So I’m starting to think I must actually be genuinely stupid here.
Reading through Volkswagens Dieselgate, and the two things that keep jumping out at me:
1) There was only ever the legal requirement to pass the tests
2) Volkswagen designed their cars to meet that exact legal requirement
And then anything I can find from that time also says:
3) Volswagen never made claims other than their cars had passed the tests (“Such as [X] kg of CO2/1000km (by [TEST CYCLE]”)
It seems to simply be a massive part of corporate r/MaliciousCompliance where they followed exactly what the law said.
I mean I know that this comes back to “The Castle Argument” that they missed “The Vibe” and “The Mabo” of the law.
But from what I can find, what they did followed exactly what was written, even if it didn’t follow what was intended?
In: 0
False advertising, you are correct that they passed all the tests. They were not fined for their test performance, they were fined because the fuel consumption rates they advertised (which matched the tests) were false.
False advertising is illegal, but yes they fully passed the tests.
I used to use it as a debate topic when I taught in grad school, “Be it resolved that volkswagen was solely responsible for the 2012 scandal”. Because they did pass the tests, but they knew how to pass in advance, and is that solely on them or also partially on those that administer the tests?
Latest Answers