Assuming this is real, I don’t see how this is legal? There’s no way Tesla would win in court under any sane judge. If they bought the car outright and fully own it (i.e. didn’t lease it from Tesla), then that is the car owner’s property.

I’m fairly certain that it won’t go before a judge. If Tesla doesn’t have a forced arbitration clause https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arbitration_clause in their contracts I would be truly surprised.

The manufacturer can’t, effectively, sabotage your property without consequence.

I don’t own a Tesla and dont have access to a US contract, but it wouldnt be far fetched that there’s something in there about Tesla reserving the right to use a kill switch at their discretion.

I truly hope this is not real,

You and me both. But we live in a stupid timeline, and I can no longer tell what’s outrageously real and what’s rage bait.

You’re assuming the court judges aren’t just paid schills for corporate interests.

I mean… It depends on the terms you sign while purchasing.

I dunno if they still do this, but over a decade ago, Apple used to put in their Terms of Service that (paraphrasing) you are only paying for the service associated with an iPhone. The physical hardware is on loan to you and still belongs to the company, and they have the right to do whatever they want with it as their property. Deactivate it remotely, recall it, wipe it, etc.

During tech expo’s, Apple would remotely disable features of any iPhone in the area so you couldn’t take photos, record video, connect to the Internet, etc. while you were on the show floor. You had to leave the event before your phone’s capabilities returned.

Tesla, dealing in an electronic vehicle that is connected remotely to their services, could absolutely do one of these legal contracts during the sale. And if you sign it, you have no legal leg to stand on when they disable and/or recall your vehicle.