Tesla called it Full Self-Driving. Now its defense is: don't believe the name.

In October 2016, Tesla promised one of its cars would drive itself from Los Angeles to New York, with no human touching the wheel, by the end of 2017.

The rest of the industry calls its systems driver assistance and tells you to keep your hands on the wheel. Tesla named its product Full Self-Driving and collected up to $15,000 a car for it. Tesla itself describes it as a Level 2 system that needs a fully attentive driver at all times.

Then the name met the record. In December 2023, a recall covered some 2 million Tesla vehicles with Autosteer, for driver-monitoring deficiencies. In September 2024, a court dismissed a securities-fraud suit, ruling that Musk's autonomy claims were corporate puffery. In August 2025, a Miami jury found Tesla 33% liable for a fatal 2019 Autopilot crash and awarded $243 million, including $200 million in punitive damages. In October 2025, regulators opened a review of roughly 2.88 million Tesla vehicles.

Also in August 2025, a federal judge certified a class of California buyers who paid for the Tesla package between October 2016 and July 2024, and accepted a full-refund damages theory.

Which leaves Tesla in an odd place: its best legal defense is that you should not have believed the name.

A name is not just marketing. Courts, regulators and buyers read it as a claim. The dismissal shows vague optimism can survive in court; the verdict and the class show a name can still cost money. Name a product for what it does today, not for what you hope it will do.