特斯拉2亿美元天价赔偿，马斯克吹过的牛都成了证据

Core Points - Tesla has been ordered to pay $243 million in damages for its first loss in a lawsuit related to its Autopilot system, marking a significant legal precedent for future similar cases [1][2][26] - The jury found Tesla responsible for one-third of the liability in a fatal accident that occurred in Florida in 2019, where the driver was distracted while using the Autopilot feature [3][12] Group 1 - The jury awarded $129 million for the plaintiff's pain and suffering, with Tesla's share of compensatory damages amounting to $43 million, in addition to $200 million in punitive damages [4][26] - Tesla plans to appeal the decision, claiming that the ruling is erroneous and detrimental to automotive safety advancements [5][9] - The case highlights the unique punitive damages system in the U.S., which can impose significant additional penalties on corporations for malicious or grossly negligent behavior [7][8] Group 2 - The accident involved a driver who was distracted by a dropped phone while using the Autopilot system, leading to a collision that resulted in fatalities [14][15] - The plaintiffs argued that Tesla's marketing of the Autopilot feature misled consumers into believing it was fully autonomous, despite it being a Level 2+ advanced driver-assistance system [16][34] - Elon Musk's past statements regarding the capabilities of Autopilot were central to the case, with the jury considering them as evidence of misleading marketing practices [18][20][24] Group 3 - Tesla has faced over twenty similar lawsuits in recent years, but this is the first instance where it has been found partially liable for an accident involving its Autopilot system [26][27] - Regulatory scrutiny has increased regarding the safety of Tesla's Autopilot and Full Self-Driving (FSD) systems, with reports indicating numerous accidents linked to these technologies [32][33] - The California DMV has initiated legal action against Tesla for false advertising related to Autopilot and FSD, which could lead to significant operational impacts if a ruling is made against the company [36][37]