Just had a vote on this stuff but apparently it wasn't good enough because Tesla's continued progress is threatening too much enclosure. If we looked into the identities and conflicts of interest behind the people bringing this suit and maybe even the people who accepted it and certified it we will very likely see petrol interests. They have to be careful because the same mechanism might be useful in getting rid of the Exxon board. I am hoping the court somehow looks into the real standing of the shills behind this case. They don't want what is right for the firm or society. This is like a competitor bringing suit claiming it doesn't have enough direct control over other competitors operations- a court would be party to this? Also there is a huge problem in that they cannot argue that maximum greed is required because that is not what the shareholders want and that isn't good for society. Lets explain the way this works. Some call its structural violence. But you always see the same tired old arguments. You'll have parasites coming in trying to argue for enclosure and being able to charge for no value added and them being given control for the imposition of this theft and its incredible disservice to the public and everyone else. Its just straight theft that needs prosecution but they call it privatization or some other of term of fraud. You can see it in centralized network systems. For instance the opponents of network neutrality want to argue for lock in (right to exclude) and premium (right to discriminate) and want to create a situation where relative to the plain utility of the system most people will be impoverished relative to what they can pay (all the market will bear or maximum theft for parasites) and in the process eliminate the incentive to improve the market because if they did that they couldn't over charge people for no-value-added premium scams. And they have to lie, lie, lie, lie to keep this stuff going so they need enclosure based sponsored media. They also insist on monopoly and public under written guaranteed returns- in essence GAIs for elite parasites and will argue the stupid Coase side of the debate with Hotelling (hoping less centralized solutions can still provide what Hotelling was after.) Right now this shill in the Australian Broadcasting network has been arguing before their government that they need to throttle gamers (hilarious) because they use too much bandwidth. The argument isn't about improving the bandwidth of the network (clue that there is a parasite in the mix trying to foist artificial scarcity to reap unjust enrichment that needs to be disgorged for a negative contribution) no its against so-called gamers to project onto- wants to blame children. When the shill was asked how he knew it was "gamers' he couldn't explain that and said that he never said it was gamers "don't put words in his mouth" but he was on camera with lying about what he had just said. The ABN in follow on response was then talking about 'network shaping' more premium prioritization BS like premium toll road for welfare baron parasites. You see the issue is peer to peer and these useless toll pipes and their private parasites being dumb piped out of the mix- its end users locking out their no-value-added manipulations and even stopping their spying which threatens parasites ability to control the narrative lie. Here is another example. We hear all the time that US consumers prefer SUV and trucks. I do, but I don't drive them, but its quite doubtful that most other people do. What happened (if I have this right) is that in 2012 the toll road private parasites got the CAFE standard split for cars and trucks so that auto makers push hard on the higher profile lower aerodynamic efficiency vehicles to create higher petrol consumption. So they start charging more for cars while providing less value and they ramp up the gas subsidy with your tax money and achieve their aim. (A radically negative use of what Hotelling had in mind, the total abuse of subsidies instead of using them to preserve marginal cost pricing.) Shows also why Tesla chose a small car or the Model 3 first, as it was less challenging for battery tech with the lower profile to provide the superior example on affordability and range. I see a silver lining here, if they finally do away with Tesla I think that will be telling the world that the time of corporations and employment is really over, we know they are not really value added propositions in this age of automation but I think it will signal the true end strongly. Tesla is no open collaborative with advanced pieces like blinded decision making systems, no its a traditional stock listed corporation, its a beat-them-at-their-own-game venture. But that isn't really necessary, there are other ways quite possibly even without trying that hard. I think autonomy finally folds standard work up and that's the end of the remaining defunct capital. Its happening anyway when you get a reality show clown who lies about his wealth in office in the US (probably has a severe cocaine habit- but doesn't drink- is a bit like Bush's pastor) and 30 years after the fall of the USSR another communist country ends up on top. Presumably what is next will be more bottom up and dencentralized, there will be planning but it will be much less top down. It won't be a fraud based welfare for the rich society where everyone else is controlled by a money trap meant to lock them out of the bottom part of Maslow's pyramid. It won't be because of a e currency tax evasion strategy either, money is tax, they still don't get that, but an e currency could help.