Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×
Businesses The Courts The Almighty Buck Yahoo!

Tesla Is Suing An Oil-Company Executive For Impersonating Elon Musk (businessinsider.com) 170

An anonymous reader quotes a report from Business Insider: Tesla is suing an oil executive under suspicion of impersonating Elon Musk to dig up confidential financial information from the company, Forbes reported on Wednesday. The lawsuit, reportedly filed Wednesday in the Superior Court of Santa Clara County, claimed that Todd Katz, the chief financial officer for Quest Integrity Group, emailed Tesla's chief financial officer using a similar email address as Musk's looking to gain information that wasn't disclosed in an earnings call with investors. Quest Integrity Group has partnerships with BP, Chevron, and ExxonMobil, the Forbes report said. According to the lawsuit, Katz used "elontesla@yahoo.com" to send an email to Tesla CFO Jason Wheeler asking about the company's sales and financial projections. The email named in the suit reads: "why you so cautious w Q3/4 gm guidance on call? also what are your thoughts on disclosing M3 res#? Pros/cons from ir pov? what is your best guess as to where we actually come in on q3/4 deliverables. honest guess? no bs. thx 4 hard work prepping 4 today. em." Tesla is seeking "undisclosed financial compensation," as well as compensation for the cost of the investigation and legal fees, according to Forbes.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Tesla Is Suing An Oil-Company Executive For Impersonating Elon Musk

Comments Filter:
  • by whoever57 ( 658626 ) on Thursday September 15, 2016 @09:10PM (#52897697) Journal
    Quest Integrity Group

    When people proclaim their good qualities so publicly, it's because they want to con you.

    • by Chuq ( 8564 ) on Thursday September 15, 2016 @09:31PM (#52897803) Journal

      The leader of the People's Democratic Republic of Korea disagrees with you.

    • I hae to assume that is short for "Quest for Integrity Group".

      Still looking since 1994!

    • by Alomex ( 148003 )

      It's an old rule of marketing. An adjective either very accurately describes the product or is the complete opposite, nothing in between.

      Say for example, if you have a cereal called Nature's Best. It either is an organic tree-hugging, all vegan, hemp-tshirt inspired cereal or is the worst junk full of sugar and additives.

      The explanation is straightforward, either you are an honest person and describe your product accurately or you are a crook, in which case you maximize your lie since it makes business sens

      • by HiThere ( 15173 )

        In your particular example you exhibit a problem with this simplistic rule:
        Say for example, if you have a cereal called Nature's Best.

        The problem here is that different people will consider different qualities to be "best" even in the context of a breakfast cereal.
        E.g.: "How much honey should it contain?" My answer would be none, but I know people who really believe that it should have enough to make it sticky...and they aren't all kids.
        Eg.: "Should it contain ground hemp?" I think most people would say n

    • Quest Integrity Group

      When people proclaim their good qualities so publicly, it's because they want to con you.

      Apparently their name refers to the physical integrity of oil pipeline hardware, and not the character of their employees.

    • Exactly this. If they put it in their company or product's name, you can be quite sure that it's lacking in the company or product.

  • by rahvin112 ( 446269 ) on Thursday September 15, 2016 @09:21PM (#52897739)

    This is standard practice nowadays. There are AstroTurfing campaigns and attacks like this going on all the time these days. There is no such thing as playing fair and letting the market decide. Ever since Tesla started plans to produce a mass consumer electric vehicle that's not handicapped and a piece of shit the oil industry has been working against them. This is why every single Model S crash is a massive public affair with news stories all over the wire. Oil companies are funding these types of articles and paying journalists to write them, probably in some cases writing them for them.

    I'm glad Musk pursued the investigation and determined the person that made the call so they can get them on the stand. Expect nothing less at this point than the astroturf nonprofit that employs the guy to try to keep him from talking to anyone and when he does they will throw him under the bus and ruin his career to make it look like "one bad apple".

    Like I said, standard practice these days. You can't really believe anything you see these days because of how corrupt journalism is, and the internet has only made it worse.

