedded enough that you've got as much hope of panning it as "think outside the box", "in the nick of time", or, the best example of linguistic snobbery, "ain't".
Not quit accurate. (Score:5, Informative)
Almost certainly, Fisker will have to pay back all the money that they obtained from Tesla. The real question is, can Tesla block Fisker's new car company?
The true loser on this will be customers and the world. In a way, for Tesla/Spacex to be successful, they need to move with speed. Spacex has contractual obligations to meet, and tesla will have to compete against major car companies in about 2-3 years. This lawsuit is taking Musk away from Tesla core AND Spacex. Both of these companies are innovative and are pushing the industry forward. But if he gets bogged down in court, they will stall. It would be far better for Tesla/Spacex, if Musk settles with Fisker quickly and moves on. In addition, the more companies that are doing EV, or even REV, the better it is.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Anyways, just wanted to say I enjoyed your post. Don't have mod points, but it was quite insightful.
Re: (Score:1)
The Altair computer comes to mind. They decided to focus on suing competitors rather than move forward with technology. Getting bogged down in court, they folded just when the market for micros exploded in the late 70's.
Re: (Score:2)
Developing one-off prototypes is easy compared to developing a refined vehicle that will meet consumer demands, all government regulations, can be manufactured efficiently and be built at a competitive price. If is was easy as you make it out to be, why is it that no one has done it yet?
Plenty have: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Former_production_electric_vehicles [wikipedia.org]
There is nothing new that needs inventing here. Only better batteries, which may have arrived.
Re: (Score:2)
Thankfully, the combination of interest in EVs and advancing tech see
Re: (Score:2)
ABS brakes don't use engine power; they just interface with the existing hydraulic brakes, and release hydraulic pressure to individual wheels as necessary. This has nothing to do with the engine.
What you may be thinking o
Hard to call (Score:5, Informative)
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
7/8 of a million just doesn't seem like a lot of money for what they were hired to do, I suspect that if the contracts had real NDA's and non-compete clauses the costs would have been substantially more. Even more likely the "trade secret" was that there were no trade secrets and any joe snuffy can
Plug in hybrids not electric only (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
Electric for haul trucks, well, idealy you'd want (electric) trains for transporting heavier things.
Re:Plug in hybrids not electric only (Score:5, Insightful)
People who aren't automotive engineers always trivialize the implementation and think it's a great idea. Actual vehicle engineers realize that in many ways a series hybrid is the worst of both worlds: more complicated than an EV and a gas car combined, less efficient than an EV for short-range driving (because of the extra weight), and less efficient than a parallel hybrid (or even a normal gas car!) on long trips.
Yeah, I realize you said you wanted the generator to be removeable, but that's another fantasy of armchair engineers. Yes, it's possible to engineer your complicated system, but it will add unacceptable weight and cost. At least you didn't say you wanted a removeable (swappable) battery.
Look, we need electric vehicles for short range -- several standard deviations of our vehicular transit. Some applications and some drivers need longer range. The hybridization doesn't have to be in the vehicle -- it can be in the fleet. Gas cars will be around for decades, so you can borrow/rent/own a second car if/when you really need it.
I don't see how electric will work very well for long haul trucks though.
They're called railroads. Many countries use electrified rail for hauling freight. It's the only option that's long-term sustainable. The US is screwed in that respect -- a pathetic rail system and approximately none of it electrified.
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Plug in hybrids not electric only (Score:4, Informative)
Re: (Score:1)
Diesel-electric !- series hybrid (Score:2)
It is also not that efficient
Re: (Score:2)
A car like Tesla is not using tens of volts. IIRC it using something like 400V. Each cell might only be 2.5V, but even a kid knows how to connect cells in series to get any voltage.
Re: (Score:2)
but in terms of efficiency nothing beats a low speed direct drive engine.
The big advantage of a Diesel-electric drive is that the engine speed is not a proportion of wheel speed. If you always drive on level roads, with your cruise control set at 60 MPH, and never stop, you are more efficient with a mechanical drive. Once you vary speed and load you have a big advantage with an electric drive because speed and load can be varied independently. This advantage usually outweighs the losses of the electric transmission.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
People who aren't automotive engineers always trivialize the implementation and think it's a great idea. Actual vehicle engineers realize that in many ways a series hybrid is the worst of both worlds: more complicated than an EV and a gas car combined, less efficient than an EV for short-range driving (because of the extra weight), and less efficient than a parallel hybrid (or even a normal gas car!) on long trips.
Somehow I think you're ignoring some important considerations, such as "gasoline generator runs at maximum efficiency", "no need to combine drive trains", "electric motors built with fewer moving parts", etc.
Considering that a "serial hybrid" is how diesel freight trains and M1-A1 tanks work, I'm less than convinced of your random dismissal of their potential. Especially with GM pushing exactly that concept as their next fuel design.
Yeah, I realize you said you wanted the generator to be removeable, but that's another fantasy of armchair engineers. Yes, it's possible to engineer your complicated system, but it will add unacceptable weight and cost. At least you didn't say you wanted a removeable (swappable) battery.
