Tesla crashes into wall during auto-park, Tesla: Beta feature, so owner's fault

What I don't understand (and maybe I'm just naive) is how it's legal to test a so-called "beta feature" -- which, if it fails, clearly can be dangerous (lucky no one was hurt) -- on customers in a live environment, vs using its own test drivers at the very least? I can't imagine this being legal with any other form of transportation (or just large equipment; they don't even sell lightbulbs that aren't CE certified).

IMO this is pure FUD, no actual correspondence with Tesla to back it up.<p>It would be silly for Tesla to argue that it&#x27;s driver&#x27;s fault because &quot;beta&quot;. Every other car manufacturer will say it&#x27;s driver&#x27;s responsibility when using autopark, full stop.

It would be interesting to get non Twitter, more in depth information on this.<p>Beta software that has safety implications on a car seems strange.

don&#x27;t you sign a liability waiver when entering Tesla beta program?

I don&#x27;t think signing up for beta software on a car like this is a good idea.

Just glad no one was hurt.

I&#x27;m kind of interested how anything even could be a Beta feature in a car&#x27;s context - or atleast a safety critical feature like this.

Do people have any personal accountability anymore? &quot;The company will protect me&quot; is such a foolish thought process, especially when you&#x27;re playing with beta features that have risks.<p>This to me isn&#x27;t all that different than the guy who crashed his Tesla while watching a movie behind the wheel. Culpability. Assumption of risk. But-for causation. All the usual legal theories apply.