    • Its not so much that they are paying journalists off, the rots further up the corporate chain with editors and bureau chiefs. And you'll rarely see the direct hand of the oil industry but rather the think tanks they hire.. These guys will wine and dine the editors, and invite them out on yachts and the like , while whispering conspiracy theories about scientists being in cohorts with the reds or whatever nonsense suits the agenda of the minute. Tesla and Elon Musks companies in general represents an existen

      • >Its not so much that they are paying journalists off, the rots further up the corporate chain with editors and bureau chiefs

        Don't forget owners. Remember a few months ago when a bunch of editors at Breitbart resigned in protest because, they claimed, Trump was paying the owners to give him positive coverage ?

        And that's breitbat, playground for the alt-right [read: neo-NAZI skinheads without charisma] - hardly a symbol of impartial, honest journalism to begin with and their editors hardly averse to a sig

      • by silentcoder ( 1241496 ) on Friday September 16, 2016 @03:51AM (#52898849)

        >while whispering conspiracy theories about scientists being in cohorts with the reds

        That one's been happening for ages. Ayn Rand fervently believed, and publicly claimed, that all research indicating a link between smoking and lung cancer was a communist plot. She died of smoking-induced lung-cancer and maintained her refusal to accept the science even on her deathbed.

      • They don't use the term "reds" anymore, that's 1950s-1980s dated. The correct usage today is "racist".

  • Apple (Score:5, Funny)

    by sexconker ( 1179573 ) on Thursday September 15, 2016 @09:25PM (#52897769)

    Is Apple going to sue Elon Musk for impersonating Steve Jobs?

    • Re:Apple (Score:5, Insightful)

      by Gussington ( 4512999 ) on Thursday September 15, 2016 @11:20PM (#52898195)
      I know you're only trying to be funny but Elon builds fast cars and rockets, while Steve built a telephone that was slightly better than the existing telephones of the day (until the competition caught up and made even better telephones).
      I'll leave it the reader to decide which is cooler.
      • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

        by hawguy ( 1600213 )

        I know you're only trying to be funny but Elon builds fast cars and rockets, while Steve built a telephone that was slightly better than the existing telephones of the day (until the competition caught up and made even better telephones).

        I'll leave it the reader to decide which is cooler.

        I'm no Apple fan, but the iPhone was far beyond the other phones of its day (the Blackberry and Treo were state of the art at the time), the first Android wasn't released until a year later and was not nearly as usable. Nokia's Symbian line and Psion had some good phones at the time, but lacked the broad appeal of the iPhone (and a few years later, the broad appeal of Android)

        While the iPhone may have lost the edge that make it better than all competitors, when it launched it was much more than "slightly be

        • Re:Apple (Score:5, Insightful)

          by dunkelfalke ( 91624 ) on Friday September 16, 2016 @01:30AM (#52898533)

          Maybe to some people, but to me the first iPhone was even inferior to even the first Windows Mobile phone I have bought in 2002 and lightyears behind my then current HTC universal. I mean, ridiculously low display resolution, lack of such basic concepts like running third party applications, copy&paste or multitasking. IPhone has been a feature phone with a touch screen at the release time, not a smartphone.

          • by Lumpy ( 12016 )

            You are Hilarious. I carried one of those abominations.

            Now my Palm Treo, THAT utterly kicked the ass of everything from Apple or the crap that ran Windows CE.

            The problem with it was it required someone with an IQ over 100 to run it. Which mean the majority of the population found it frustrating to use.

            • I owned basically every HTC device starting with Wallaby and finishing with HD2 and I really liked them. My last Palm was Palm III, so I can't really comment on Treo, but I wasn't impressed with PalmOS in the 1990ies.

        • Re:Apple (Score:5, Insightful)

          by gTsiros ( 205624 ) on Friday September 16, 2016 @04:07AM (#52898885)

          far beyond? it was at least two years behind.

          christmas of 2005 i got an htc wizard

          it was incomparably better than the iphone

          and it came about two years earlier

        • Re:Apple (Score:4, Insightful)

          by Anonymous Coward on Friday September 16, 2016 @04:59AM (#52898991)

          I'm no Apple fan, but the iPhone was far beyond the other phones of its day (the Blackberry and Treo were state of the art at the time)

          Seriously? Aren't you forgetting about a Finnish company that completely dominated the smartphone scene at the time?