Wow. If only there was some way, some magical way that we could (1) sta
Re:Plug in hybrids not electric only (Score:4, Informative)
Neither locomotives nor the tanks you mention use any type of electrical storage. Rather, the only reason for the the hybrid electric system in those vehicles is to replace what would otherwise be a very complicated ultra-high-torque transmission.
I'm not sure what your point is; that's what gas cars are for. And driving across the country is, by and large, stupid, and it represents an astronomically small fraction of what we do with cars. But for those who want to do it, gas cars will be around for decades. (But no fair whining about fuel prices!)
mod parent up! (Score:2)
The Mitsubishi electric vehicle, on the other hand, is being to look like not being vaporware and I already want one.
Re: (Score:2)
Neither locomotives nor the tanks you mention use any type of electrical storage. Rather, the only reason for the the hybrid electric system in those vehicles is to replace what would otherwise be a very complicated ultra-high-torque transmission.
That might be true, but it is also true that it can not be significantly more inefficient than the alternatives. Fuel cost is a major cost in operating a train, and inefficient engines would not be able to compete.
The loss from converting motion to electric and back again, is made up by being able to run the engine at optimal load and RPM.
You can also not ignore that all other (mechanical) transmissions have losses. There is no such thing as a lossless transmission.
Re: (Score:2)
One thing about the people of the USA. We *Love* our high performance gas burning cars, trucks, and SUVs. Once fuel prices reach those levels, expect a huge black market for fuel and massive amounts of thievery..tank-truck hijackings, theft from gas station holding tanks, br
Re: (Score:2)
The US is screwed in that respect -- a pathetic rail system and approximately none of it electrified.
I'm not sure where people get the idea that the US has a pathetic railroad system - there's over 140,000 miles of track currently in freight operation. Rail accounts for 40% of all freight-ton miles, more than any other mode of freight transport. The tonnage hauled per year has been increasing steadily over the past 15 years. Personally, I'd call the US rail system our hidden jewel.
Re: (Score:2)
sniff? (Score:2)
"Sniffing" out the competition would mean Tesla is trying to figure out who their competition is. I have a feeling that the intended word should be "snuffing" out the competition, which would mean Tesla is being anti-competitive, which seems to be what the article is talking about.
Familiar situation (Score:5, Interesting)
1. Stop paying your bills
2. Get into a big court case that effectively ties you up until your development has a chance to deliver.
3. Go to potential investors and say "Well, we would have delivered on time if it weren't for our competitors cheating. We're in court with them now. As soon as the court case finishes we'll get a good chunk of cash *and* we'll be in full production.
As wacky as it sounds, it's better than saying "Well, we didn't quite meet the sales window, but we're hoping you'll give us more money so that we can keep working..."
I'm not saying this is what is happening. It's looks very similar to what I've seen on a couple of occasions.
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
It's divorce-type litigation (Score:1)
It's one of those stupid divorce-type business litigations, where someone involved with the project went off to do one of their own. It's a vague trade secret case. But the "secrets" are available to anyone who buys one and takes it apart. That, incidentally, is normal practice in the auto industry; all the big automakers buy each other's new models and disassemble them.
There's not really much innovation in the Tesla; it's a bunch of laptop batteries, an electric drivetrain, and liquid cooling on the b
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
First, when someone sinks millions or billions of dollars into R&D, and than patents the resulting technology, you don't get the pleasure of buying the end product, reverse engineering it, and then making/selling said products yourself for pennies on the dollar. If patented, it's illegal, and personally I think people who think that's OK to do the above should be dragged out back for a "conversation".
Second, Tesla Motors (or more speci
don't blame the victim (Score:2)
I am especially hopeful that the Automotive X Prize [progressiv...xprize.org] will drive this industry forward - and on that count, don't you think it's interesting that Tesla is an official contestant, but Fisker is NOT? See X Prize Cars [xprizecars.com] for more
Tesla's High-Tech Lawsuits in Silicon Valley War (Score:1)
At Least.. (Score:2)
Yet.
Cheers!
Strat
Tesla needs to ship a product (Score:2)
I go by the Tesla dealership site in Menlo Park regularly, and it's still not open. Not even close. Their blog claims the car "began regular production" on March 17th, but they're not actually delivering cars.
They may still be struggling with the fragile transmission problem and the motor cooling problem.
Re: (Score:1)
It's starting to look like they are heading down the litigation route that SCO was going. Hopefully they can actually deliver the product and not just sue people for IP.
Magna has already filed as suit against Tesla in regards to the transmissions used in their cars, so it should get interesting soon.
Re: (Score:1)
Somebody must be getting them.
Re: (Score:2)
Tesla shipping RSN (Score:2)
The cars are being assembled, albeit at a very slow pace, and some of them I believe should already on the boat from England. Tesla's approach seems to be: assemble four or five cars and then put them on a ship in one lot. Then it takes a few weeks to cross The Pond.
C
It's because... (Score:2)
All they've done is turn out a couple of one-off prototypes that work *sometimes* but mysteriously don't seem to be usable when anyone with a camera and half an ounce of engineering nouse is around.
Funny that.
Be careful about the Death Rays... (Score:1)