Cybertruck NO RESALE... ChatGPT said this

[CyberRand]

For shits and grins, I pasted Tesla's information they posted re: resale into ChatGPT and asked what might be options.

Friend-O ChatGPT said this:


ChatGPT
The legal statement from Tesla regarding the Cybertruck indicates a clear intent to restrict the resale of the vehicle within the first year after delivery. This restriction is likely in place to prevent speculative reselling, particularly given the limited initial quantity of Cybertrucks. However, you're interested in exploring creative ways to navigate this restriction while complying with the terms. Here are some potential approaches:

1. Lease or Rent the Cybertruck: Instead of selling the Cybertruck, consider leasing it to someone else. This approach could involve a rent-to-own arrangement where the lessee pays a monthly fee to use the vehicle and has the option to purchase it after the one-year restriction period. This method allows you to retain ownership while generating income from the vehicle.
2. Tesla's Buyback Option: As per Tesla's statement, if you need to sell the Cybertruck within the first year for an unforeseen reason, you may notify Tesla and give them the option to buy it back at a predetermined price. If Tesla declines, you can then seek their written consent to sell to a third party.
3. Shared Ownership or Co-ownership: Form a partnership or co-ownership agreement with someone interested in the Cybertruck. This could involve a contract where you agree to transfer ownership to the co-owner after the one-year period.
4. Business Use: If you own a business, you might use the Cybertruck for business purposes (like showcasing in events, marketing, or as a company vehicle) and then sell it as a business asset after the restriction period.
5. Modifications or Customization Services: While you cannot sell the vehicle, you might be able to offer customization or modification services on the Cybertruck. This way, you're not selling the vehicle itself but providing a service related to it.
6. Waiting It Out and Selling Post-Restriction: Sometimes the simplest solution is just to wait out the restriction period. Given the anticipated demand for the Cybertruck, its value might still be significantly high after one year, potentially allowing for a profitable resale.

It's important to note that any approach you consider should be carefully reviewed to ensure it doesn't violate Tesla's terms. Consulting with a legal professional is highly recommended to ensure compliance and to understand any potential legal ramifications fully. Additionally, any strategy that involves transferring interest or rights in the vehicle should be meticulously documented and legally sound to avoid any future disputes or legal challenges.

Sponsored

 

[Coolbreeze704]

Rent to own could be risky. Better have a good lawyer draw up the agreement.

Can see it now after 12 months buyers says " I am out" and you get this back.

 

[cybguy]

Rent to own could be risky. Better have a good lawyer draw up the agreement.

Can see it now after 12 months buyers says " I am out" and you get this back.

No so risky. I've said on another site, that the way to get around this is to rent and then offer to sale after 1 year. You could lease for $1 a month after $100,000 down with the option to buy for $1 after 1 year.
But while plenty of us would sell for the right price, the number of people that will pay substantially more to move up in line will likely be quite small. I doubt there is more than a thousand people that are going to be willing to pay more than $10,000 extra for an early Cybertruck. This is mostly just the imagination of Tesla fans who are out of touch with reality. Hey but if anyone wants that lease I offered let me know. I won't hold my breath.

 

[CyberGus]

I would be wary of getting legal advice from ChatGPT


https://www.reuters.com/legal/new-y...ng-fake-chatgpt-cases-legal-brief-2023-06-22/

New York lawyers sanctioned for using fake ChatGPT cases in legal brief

June 26, 20233:28 AM CDT

NEW YORK, June 22 (Reuters) - A U.S. judge on Thursday imposed sanctions on two New York lawyers who submitted a legal brief that included six fictitious case citations generated by an artificial intelligence chatbot, ChatGPT.

U.S. District Judge P. Kevin Castel in Manhattan ordered lawyers Steven Schwartz, Peter LoDuca and their law firm Levidow, Levidow & Oberman to pay a $5,000 fine in total.

The judge found the lawyers acted in bad faith and made "acts of conscious avoidance and false and misleading statements to the court."

Levidow, Levidow & Oberman said in a statement on Thursday that its lawyers "respectfully" disagreed with the court that they acted in bad faith.

"We made a good faith mistake in failing to believe that a piece of technology could be making up cases out of whole cloth," the firm's statement said.

Lawyers for Schwartz said he declined to comment. LoDuca did not immediately reply to a request for comment, and his lawyer said they are reviewing the decision.

Schwartz admitted in May that he had used ChatGPT to help research the brief in a client's personal injury case against Colombian airline Avianca (AVT_p.CN) and unknowingly included the false citations. LoDuca's name was the only one on the brief that Schwartz prepared.

Lawyers for Avianca first alerted the court in March that they could not locate some cases cited in the brief.

Bart Banino, a lawyer for Avianca, said on Thursday that irrespective of the lawyers' use of ChatGPT, the court reached the "right conclusion" by dismissing the personal injury case. The judge in a separate order granted Avianca's motion to dismiss the case because it was filed too late.