          The first iPhone was a very slick feature phone, but it was by no means a smartphone. It did not have apps and it lacked a lot of functionality that was common even in cheap phones at the time. Moreover, it was the first phone ever to be tied to one specific mobile network. In the beginning, it was impossible to buy it without an extremely expensive bundled subscription to one particular network. There was really no reason to want it. However, the excellent marketing, the years of rumours and secrecy and the way the media treated Jobs and Apple at the time made it popular. It is a marketing success story, but there is nothing particularly good about the product as such. It did popularise the touch screen, however.

        • Yeah but it's not a rocket that actually flies to space though is it? Come on, a slightly better phone or a rocket, which one would you prefer?
      • Re:Apple (Score:5, Funny)

        by amicusNYCL ( 1538833 ) on Friday September 16, 2016 @12:23AM (#52898359)

        Way to rewrite history there, pal. It's not like the only thing Jobs did was build a better phone. He also literally invented the first portable music player in history, and then re-invented it (again). In fact, I distinctly remember an event when he revealed the newest all-new re-invented portable music player, and it was impossibly small, it said so right there in the marketing literature. Impossibly small, but he built it anyway. He builds things that are literally impossible to build. Call me when Elon comes out with an impossibly small car or rocket and then we can compare him to Jobs.

        • Thanks. I enjoyed that immensely. :)

          • Holy hell I actually looked up the ad [youtube.com]. There's one for the time capsule.

            Little known fact: those are 10-foot tall animatronic hands, because it's not possible to build something that small which holds a whopping 1,000 songs.

        • by HiThere ( 15173 )

          No. No. No. No. Steve Jobs never ever invented a product. He pushed others to invent products, he sold products, he evangelized product. He was important, he rescued Apple from bankruptcy, but he was not a product designer. He was a salesman and an art critic (in the wider sense of art). He demanded excellence, and often got it.

          Steve Jobs was quite important, but he wasn't the company.

        • Well played sir :)
      • Pretty toy versus space travel. Yeah, I'll take Musk for the win on this.

      • Jobs never built a thing in his life. He just got really, really good at a certain kind of marketing - no not marketing to the public (he had people for that) - marketing himself to engineers and designers as a visionary boss who will let you create great things.
        Which put him in a position to get rich off of other people's groundbreaking work - with never a reward for those who did the breaking of the ground. That pattern goes all the way back to when he first met his 'friend' Steve Wozniak.
        Woz at least rec

        • by Lumpy ( 12016 )

          also got good at FUCKING the people that built the stuff. he fucked over Woz, the man that actually made apple what it is, he fucked over everyone that did not just nod and say yes-sir.

          He may have went down the right paths, but he stepped on a lot of people's faces while wearing soccer cleats to get there.

          But then all the "tech giants" were raging assholes that fucked over the people that did the real work to get there. Gates was notorious for it.

          • Yep, I never suggested he was particularly unique for that. Just that this is, indeed, who he was.

            Generally - the people who actually create things are almost never the people who get rich from them. That's at least in part because those people care about creating something great, not about getting rich. It's practically a job requirement - you can't care about the greatness of the creation AND about the profitability of the company since the two goals will create vastly conflicting requirements.

      • I'm not an Apple fan but I do seem to recall Jobs being responsible for bringing us the Apple Mac and Pixar amongst other things.
      • I know you're only trying to be funny but Elon builds fast cars and rockets, while Steve built a telephone that was slightly better than the existing telephones of the day (until the competition caught up and made even better telephones). I'll leave it the reader to decide which is cooler.

        I'm not a fan of Jobs, and I'm certainly not an iPhone fanboy, but GTFO, the first iPhone was leaps and bounds better than anything available at the time. It was a paradigm shift in both mobile phone and personal computing technologies.

        General dislike for someone or something should not preclude us from being objective.

