Consider the fairly massive changes to the competitive landscape ushered in by the <i>combined</i> factors of self-driving and electric vehicles:<p>- For liability reasons, most of the algorithmic IP will likely be open sourced. Either because it's required by regulators or because it's the most efficient way for car makers to socialize risk of an algorithmic failure.<p>- Electric vehicles have many fewer moving parts, which means that the remaining parts are likely to be converged upon by the industry and used widely. This breaks a lot of platform-dependency issues and allows for the commoditization of parts like motors. As these become standardized and commoditized, and easily comparable on the basis of size, torque, and efficiency, there will be virtually no benefit to carmakers to manufacture their own. The same applies to aluminum monocoque frames, charging circuitry, etc.<p>Tesla currently differentiates its models based on how many motors and what size batteries, but beyond that it's mostly just cabin shape, along with new innovations like the hepa filter cabin air cleansing which will likely be a standard part of all future models.<p>- Battery tech works the same way as motors, with little competitive advantage to be gained by automakers, especially since most of the IP in this area is already spoken for.<p>Compare the number of patentable parts in a model T vs a 1998 Taurus vs a 2017 internal combustion vehicle vs a Telsa. Tesla is one innovator, and GM has already likely patented many inventions relating to EV technology back in the original Chevy Volt era.<p>All this is why Tesla acquired SolarCity and is attempting to make an infrastructure play rather than a technology play. Only due to Musk's rare ability to self-finance big risks is this even possible, since infrastructure moonshots featuring $30K+ hardware units are hard to fund.