[zde]

> separate problem

Nope. When doing business, the only thing that counts is formal, verifiable spec. Crying "You have cheated since I wanted somehing else" should be irrelevant in any country that honors rule of law.

> specifically designing their cars to cheat on the existing test.

Test is a predicate. It can pass or fail, but you can't cheat it.

> actively circumvent the purpose of the test

Hmm, that's probably closest to something I can accept as an argument. Nice. But to circumvent the purpose requires an actual purpose. If the purpose is formal, it's the test itself. And if it's not formal, then it's IMO impossible or very hard to prove that it has been circumvented.