Did Elon Musk obtain permission to use the name "Tesla" I wonder?

It's an SI unit. (Magnetic field strength). No permission needed.

Elon didn't name the company. The company was incorporated in 2003 by Martin Eberhard and Marc Tarpenning.

If the company was named "Nicola Tesla Motors Inc" maybe they'd have a problem.

Here is some info about "Tesla" name:

http://theoatmeal.com/comics/tesla_model_s2

Nikola Tesla's grand nephew wrote a letter to Elon Musk. It was posted at the end of this comic. http://theoatmeal.com/comics/tesla_model_s2

Edit, opps. I spent so long looking for the link, I was beaten to it.

Perhaps the Tesla family can retaliate by registering the name Elon Musk for a new and electrifying men's fragrance...

voyager said:

Perhaps the Tesla family can retaliate by registering the name Elon Musk for a new and electrifying men's fragrance...

Click to expand...

Retaliate? Now it's a war? That seems a bit over-the-top.

Though Elon did not select the name (see my first post, above), he has also pledged $1M of his money to the Nikola Tesla museum.

bonnie said:

... he has also pledged $1M of his money to the Nikola Tesla museum.

Click to expand...

Also, a supercharger at the museum, I believe.

Judge Advocate said:

Just wondering if he got permission from the Serbian American's family.
He probably did but just curious.
Imagine of Elon had to change the name of his car company?
Don't want to even think of it.

Click to expand...

He surely did not! The company existed and was named prior to his involvement. It was formed in July 2003 and Musk joined in February 2004.
Were the situation have been different it is not really clear that the name "Tesla" could be protected anyway, despite the obvious lineage. For a related example the 'tesla'=10K Gauss could be claimed to have had commercial intent also. It would be an entirely different question were the name to have been Edison, Firestone, Crapper or Ford all of which were explited commercially during the lifetime of the persons in question. In any event there would be a difficult case to make for the Tesla name since Nicola never married and had no progeny (OK, 'known progency', since there conceivably could have been).

Ergo...there is nobody from whom to seek permission, his name was not commercialised during his lifetime, so there is no potentially injured party to make such a claim. Thus, there was nobody from whom to seek permission.

This was an interesting question...

Johan said:

If the company was named "Nicola Tesla Motors Inc" maybe they'd have a problem.

Click to expand...

It would be weird, but as best I understand the law that would be perfectly OK. In fact, a Nikola Tesla Corporation was formed in Czechoslovakia just six years after his death, which was subsequently purchased by Ericsson and still is a major telco in eastern Europe, as far as I know.

LetsGoFast said:

It would be weird, but as best I understand the law that would be perfectly OK. In fact, a Nikola Tesla Corporation was formed in Czechoslovakia just six years after his death, which was subsequently purchased by Ericsson and still is a major telco in eastern Europe, as far as I know.

Click to expand...

At least in the US no commercial exploitation during life and no direct descendents makes this perfectly legal, as it would be in this situation nearly everywhere. BTW, my reference to this dates from ancient times during a class I took on tort law personality rights, involving among of things the Lincoln Motor car Company. These days the dominant text on the issue in Europe is this
Personality Rights in European Tort Law | European Law | Cambridge University Press

Many other entities have used the Tesla name as well...