Model 3

Ex-Tesla Factory Worker to Pay $400,000 Over Feud With Musk

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2020-12-01/ex-tesla-factory-worker-to-pay-400-000-to-end-feud-with-musk

And yes, relevant to Model 3 as Tesla reputation and Model 3 was being maligned due to this ridiculous person

"...that accused Martin Tripp of illegally divulging trade secrets about the production of Tesla’s Model 3."

"Tripp countersued Musk for defamation, but the federal judge handling the case threw it out, ruling that the technician had failed to show that the CEO had acted with actual malice."

F that chump. Glad he is getting his just desserts.

Comments

  • Only because I was schooled on this a couple weeks ago, it’s deserts🤓
  • desserts - a course following the main meal

    deserts - dry, barren land
  • True, but not relevant.
    https://www.macquariedictionary.com.au/blog/article/248/
  • Of course it turns out the worker was right but money can get you out of murder in US legal system so no surprise billionaire wins lawsuit.
  • Tripp and FishEV are liars. Tripp made up lies about Tesla scrap and Tesla putting punctured batteries in cars. Justice has been served, rightly so, on Tripp.
  • 1. Being correct or not on facts is irrelevant. Breaking the law is what is relevant.

    2. We’re these even established as fact? Was there ever any solid validation of his claims or are these just unsubstantiated allegations? (Allegations != facts)

    The public had neither the right to nor any reasonable interest in knowing anything he claimed to have seen. And this guy was a low-level technician; who’s to even say he understood what he was looking at? I run into this issue all the time: people shooting their mouths off when they think something is off before they understand the grand plan.

    What was his goal in making these allegations? If he truly had concerns about manufacturing conditions and no one was listening to him, did he think he was going to get Elon to address them by trying to publicly shame the company? Or was he a disgruntled soon-to-be-ex-employee who sought to harm the company’s reputation in recompense for disregarding his recommendations? That’s sabotage. Yet a third option: was he like one of these arsonist-firefighters who craves the attention he would get from the press?
  • This country is not more free if you have more money. Complete myth. Your life with more money may be more pleasant and easy or it may be rife with problems. More money is not what guarantees freedoms. The constitution and the bill of rights do that.
    Do some take advantage? Sure. But that’s not the foundation of our freedom.
  • > @AmokTime said: We’re these even established as fact?"

    That's why he got sued for being whistleblower.
  • A whistleblower would have factual evidence to back up claims. A liar gets sued, successfully, for making up stuff intended to be harmful.
  • > @"Magic 8 Ball" said: > A whistleblower would have factual evidence to back up claims."

    It doesn't matter that his claims were true, he was legally bound not to reveal the problems that Tesla was lying about to public.
  • Prove it
  • The journalists who used him to create sensationalistic lies as click bait have let him twist in the wind. Dana Hull for one.
  • > @FISHEV said:
    > It doesn't matter that his claims were true...

    Yes, I can see where a serial liar would think that. Carry on.
  • A true whistleblower often breaks the law to expose a larger crime and is protected for doing a public service. A fake whistleblower suffers the fate Tripp did.
  • > @"Magic 8 Ball" said:
    > A true whistleblower often breaks the law to expose a larger crime and is protected for doing a public service.

    Except they aren't as this case demonstrates. He uploaded the Tesla files. There was no question on fact, just the law which said he could not do it.
  • > @FISHEV said:
    > Except they aren't as this case demonstrates. He uploaded the Tesla files.

    If Tripp found anything of consequence he would have been protected. Tripp had a grudge and he tried to make a stink out of a nothing burger. As it is he most likely violated his employment NDA by sharing what he did. Justice was served.
  • Tesla Inc v Tripp, U.S. District Court, District of Nevada, No. 18-00296.
    Tripp acknowledged his countersuit was funded by a Tesla short.
  • This is amazing that fish would even try and defend Tripp as a legit whistleblower. Whistleblowers = truth and are not subject to paying various fines and being found to have fraudulent claims.

    If anyone coming here is uncertain, fishev is less than a troll. They are a source of constant of misinformation.
  • Uploading files is not proof. Uploading files is potential fuel for an investigation (like, to prove the files are real evidence and not something that was manufactured). Except there was no investigation because no consumers were harmed. If there even was an issue, it was all internal to Tesla. Even if the info was real (and this has never been proven), no one had a right to know this information.
  • The worker was wrong, dishonest, no integrity , and signed a contract to provide information when not permitted and thus was fined for his very illegal things.

    He was wrong on every count and got what he deserved.


    Sorry about the deserts. I know the difference of the spelling, but what I got wrong was the actual phrase. For some reason I kept thinking it had to do with desserts gone bad rather than a pleasant thing.

    Always learning 😃
  • *not divulge information when not permitted.. *sigh*
  • > @calvin940 said:
    > The worker was wrong, dishonest, no integrity , and signed a contract to provide information when not permitted and thus was fined for his very illegal things.
    >
    > He was wrong on every count and got what he deserved.
    >
    >
    > Sorry about the deserts. I know the difference of the spelling, but what I got wrong was the actual phrase. For some reason I kept thinking it had to do with desserts gone bad rather than a pleasant thing.
    >
    > Always learning 😃
    >
    >
    My problem as well. Didn’t realize there was a third definition.
Sign In or Register to comment.