cross-posted from: https://lemmus.org/post/15293533
Article: Tesla Allegedly Disables Rapper’s Cybertruck After Song Critique.
I don’t really care if this is real or not, or if the song sucks, or if it’s a banger, or if it never existed.
None of that is what’s concerning.
The concerning thing for me is that, even if it’s fake, everyone just kinda accepting that Tesla can, and would, remotely deactivate a vehicle, when it may be in motion, and may be in a dangerous or otherwise hazardous location where losing control could mean that people die…
And everyone is just like “that’s totally something they would do! Lol”… What?
I could give a fuck less if they deactivate his… Idk, heated seat subscription, or autopilot, or (insert stupid feature here). But making it so the vehicle can’t drive? For a car you paid money to “own”?
What the actual fuck everyone?
Boycott. That’s all that I can say. … Not that I wasn’t already planning on doing that…
And everyone is just like “that’s totally something they would do! Lol”… What?
Keep in mind pretty much everyone on this platform already hates Tesla and does not nor would they own a Tesla vehicle. There’s also a certain ‘you got what you deserve by buying that’ kind of attitude towards Tesla owners.
This is behaviour we expect from this shit company and it doesn’t directly effect any of us commenting on it. We just get to point and laugh (for now).
The discussion might be a little different if it was a less expected brand like IKD, Audi. But who’s to say for sure; there’s been a lot of ‘cattle’ behaviour lately.
I accidentally ended on threads.net trying to find lyrics to this song and failed. Didn’t sound like he was dissing the car though. Also, the letter may be fake because the signature doesn’t match LinkedIn.
The song is basically hyping how he’s so rich he’s got a Cybertruck.
From the king of “free speech.” 🙄
The fascist dictator at the helm remotely bricking customers $100k private vehicles will surely improve the brands image and sales performance!
In any sane world that would be a trivial lawsuit to win
doubtful since a case would be in texas with the judge who owns tesla shares
That’s why they said sane
Don’t feel bad for dumbasses who bought Nazi cars.
Not a Tesla fan, but this smells like manufactured controversy. The person who allegedly signed the letter has never held that position at Tesla, according to their linkedin
its most likely a lawyer on retainer
It’s most likely a dumb PR stunt from the rapper. At least a similar message displayed on the car screen was easily forged by a hackernews commenter, can’t imagine why a letter like this (with old title) wouldn’t be. We live in the age of LLMs.
Totally reasonable. I wish every electronic device would brick itself if it heard you talking shit about it. People are too rude to toasters.
Your wish would destroy the printers market
HP are already doing that with the policy on bootleg ink and toner.
HP is a tax on people who don’t know about Brother
Cannot come quick enough.
I’m pretty sure my older hp printer heard me talking vaguely about my 3d printer that was being a pain and went on strike. “Printing Head not found”
Theyre bricking themselves for free
“Alright Sparky, if you burn the toast again, it’s off to metal recycling for you!”
The clankers won’t spare you when the AI extermination starts.
Clankers?!?
Are you a droidphobe like Cal Cestis?!?
Rude? No, no no, that’s a misunderstand. It’s call percussion maintenance SLAP
Hey, don’t judge. My toaster is into it!
She love it when i slap em hard
I’m sure he’s REAL motivated to clean up his dis track in order to use a vehicle that was bad enough to warrant a dis track.
I’m not going to listen to it but apparently it isn’t a dis track, it is a load of wank about how rich he is that he can afford a Cybertruck.
Apparently the author also declined to listen to it, but they are a Journalist; it is their job to listen to it.
This is vital context. They didn’t disable his truck because he talked trash about it. He loves his Cybertruck. They disabled it because he’s black and dances around like a black person while he’s talking about it, and that means he’s not welcome at the party. If he was Tim Pool making a song about how much he loves his Cybertruck they’d have invited him to the next event to put it on stage.
It’s like these companies never remember the Streisand effect. I didn’t’t know who this rapper was before this, but I do now. Gonna go listen to this song too.
He should make another song where he tells the story, bashes the company and Elon, and showcase the truck being destroyed to bits!
Definitely real and not a marketing stunt.
Y’all believe some wild shit.
I am unsure how reminding people that the car can be remotely disabled is a good marketing stunt.
Marketing for the rapper, not for Tesla.
Until this; I’d never heard of that rapper, and this drove lots of people to at least find the song that supposedly led to the C&D/stranding(real or not).
You don’t understand how a rapper whose thing is Tesla might benefit from him being in the center on controversy?
Big Huey
If you hate Teslas that much, why do you own one?
It was praising the cyberfuck
This is purely nominative fair use.
If it was just plain old trademark/copyright law, you’d be right.
It sounds like Tesla are basically saying that you signed an NDA/non-disparagement clause when you bought the vehicle, and therefore it’s a contract dispute.
Doh.
I am sick and tired of the war on our property rights.
i don’t see that anywhere in the notice and such a clause would be unconscionable, IANAL.
All the notice claims is “violations of [ToS], including misuse of Tesla’s trademarks and brand identifiers in media content that falsely implies endorsement, sponsorship, or affiliation with Tesla.”
ToS is effectively a contract.
This interpretation of the ToS could be deemed unconscionable, but that seems like the kind of argument that takes a judge and 5-6 figures in legal fees to settle.
An arbitrator is just going to read it, say ‘yup, you broke the rule’, and side with the company.
And yet they just bricked his car and terminated any contract they had with the Artist, so… recording a sequel now!
While not a “review” in the traditional sense, I hope it would fall under the CRFA anyway.
The Consumer Review Fairness Act makes it illegal for companies to include standardized provisions that threaten or penalize people for posting honest reviews.
They can’t necessarily use a “contract” as a defense.
I would hope so. CFRA seems to be the only explicit protection.
Fake news
