I'm not a lawyer but that sure sounds like it would be a case of promissory estoppel to me. That is, if someone relies on Tesla's word and makes investments based on it they'd have a legal case to prevent Tesla from trying to exercise those patents against them. But I do hope there's an actual legal grant of rights as well.

Haven't heard the term and I'm googling it to understand better. Is there case law where this was tested in the context of patents on ports? I'm thinking Tesla could say, "we changed our minds but you can keep selling any of the Toyota 2023 models, you just can't make a new car model with the port. therefore we aren't causing you financial harm or injury by relying on our promise"

You're asking for a very specific citation there.

But it doesn't matter, they could give everyone who asks a 20 year license for $1.

Also courts aren't stupid.

Google “promissory estoppel”

I Googled it, and learned a new concept. Thanks!

The press release says:

> we are opening our EV connector design to the world. We invite charging network operators and vehicle manufacturers to put the Tesla charging connector ... equipment and vehicles

This does not even promise that it is free. "open" and "invite you to X" sound good but are very vague.

Yeah, Apple has used similar language in marketing for their Lightning Connector licensing program.

> What legal guarantee is there that Tesla won't reverse course in the future?

None. There would have to be a governing body set up for this to have any legs