Tesla will sue you for $50,000 if you try to resell your Cybertruck in the first year

L4sBot@lemmy.worldmod to Technology@lemmy.world – 934 points –
Tesla will sue you for $50,000 if you try to resell your Cybertruck in the first year
businessinsider.com

Tesla will sue you for $50,000 if you try to resell your Cybertruck in the first year::Tesla may agree to buy the truck back at the original price minus "$0.25/mile driven" and any damages and repairs.

301

You are viewing a single comment

How is this legal in the US given the first sale doctrine?

Ferrari has some similar bullshit, but you agree to it in a contract when you buy the car. If you refuse they simply don't sell you the car.

(Ferrari chooses you, not the other way around)

If you refuse they simply don't sell you the car.

Sure, question is of course: will they be able to do something about it if you agree to the terms and sell it anyway. I don't think 'breaking' an agreement based on unlawful stipulations is actionable (ianal)

For Ferrari, if you break their stipulations, they put you on a blacklist and won't sell you another ever again. I can't find any other hard-and-fast things they do because there's a lot of rumor milling, but barring you from purchases and ending your dealership maintenance seem to be "for sure". I imagine it comes with some other stigmas from the community too. But much like real estate covenants if you agree to something in a contract, and then break it, you're subject to civil action. In a Covenant, the contract holders are permitted to buy back your house and evict you.

If I recall correctly, Ferrari being assholes is why Lamborghini isn't just a tractor brand.

Even at the time of the quarrels con Ferrari, Lamborghini was already producing both tractors, air conditioners and boilers.

Yeah for the people in question (buying ferraris/teslas) that blacklisting part might be deterrence enough. Still, even in that real estate covenant construction you mention, that 'something' they stipulate cannot be unlawful I think.

If they simply forbade resale, it would be an unenforceable term. The obligation on them to buy it back (at an agreed price) in order to enforce the term likely makes it legal.

Deadmau5 was threatened with a lawsuit over his "Purrari" Nyan cat livery.

How does Monsanto avoid this?

They sell you seeds. You can grow things with those seeds, but you cant plant the grown plants' seeds.

In that case, it's a patented product that happens to reproduce itself as part of its normal operation.

In this case, it's just shitty business behavior.

(To be clear, no, living organisms should not be patentable. But it'd be fucking hilarious if patented genes went feral.)

On the plus side, some of those patents have already expired.