It's been a while since I've seen the episode in question, but who's in the right depends entirely on whether the claims were falsified. If the brakes did fail and the motor did overheat, then it doesn't make much sense for Tesla to sue. Either way, I suspect we'll find out.
It won't stop the episode airing, the retraction will likely be released on the BBC website, there'll be a press release but even BBC news won't cover it and there'll probably be a mention in an upcoming top gear, which will likely have Clarkson just take the piss out of Tesla for being little bitches that can't take a review.
I don't even know why Tesla would want their vehicle reviewed by Clarkson. He's brutal on Diesel vehicles, even when they compare on-par with gasoline. From what I remember, Clarkson was incredibly pro-tesla as I half expected him to say "It's electric," look at another camera and carry on the show like they'd just asked him to test out a golf cart.
> The company says that if the episode had been broadcast in 2008, and not rebroadcast repeatedly it would not have sued.
Are these people complete utter retards, what fucking planet do they live on that they don't understand that TV episodes rebroadcast repeatedly. Reruns of friends episodes 17 years after their initial run doesn't give someone a clue that TV has reruns?
I wouldn't buy a roadster simply for the utter idiocy of this comment from the company. I'd question whether they have a simple employee capable of fastening a damn nut to a bolt because their management can't comprehend that TV shows have reruns. It's not like there's entire TV stations based around reruns... oh wait, but there is!
Where libel law is concerned, repetition of the supposed libel is a big deal, as it cements in the viewers' minds the supposed drawbacks of the product. One-time damage from a flippant statement is one thing, but repeating that statement ad nauseum around the world is another.
It's the libeled parties responsibility to promptly file a motion, not wait years and dozens of repeats just to boost the settlement size to the biggest you think you can get.
They willingly allowed their image to be damaged by not filing a motion immediately.
