Tesla Stops Using 'Autopilot' Term in California

The automaker faces penalties from the state's DMV if it continues to use the term.

Published on Feb. 20, 2026

Got story updates? Submit your updates here. ›

According to reports, Tesla has ceased using the term 'Autopilot' in California for its driver assistance feature, rather than face a 30-day suspension from the state's DMV. The legal fight began in 2023, with the DMV taking issue with both 'Autopilot' and 'Full Self-Driving' terminology.

Why it matters

This move by Tesla highlights the ongoing regulatory scrutiny over the marketing and capabilities of advanced driver assistance systems. California's DMV is cracking down on potentially misleading terminology that could give consumers an inaccurate impression of a vehicle's self-driving abilities.

The details

Tesla had already stopped shipping Autopilot as standard equipment, instead pushing customers toward its more advanced, subscription-based version of the system. The company has also changed 'Full Self-Driving' to 'full self-driving (supervised)' on its website. California DMV director Steve Gordon said Tesla has now taken the required action to remain in compliance with the state's consumer protection laws.

  • In 2023, the California DMV began taking issue with Tesla's use of 'Autopilot' and 'Full Self-Driving' terminology.
  • Last month, Tesla stopped shipping Autopilot as standard equipment.

The players

Tesla

An American electric vehicle and clean energy company.

California DMV

The state agency responsible for vehicle registration, driver's licenses, and regulating the automotive industry in California.

Steve Gordon

The director of the California DMV.

Got photos? Submit your photos here. ›

What they’re saying

“Tesla has now taken the required action to remain in compliance with the state of California's consumer protections.”

— Steve Gordon, California DMV Director (San Francisco Chronicle)

What’s next

The California DMV will continue to monitor Tesla's marketing and terminology to ensure compliance with state consumer protection laws.

The takeaway

This case highlights the ongoing tension between automakers' desire to market advanced driver assistance features and regulators' efforts to ensure consumers understand the actual capabilities and limitations of these systems.