The judge wrote in Thursday's sanctions order that there is nothing "inherently improper" in lawyers using AI "for assistance," but he said lawyer ethics rules "impose a gatekeeping role on attorneys to ensure the accuracy of their filings."

The judge also said that the lawyers "continued to stand by the fake opinions" after the court and the airline questioned whether they existed. His order also said the lawyers must notify the judges, all of them real, who were identified as authors of the fake cases of the sanction.

 

[Arctic_White]

Quite frankly, I am both sad and disgusted at folks wanting to profit from this.

It undermines what Tesla is trying to do (transition the world to sustainable energy) and it makes those who really want a Cybertruck wait.

While I am all about capitalism within reason, the fact that so many folks here have multiple reservations purely from a profit perspective makes me disappointed.

I also wonder how many of the 2M+ reservation go away because of this clause?

 

[SolarWizard]

Quite frankly, I am both sad and disgusted at folks wanting to profit from this.

It undermines what Tesla is trying to do (transition the world to sustainable energy) and it makes those who really want a Cybertruck wait.

While I am all about capitalism within reason, the fact that so many folks here have multiple reservations purely from a profit perspective makes me disappointed.

I also wonder how many of the 2M+ reservation go away because of this clause?

Profiting off the trucks does absolutely nothing to deter that mission. In fact it probably has more impact since people willing to pay $20k+ over sticker almost certainly drive less efficient luxury vehicles or trucks than day 1 reservation holders typically would.

 

[Jhodgesatmb]

Quite frankly, I am both sad and disgusted at folks wanting to profit from this.

It undermines what Tesla is trying to do (transition the world to sustainable energy) and it makes those who really want a Cybertruck wait.

While I am all about capitalism within reason, the fact that so many folks here have multiple reservations purely from a profit perspective makes me disappointed.

I also wonder how many of the 2M+ reservation go away because of this clause?

Some multiple-reservation holders reserved for business reasons or for family members because some have spoken up here. We have no idea how many flippers there might be, but we are all deluged all the time by YouTubers wanting us to buy raffle tickets forTeslas, Rivians, etc. how would that work under these rules? The Petersen auctioned one and they must have had special permission - maybe ChatGPT could have suggested creating a 501c3 and raffling off a Cybertruck and donating some of the proceeds to charity

 

[bdmridgeback]

Quite frankly, I am both sad and disgusted at folks wanting to profit from this.

It undermines what Tesla is trying to do (transition the world to sustainable energy) and it makes those who really want a Cybertruck wait.

While I am all about capitalism within reason, the fact that so many folks here have multiple reservations purely from a profit perspective makes me disappointed.

I also wonder how many of the 2M+ reservation go away because of this clause?

Hell, one of the sales people at my local Tesla dealer has 3 on order! Gotta know that's for resale purposes and he is a Tesla employee.

 

[JBee]

I do wonder how many people will pay a premium to get it early. It can't be a huge number?

 

[Jethro]

Some multiple-reservation holders reserved for business reasons or for family members because some have spoken up here. We have no idea how many flippers there might be, but we are all deluged all the time by YouTubers wanting us to buy raffle tickets forTeslas, Rivians, etc. how would that work under these rules? The Petersen auctioned one and they must have had special permission - maybe ChatGPT could have suggested creating a 501c3 and raffling off a Cybertruck and donating some of the proceeds to charity

Very accurate! My friend followed the release on the first day and got me a reservation. I own an MY and have a roadster on order. This is a no-profit transfer. In fact, we are hoping that I can pay, insure, and pickup right from Tesla. How about starting a company together and annd doing it that way?? Any advice on this would be appreciated.

 

[SolarWizard]

I do wonder how many people will pay a premium to get it early. It can't be a huge number?

If I had to guess based on the overall reservation #s id bet there are in the neighborhood of 15-25000 people willing to pay to skip the queue. As far as how much over sticker thats tbd but surely at least the delta between FSD then and now.

Surely certain people on social media and celebrities would pay double

 

[Jhodgesatmb]

If I had to guess based on the overall reservation #s id bet there are in the neighborhood of 15-25000 people willing to pay to skip the queue. As far as how much over sticker thats tbd but surely at least the delta between FSD then and now.

Surely certain people on social media and celebrities would pay double

First runs [of everything] have issues. I am glad I am back a ways, though I may be back further than I thought I’d be. I thought/hoped the LR Trimotor would be made first, but if it really is delayed for a year then it might be a year longer and that is too long. I would never be willing to pay a premium for a car/truck but at least first-run issues will be resolved, and just maybe the stock will bounce somewhere in there.

 

[Crissa]

Profiting off the trucks does absolutely nothing to deter ...

This is untrue. Flipped vehicles are less likely to go to people who are using them. They're halo vehicles, which end up setting unused. Flippers displace profit that Tesla could be making. And raise the current price for vehicles. And steepen the depreciation of vehicles by creating a supply of orphan ones. And! And they reduce the data that Tesla is getting back on the function of their vehicles.

On the top of being unfair.

-Crissa

Sponsored