Alcon Entertainment sued Tesla, Elon Musk and Warner Bros. Discovery after an image resembling Blade Runner 2049 imagery appeared during Tesla’s October 10, 2024 Cybercab presentation. Alcon alleges it refused permission to use the film imagery and that the image was nevertheless shown. In the latest located ruling, dated February 3, 2026, a judge allowed Alcon’s literal-copying theory against Tesla and Musk to proceed past dismissal—but did not find that anyone infringed copyright or resolve the fair-use defense.
What happened at Tesla’s Cybercab event?
Tesla presented its Cybercab on October 10, 2024, at a Warner Bros. Discovery studio lot in Burbank. According to Alcon’s October 21, 2024 complaint, the defendants sought permission to use an iconic still from Blade Runner 2049 at the event. Alcon says it refused and objected to any suggestion that it was affiliated with Tesla.
| # | Preview | Product | Price | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 |
|
Blade Runner 2049 (Blu-ray) (BD) | $7.99 | Buy on Amazon |
| 2 |
|
Blade Runner 2049 (4K Ultra HD + Blu-ray) (4K Ultra) | $17.53 | Buy on Amazon |
| 3 |
|
Blade Runner 2049 | $29.99 | Buy on Amazon |
| 4 |
|
Blade Runner Collection: Blade Runner The Final Cut / Blade Runner 2049 (2-Movie Blu-ray Set) | $27.27 | Buy on Amazon |
Alcon alleges that an apparently AI-generated image resembling imagery from the film was then displayed during the presentation. The complaint says it appeared onscreen for 11 seconds; that duration is Alcon’s allegation, not a finding by the court. Reuters’ contemporaneous account also described the dispute as arising from the Cybercab unveiling and reported Alcon’s claims.
During the event, Tesla CEO Elon Musk said, “I love Blade Runner, but I don’t know if we want that future,” and added, “I think we want that duster he’s wearing, but not the bleak apocalypse,” according to the Associated Press.
Crashes, No Sound, or Screen Glitches?
Random freezes, missing sound and display glitches usually trace back to one bad driver. Find and replace yours safely.Free scan · under a minutePC Slower Than It Used to Be?
A free scan shows the junk files, broken settings and background clutter dragging Windows down - then fixes them in one click.Free scan · Windows 10 & 11#1 Best Overall
What does Alcon’s lawsuit claim?
Alcon’s complaint asserts claims under the Copyright Act and alleges false endorsement under the Lanham Act. In broad terms, the copyright claim concerns alleged use of protected film material; the false-endorsement claim concerns whether the presentation could mislead people into thinking Alcon endorsed or was connected to Tesla. These are claims made by Alcon, not established facts or a court’s conclusion that viewers were misled.
Alcon also tied the dispute to its commercial interests. Its complaint said it had spent “hundreds of millions of dollars” building the Blade Runner 2049 brand and alleged that earlier automotive brand contracts carried eight-figure price tags. Those figures are allegations in Alcon’s 2024 pleading, not independently verified financial findings. Reuters reported that Alcon raised concerns about potential brand-partner confusion and its planned Blade Runner 2099 series for Amazon Prime; the complaint said it was discussing automotive partnerships for that series.
Rank #2
- Brand New in box. The product ships with all relevant accessories
What did the judge decide in February 2026?
On February 3, 2026, U.S. District Judge George H. Wu rejected Tesla and Musk’s effort to end the case at the motion-to-dismiss stage. The court concluded that Alcon had plausibly alleged a literal-copying theory: material from the film may have been copied in the process of creating the event image. The order said, “Plaintiff has a seemingly-valid and plausible theory of literal copying, which does not appear to require an assessment of ‘substantial similarity.’” That statement explains why the theory could proceed at this stage; it is not a finding that copying or infringement actually occurred.
The ruling addressed whether the allegations were sufficient to continue, not who should win after the evidence is developed. The court said it could not resolve fair use on the pleadings and expected a full assessment no earlier than summary judgment. Fair use therefore remained an unresolved defense.
Quick wins for a faster PC:
Clear out junk files and repair common Windows errorsFree Scan →Scan for outdated or missing drivers - takes under a minuteDriver Scan →Repair Windows errors before they cause bigger problemsFix Now →Rank #3
How did the order treat Warner Bros. Discovery?
The order did not treat all three defendants alike on literal copying. It noted that Alcon had not plausibly connected Warner Bros. Discovery to that allegation on the same basis it asserted against Tesla and Musk. The ruling therefore should not be described as finding WBD liable, or as applying the same pleading conclusion to WBD.
Independent reader supportYour contribution helps us test, update, and keep practical guides available for everyone.Where does the case stand?
The latest located court development is the February 3, 2026 order. It allowed Alcon’s literal-copying theory against Tesla and Musk to survive a motion to dismiss, while leaving infringement, fair use and the ultimate outcome unresolved. The available information does not establish later docket activity, so the February order should not be treated as the final result of the lawsuit.
Quick Recap
Rank #4
- Widescreen
- Bundle
- Double Feature
Product prices and availability are accurate as of the date/time indicated and are subject to change. Any price and availability information displayed on Amazon at the time of purchase will apply.