        • We've already had this argument a million times in here. The point is do you prefer a slightly better phone or and the fastest car in the world? Or a rocket?
          I'm no fan of Elon either, but I think most people would think cars and rockets are cooler than phones and laptops
          • We've already had this argument a million times in here. The point is do you prefer a slightly better phone or and the fastest car in the world? Or a rocket? I'm no fan of Elon either, but I think most people would think cars and rockets are cooler than phones and laptops

            You are changing the goalposts. I'm not talking about comparing cars and rockets or whether the later is way cooler than the former (what a stupid strawman.) I'm talking about (and taking you to task) this which you wrote:

            while Steve built a telephone that was slightly better than the existing telephones of the day

            That's bullshit no matter how you cut it. Rockets cooler than phones? Of course! The first iPhone being just slightly better than the phones of the time? Utter garbage and disingenuous history revisionism.

            • You are changing the goalposts... That's bullshit no matter how you cut it... The first iPhone being just slightly better than the phones of the time? Utter garbage and disingenuous history revisionism.

              Fuck off no-one cares about these tired iPhone arguments anymore. It's just a phone, get over it.
              The thread is about whether Elon is a copy of Steve, or a better version altogether. I think he's much better since the stuff he is doing is much cooler.

              • You are changing the goalposts... That's bullshit no matter how you cut it... The first iPhone being just slightly better than the phones of the time? Utter garbage and disingenuous history revisionism.

                Fuck off no-one cares about these tired iPhone arguments anymore. It's just a phone, get over it.

                You care enough to argue back, don't you? We are not arguing about iPhones (that's you again moving the goalposts). We are arguing about your technologically inaccurate statements. You don't like being called on inaccurate statements? Then motherfuckingduh don't make inaccurate statements. Or better yet, let it go (since you claim no one cares about these arguments anymore.)

                The thread is about whether Elon is a copy of Steve, or a better version altogether.

                Yes, then stick to that theme and don't post inaccurate shit like saying the first iPhone was just *slightly* better than the technology available at the time (which is inaccurate and easy to disprove by just pulling up the specs of every single major phone at the time.)

                I think he's much better since the stuff he is doing is much cooler.

                No one said otherwise. Feel free to hump that strawman, just don't complain when you get blisters.

  • by glitch! ( 57276 ) on Thursday September 15, 2016 @09:30PM (#52897799)

    If I got an email with such shit, I would reply with a demand to try again with correct spelling and grammar. And of course I would expect this to be some kind of attack, and report it to others in my company.

    • and I would demand that the person use their corporate account, not some yahoo/gmail/hotmail/whatever address that happens to match spelling on the user part ...

    • If I got an email with such shit, I would reply...

      The only correct response to spam is ignore and delete. Any other response only gives more power to the spammer.

    • It's Amazing... (Score:4, Insightful)

      by freeze128 ( 544774 ) on Friday September 16, 2016 @01:54AM (#52898579)
      I don't really know Silicon Valley Corporate culture.... Is it really acceptable to:

      Send a business email from a YAHOO email account?
      Send an email that looks like a 16 year old girl's text to her BFF?

      I would have thought that a big company like Tesla would have its own internal email server, and I also would have thought that there would be some sort of decorum in the workplace.
    • I would print out the e-mail, annotate with a red pen and write F- with a frowny face at the top. Then scan it and send it back with a copy to his parents.

  • by Anonymous Coward on Thursday September 15, 2016 @09:31PM (#52897805)
    why you so cautious w Q3/4 gm guidance on call? also plz list my gr8test wkneses an prsnl failngs. can also leave cpy of all imprtant secrt financial docs by bench at park? thx for hrd wrk, i am yr leedur. em. oil is dum, lol!
  • Strange Wording (Score:5, Interesting)

    by quantaman ( 517394 ) on Thursday September 15, 2016 @09:33PM (#52897819)

    Is that really how Elon Musk writes emails?

    Either that guy is copying actual internal emails sent by Musk or he's the most incompetent spear phisher ever.

    • by Luthair ( 847766 )
      It actually doesn't surprise me that more technologically illiterate people would write very informally to people they work with very closely, particularly if they commonly used blackberries, etc.
    • by thegarbz ( 1787294 ) on Thursday September 15, 2016 @11:17PM (#52898177)

      Is that really how Elon Musk writes emails?

      Elon Musk doesn't even tweet like that. This is barely a step above:

      Plz I can haz corporate secretz
      kthxbye.

