Tesla, led by Elon Musk, claims that revealing data on self-driving crashes would result in “competitive harm.”

      Tayfun Coskun/Anadolu Agency via Getty Images

      Subscribe to The Drive’s daily newsletter

      Receive the latest updates on car news, reviews, and features.

      Tesla's legal team has submitted a motion requesting that a judge dismiss a public information request that would obligate the U.S. National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) to disclose crash data related to incidents involving automated or semi-automated driving systems in its vehicles. Tesla refers to its systems as Autopilot and Full-Self Driving, although these terms can be misleading. The company argues that competitors could leverage this data to evaluate the effectiveness of its hardware and software, potentially causing "financial and economic harm."

      The Freedom Of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit was initiated by The Washington Post last year in an effort to acquire additional information regarding vehicles under the control of driver assistance systems (either Autopilot or Full Self-Driving) at the time of a crash, as reported by Reuters. Given that Tesla had been advocating for the Trump administration to eliminate current reporting obligations for self-driving vehicle accidents, the case has garnered significant attention.

      Tesla asserts in its motion that competitors would typically need to invest substantial amounts to gain insights into Tesla's development of its driver assist technologies. By disclosing crash data, NHTSA would be providing a diluted version of valuable accumulated information to competitors, effectively allowing them to “read ahead” in their own development process by observing Tesla's advancements (or, more accurately in this case, its public failures).

      “These are exactly the types of competitive harms that courts in this circuit have long recognized,” Tesla stated in the motion.

      Ultimately, the crux of the issue is this: if NHTSA makes Tesla's crash data public, it could potentially dissuade consumers from purchasing its vehicles, and it would be unjust to force the company to disclose such information.

      “Tesla has indicated (and NHTSA has agreed) that competitors might analyze the released data and draw speculative inferences regarding the quality of Tesla’s ADAS technology related to a specific version or feature—which could very well be flawed since the disclosed data may represent only preliminary investigations—and utilize that to enhance or promote their own technology to the detriment of Tesla,” the motion states.

      “Therefore, even under the Plaintiff’s argument, Tesla and NHTSA have demonstrated a reasonable likelihood of harm due to disparagement arising from the release of the withheld information,” it concludes.

      This is a well-structured argument that is bolstered by support from the agency being sued by the Post, but it raises a more fundamental question: Should NHTSA prioritize the interests of a multi-billion-dollar corporation or the public safety on America’s roadways?

      Have a tip? You can send it here: [email protected]