Tesla’s legal team is officially going on the offensive to secure the naming rights for its upcoming autonomous Robotaxi, the Cybercab. According to new filings with the US Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO), Tesla has initiated legal proceedings against French beverage wholesaler Unibev, accusing it of fraudulently squatting on the Cybercab trademark.
While the dispute highlights Tesla's administrative slip-up in announcing the Cybercab naming without first acquiring the trademark, the company is now pulling no punches to reclaim the name ahead of the vehicle’s volume production and launch.
The Unibev Trademark Squatter
The news of the USPTO appeal, uncovered by Electrek, centers around Unibev’s principal, Jean-Louis Lentali.
When filing for the Cybercab trademark, Unibev reportedly told USPTO that no other entity was using the “cyber,” “cab,” or “cyber cab” monikers for similar goods. Tesla’s legal team is arguing that this statement was blatantly false.
Tesla points out that it had already publicly revealed the Cybercab name in 2024, but unfortunately failed to file its own trademark paperwork in time, allowing Unibev to swoop in and claim the name.
In a five-count opposition motion, Tesla explicitly accused Unibev of fraud and extortion. Tesla’s legal team argued that Unibev has absolutely no history of manufacturing or selling vehicles. Tesla also noted that Lentali actively follows Elon Musk and other Tesla executives on social media, making it impossible for him to be ignorant of Tesla’s massive, highly publicized plans for the Cybercab.
A History of Targeting Tesla
To strengthen its case that Unibev is acting in bad faith, Tesla’s lawyers pointed to the French wholesaler’s extensive history of targeting its intellectual property with trademarks.
According to the report, Unibev’s trademark squatting isn’t limited to just the Cybercab. The company also claimed the trademark for “Teslaquila”, which forced Tesla to pivot and sell its infamous liquor under the name “Tesla Tequila” instead. Unibev has also proactively filed for other blatant Tesla-adjacent trademarks, including “Cyberquad” and “Cybertaxi.”
Tesla argues that Unibev has no intention of ever using these names for legitimate products and is instead squatting on them solely to extort massive licensing payouts from Tesla.
Racing Against the Production Clock
Tesla has every reason to aggressively clear this legal hurdle as quickly as possible. With the first production-intent Cybercab having already rolled off the production line, the faster, the better.
With volume production intended to begin as soon as April, the Cybercab is supposed to become the foundation of Tesla’s ambitions as an autonomy, AI, and robotics-first company, rather than just an automaker. Having the actual name of the product being held hostage by a French beverage company is simply not an option.
We expect the USPTO to rule heavily in Tesla's favor given Unibev's documented history of bad-faith filings, but we will keep a close eye on the docket as the appeal progresses.
