SAN FRANCISCO: A US jury on Friday found Tesla Inc. CEO Elon Musk and his company were not liable for misleading investors when Musk tweeted in 2018 that he had “funding secured” to take the electric car company private.
Plaintiffs had claimed billions in damages and the decision also had been seen as important for Musk himself, who often takes to Twitter to air his views.
The jury came back with a unanimous verdict roughly two hours after beginning deliberations.
Musk was not present in court when the verdict was read but soon tweeted that he was “deeply appreciative” of the jury’s decision.
“Thank goodness, the wisdom of the people has prevailed,” he said.
Nicholas Porritt, a lawyer for the investors, said in a statement, “We are disappointed with the verdict and are considering next steps.”
Shares of Tesla rose 1.6 percent in after-hours trading following the verdict.
“A dark chapter is now closed for Musk and Tesla,” Wedbush analyst Dan Ives said. Ives added that some Tesla investors feared Musk might have to sell more Tesla stock if he lost.
The world’s second-richest person has previously created legal and regulatory headaches through his sometimes impulsive use of Twitter, the social media company he bought for $44 billion in October.
Minor Myers, who teaches corporate law at the University of Connecticut and who had previously called the investors’ case strong, called the outcome “astounding.”
The US anti-securities fraud law “has always been thought to be this great bulwark against misstatements and falsehoods,” he said. “This outcome makes you wonder if it is up to the job in modern markets,” he said, adding that Musk himself was likely to “double down” on his communication tactics after the verdict.
Musk’s attention has been divided in recent months between Tesla, his rocket company SpaceX and now Twitter. Tesla investors have expressed concerns that running the social media company has taken up too much of his focus.
’Bad word choice’
Tesla shareholders claimed Musk misled them when he tweeted on Aug. 7, 2018, that he was considering taking the company private at $420 per share, a premium of about 23 percent to the prior day’s close, and had “funding secured.”
They say Musk lied when he tweeted later that day that “investor support is confirmed.”
The stock price soared after the tweets and then fell again after Aug. 17, 2018, as it became clear the buyout would not happen.
Porritt during closing arguments said the billionaire CEO is not above the law, and should be held liable for the tweets.
“This case ultimately is about whether rules that apply to everyone else should also apply to Elon Musk,” he said.
Musk’s lawyer Alex Spiro countered that Musk’s “funding secured” tweet was “technically inaccurate” but that investors only cared that Musk was considering a buyout.
“The whole case is built on bad word choice,” he said. “Who cares about bad word choice?“
“Just because it’s a bad tweet doesn’t make it fraud,” Spiro said during closing arguments.
An economist hired by the shareholders had calculated investor losses as high as $12 billion.
During the three-week trial, Musk spent nearly nine hours on the witness stand, telling jurors he believed the tweets were truthful.
Musk later testified that he believed he could have sold enough shares of his rocket company SpaceX to fund a buyout, and “felt funding was secured” with SpaceX stock alone.
Musk testified that he made the tweets in order to put small shareholders on the same footing as large investors who knew about the deal. But he acknowledged he lacked formal commitments from potential backers.
The verdict is another victory for Musk and his lawyer Spiro after they won a defamation lawsuit against the billionaire in 2019 over his tweet calling a cave explorer a “pedo guy.”
Tesla’s Elon Musk found not liable in trial over 2018 ‘funding secured’ tweets
https://arab.news/cqwjw
Tesla’s Elon Musk found not liable in trial over 2018 ‘funding secured’ tweets
- Tesla shareholders claimed Musk misled them when he tweeted on Aug. 7, 2018, that he was considering taking the company private at $420 per share
- Shares of Tesla rose 1.6 percent in after-hours trading following the verdict and Musk tweeted that "he wisdom of the people has prevailed"
Foreign media group slams Israel for refusing to lift Gaza press ban
- Foreign Press Association expresses 'profound disappointment' with Israeli government’s response to a Supreme Court appeal
- Israel has barred foreign journalists from independently entering the devastated territory since the war started
JERUSALEM: An international media association on Tuesday criticized the Israeli government for maintaining its ban on unrestricted media access to Gaza, calling the move disappointing.
The government had told the Supreme Court in a submission late Sunday that the ban should remain in place, citing security risks in the Gaza Strip.
The submission was in response to a petition filed by the Foreign Press Association (FPA) — which represents hundreds of journalists in Israel and Palestinian territories — seeking immediate and unrestricted access for foreign journalists to the Gaza Strip.
“The Foreign Press Association expresses its profound disappointment with the Israeli government’s latest response to our appeal for full and free access to the Gaza Strip,” the association said on Tuesday.
“Instead of presenting a plan for allowing journalists into Gaza independently and letting us work alongside our brave Palestinian colleagues, the government has decided once again to lock us out” despite the ceasefire in the territory, it added.
Since the outbreak of the Gaza war in October 2023, triggered by an attack on Israel by the Palestinian militant group Hamas, the government has barred foreign journalists from independently entering the devastated territory.
Instead, Israel has allowed only a limited number of reporters to enter Gaza on a case-by-case basis, embedded with its military inside the blockaded Palestinian territory.
The FPA filed its petition in 2024, after which the court granted the government several extensions to submit its response.
Last month, however, the court set January 4 as a final deadline for the government to present a plan for allowing media access to Gaza.
In its submission, the government maintained that the ban should remain in place.
“This is for security reasons, based on the position of the defense establishment, which maintains that a security risk associated with such entry still exists,” the government submission said.
The government also said that the search for the remains of the last hostage held in Gaza was ongoing, suggesting that allowing journalists in at this stage could hinder the operation.
The remains of Ran Gvili, whose body was taken to Gaza after he was killed during Hamas’s 2023 attack, have still not been recovered despite the ceasefire.
The FPA said it planned to submit a “robust response” to the court, and expressed hope the “judges will put an end to this charade.”
“The FPA is confident that the court will provide justice in light of the continuous infringement of the fundamental principles of freedom of speech, the public’s right to know and free press,” the association added.
The Supreme Court is expected to issue a ruling on the matter, though it is unclear when a decision will be handed down.
An AFP journalist sits on the board of the FPA.










