- cross-posted to:
- technews@radiation.party
- cross-posted to:
- technews@radiation.party
Mercedes adopts Tesla’s EV charger.
You must log in or register to comment.
„… which is rapidly becoming the de facto charging standard in North America and Europe.“
Wait? Europe? I have never heard of anyone in Europe switching to NACS. Europe is all CCS2, even Tesla uses CCS2. Only Model S and X are using a custom Tesla-Solution which is based on the Typ2 AC-Connector. An probably switch to CCS2 in the next generation cars.
So, definitely no NACS in Europe as far as I know.
You have to go out of your way to even find Tesla charging stations in Germany. They are comparatively rare and far in between.
Could be worse.
deleted by creator
Standard business practice. Every company create their own proprietary stuff and try to make them the standard via lobbying etc, then earn money from other companies when their stuff becomes the standard.
deleted by creator
TL;DR: If you want to use Tesla’s charger patent, you’re allowing Tesla to steal your patent and you can’t sue Tesla for it, even if the patent is not related to charging technology.
Well yes, but to use it the company will have to give up a lot.
From https://www.makeuseof.com/why-manufacturers-dont-use-tesla-superchargers/:
Tesla offers its patents free of charge and won’t launch a lawsuit against any company using them. This sounds great, but this only applies to companies acting in “good faith”, as defined Tesla’s Patent Pledge. This clause has significant business implications and explains why many haven’t utilized Tesla’s patents.
According to Nicholas Collura, an attorney writing for Duane Morris LLP, using Tesla’s patents forfeits a company’s right to bring action against Tesla for any form of copyright infringement—not just in relation to the patents. Essentially, if Tesla stole a company’s software code, that company would need to give up any protections offered under Tesla’s Patent Pledge to pursue legal action.
Furthermore, and even more importantly, using Tesla’s patents means that a company cannot assert its own patent right against any other electric vehicle company. This is especially risky for companies that rely on patents to gain a competitive edge.
The terms also deem that a company can’t challenge any Tesla patent, including those outside of the Patent Pledge, nor can it have any financial involvement in a company that does so. Collura notes the vagueness of this, saying that “Tesla could argue that a supplier has a financial stake in its customer’s challenge of a Tesla patent.”
deleted by creator
As of last month, SAE is making NACS an open standard (properly open, not just in name). So if you want to make an NACS charger, you get permission from SAE, not Tesla.
https://www.sae.org/news/press-room/2023/06/sae-international-announces-standard-for-nacs-connector
I’m not a lawyer, and I don’t know for sure that there isn’t any patent-pledge sneakery involved here, but I would be a lot more comfortable using those designs myself if they were published by a standards body like ISO, IEC, or SAE.
Looking like the Tesla connector is well on its way to becoming the standard now. GM, Ford, Rivian, (I’m forgetting one), and now Mercedes all switching over. The Tesla Supercharger network in the US is fantastic, much better than the alternative. Hopefully that doesn’t go downhill as more cars flood the network.
ABB is supporting it therefore EA is supporting it, therefore it’s only a matter of time before VW is supporting it. Stellantis basically has no choice. V4 superchargers will have 800v so Hyundai-Kia should be able to jump on board, assuming the V2L stuff is worked out. Not sure of the status of that on NACS right now but it shouldn’t be a big lift for Hyundai since at this point it’s more of a physical difference.