    • by rch7 ( 4086979 )

      It looks more like a trolling not phishing. Unless E.M. really writes emails like 16 year old girl :/

  • Is Jason Wheeler going to get his ass fired and become *FORMER* CFO?

  • I wonder what the lawsuit is actually for. I have a hard time believing Tesla could sue for someone impersonating Elon, wouldn't he himself need to do it? Perhaps attempted theft of trade secrets?

    One wonders what this clown would have done with the information, had he been successful and used it for financial gain then I assume he could have run into legal problems with the SEC if caught.

    • by Anonymous Coward on Thursday September 15, 2016 @11:19PM (#52898191)

      From the complaint, the lawsuit is actually for:
      1. Violation of California Penal Code 528.5 (which seems to allow any person damaged by impersonation to sue, not just the one impersonated).
      2. Unlawful, deceptive, and unfair business acts and practices in violation of California Business & Professions Code 17200.

      • by Luthair ( 847766 )

        Notwithstanding any other provision of law, any person who knowingly and without consent credibly impersonates another actual person through or on an Internet Web site or by other electronic means

        Why oh why does this specifically call out electronic means? Why isn't there a single statute which would also cover writing letters, etc. why do they need different handling?

  • So wait... (Score:3, Insightful)

    by mark-t ( 151149 ) <markt AT nerdflat DOT com> on Friday September 16, 2016 @12:17AM (#52898341) Journal
    It's okay if an FBI agent impersonates a journalist [slashdot.org] but it's not okay for an oil company exec to impersonate Elon Musk?
    • Re:So wait... (Score:5, Informative)

      by silentcoder ( 1241496 ) on Friday September 16, 2016 @04:08AM (#52898887)

      Where's the relevance here ?
      The two cases literally have nothing in common.
      The first is a criminal case. The second a civil case. That is: completely different standards of evidence and procedures.
      The first is in federal court under federal law.
      The second is in California state court under California state laws.

      The only thing the two cases have in common is they involve somebody impersonating somebody else - that is not ipso facto a crime or a cause for civil action. If it was the entire cast of Saturday Night Live would be in jail or getting sued every week.

      This particular case violated California state laws since
      1) the impersonation caused actual harm
      2) It falls under California's law against deceptive business practises.

    • by HiThere ( 15173 )

      You're correct. They should BOTH be illegal. The question is my mind is whether an officer of the law lying is worse than a CEO lying. It's clear, however, why a different CEO would think attempting to impersonate him for business advantage is worse. What's peculiar is that the law appears to agree so strongly with the CEO.

  • Them's some mighty fine integrities you got there, Mr. Katz. Mighty fine.
  • Maybe I am mistaken, but how is this not a Federal crime?
    I'm surprised if so that Tesla didn't just call in the FBI.
    IANAL, maybe someone could weigh in with more knowledge on this?
    • I think you might be on to something, not because of the email itself, but because of the potential content that the impersonator sought to obtain.

      You see, if Tesla had fallen for the trick and had sent back any form of confidential and financial information, then the recipient would have effectively received "Insider Information" pertaining to Tesla's finances. The SEC takes a *VERY* dim view of this sort of thing [hint: illegal-level dim view] on the basis that a person who trades on the basis of "Insi
    • I am not a lawyer but The Yes Men [wikipedia.org] comes to mind. I remember stories of reporters posing for things as well.

      I think it is rather clear it is not a crime because they are suing and there is no mention of criminal charges. They may find some civil regulation but it sounds to me more like retaliation where the lawsuit itself and the bad PR is the goal; maybe some money is settled or somebody resigns because of the bad PR.

      I knew somebody who was frivolously sued by a multinational - he would have won if he

  • Best would have been to feed the phisher wrong information and observe the results. You need to see where the information goes beyond this moron. Getting him slapped for it is of minor importance. Could have used the news article from the FBI with the enclosed malware to trace the real IP's

    Standard Intelligence Agencies practice i would say.

     

  • Todd Katz [...] emailed Tesla's chief financial officer using a similar email address as Musk's [...]. According to the lawsuit, Katz used "elontesla@yahoo.com"

    Why would Elon Musk be using an email address that is in any way even remotely similar to "elontesla@yahoo.com"?

Technology is dominated by those who manage what they do not understand.

Working...