- This topic has 10 replies, 10 voices, and was last updated 8 years, 11 months ago by
.
- Topic
Do Automakers Want to Make it Illegal to Work On Your Vehicle? is the actual title of the video. Thing is, the title will only accept so many characters. That said, I’ve gotten a lot of questions about this topic. This video is an attempt to answer those questions. What are your opinions on the topic?
- Replies
I still think electronic/computer modifications will happen a lot. When have government regulations stopped anyone? A ton of people in California run without catalytic converters. A company I’ve looked at for a supercharger kit for my BMW supplies a CA smog-legal tune, and the tune is completely reversible. I have to think this sort of thing will be much more common in the future.
That said, I think what the manufacturers are concerned with are the increasingly complex accident avoidance systems. A tuner hacking up the systems that automatically actuate the braking system could be quite dangerous; I think they’re afraid of stuff like this:
Well perhaps not exactly lock the electronics so they can’t be tampered with, but enforce logging. Ie that everytime ANYONE messes with the electronics it should get logged somewhere in the car and then be pulled at a later time for audits and such. I live in Denmark and we have some issues with people buying former fleet lease cars with 180k-280k kilometers on them and then hooking them to a computer and using said computer to dial them back to 80-180k or less and then marking them up accordingly.
Several european carmakers did toss their arms up in the air and say that there was no way they would be able to tell that kind of electronic tampering had indeed taken place and the only “safeguard” would be to check the service manual, call a official service technician and enquire about last service and mileage, or check the MOT slips. Out MOT’s are logged electronically so at any time I can take a tag and look up a car and see what the odometer reading was at all its MOT’s. Any low or odd readings usually indicate either a dialback or a new engine/dash.
Eric, I feel you missed one huge point in regards to the “it’s my car” argument.
Yes, it is their car, but their use of the public roads carries the requirement of their car to be safe, sound and meet emissions standards. The moment they alter these systems they are, effectively, voiding their legality to drive on the public roads. At that point the “it’s my car” argument is moot. Unless they agree to never use that car on a public road, they are already in violation of federal law and most local laws by operating that altered vehicle on public roads. Therefore, this effectively changes nothing for the other than blocking them from breaking the law, which is a very weak point to argue in defense of.
Ok, lets talk about Copyright infringement according to the government…If you have a cd player in the shop, and the public hears you play its..your in violation.. Not only do you have to have an ASCAP license, you have to have a BMI one as well. Restaurants and such used to have pay for money for this…does anybody actually get prosecuted for playing music in a business.. well, probably about as many people as will be charged with copyright violations for auto software. I know there is a lot of a back scratching going on between the crooks in DC and the automakers, however, it will backfire. If this is in fact retroactive, the standalone ecm market to keep cars on the road without the use of the stealerships/corporate stuff, the aftermarket will explode. Rather than just catering to a few performance vehicles as they do now, they will be like Dorman or Cardone, helping people get to work without spending a ton. Will the DC crooks try to to limit how many people have access to fully featured hardware to make any and every car run without factory hardware and software… yes, but joe average is smarter. Government does something and the citizenry is already 10 steps ahead… if this becomes a war between independant/aftmarket folks and the factories, the cars with multiple computers with can bus type stuff will be a challenge, however systems to run just the drivetrain with open source software, well that stuff been around for 2 decades will become a trend and for something like an older car like a Civic or GM truck, there are already systems out there that can run them without ANY factory software/hardware. Backup cameras, screens, active steering and braking, I don’t believe the aftermarket will get near that due to liability, so in theory, the crop of cars before 2005 will be on the road long after the newer stuff is in an electronic dump in China.
Another important thing is that modern cars, and especially i have heard, luxury cars, parts are coded. As we all know from living with american DMCA for 15+ years, once a DMCA claim is found strong, the loosest interpretation of the law, often coming down to definitions of words, is what is upheld. So coded stereos, brake pads, some mercedes BATTERIES i have heard… are all coded, and to break that code is breaking the DMCA. Doesn’t matter your intent at all, which is why it is a heavy handed draconian LAW.
So the auto manufacturers are already creeping out of all their kind claims. And very soon, every single part of the car, spark plugs included, may be represented in the computer. Oil viscosity sensors, what your car was purchased in the south, and now you want to use it in the north? Pay up!
Modifying your vehicle to disable the brakes in some way would make you be liable obviously to a judge or jury. It is probably already a crime to cut your own brake lines, get in accident and falsely blame the manufacturer. Many laws go over the top when common sense will do, but when it comes to computers LOOK OUT EVERYONE!!! its a brand new world!!!! Since you don’t remember when the DMCA was passed (i sure do), you will remember the 90s and how people, especially senators and corporations, feared the computer and passed it in that regard.
I am not in the habit of subsidizing corporation’s business models by buying “updates” for my car thank you. And the laws america passes, has effects on other parts of the world unfortunately. Its always good to remember the following as an american, and vote more for peoples personal rights, because many people outside of your country are also affected, and have absolutely ZERO say in the passing of laws like these or their exceptions.
“Whenever a controversial law is proposed, and its supporters, when confronted with an egregious abuse it would permit, use a phrase along the lines of ‘Perhaps in theory, but the law would never be applied in that way’ – they’re lying. They intend to use the law that way as early and as often as possible.
(cf: DMCA, Patriot Act, Prevention of Terrorism Act (UK), Enabling Act (Weimar Germany)…)” –meringuoidPart of it is probably that Ford doesn’t want Chrysler copying and using their software (to pick on those two companies).
I remember twenty or twenty five years ago when we would download the contents of the engine computer, decompile it and wonder about all the ones and zeros. That has all been figured out and now one can play with it as they please. If the car companies lock it up I expect it will be a week or two before the unlocker is posted to the web. So, what can they do except make noise about it? It is a non issue in my opinion.
The bulk of the focus in DYI circles seems to be on whether or not legislation will prohibit maintenance by anyone other than the dealer or shops authorized by them. In the arguments by lawyers for GM and John Deere, there is a more insidious precedence they seem to be setting up. They are stating that the software that allows the vehicle to function, and by extension the vehicle itself, is still property of the manufacturer and is merely licensed for use by the consumer for the lifetime of the vehicle. I’m sure the goal of this push is a preemptive strike at enterprising third parties from creating software that would completely replace the factory software, much like installing Linux on a computer instead of MS Windows. Maybe a better example is smartphones and the “jailbreaking” debate, where the manufacturer wants the hardware exclusively tied to their software.
http://www.autoblog.com/2015/05/20/general-motors-says-owns-your-car-software/
BTW, just found the site through the YouTube channel and it looks like an awesome resource!
I’m coming at this issue from a slightly different direction. Let’s consider driving aids, like Park Assist, for a moment. Clearly, if you’ve gone into your vehicle’s electronic brain with a can opener and altered something, anything, for any reason, and your vehicle ends up squashing a huddle of blind nuns on their way to prayers while it’s parking itself, you’re obviously on the hook for insurance, damages and criminal charges.
If, however, your digital systems are factory-pristine and unaltered, and the vehicle has a digital brain fart and it causes damage and/or injury while self-parking, who is going to be at fault? You? It’s your vehicle, but weren’t quite driving it completely at the time. You weren’t operating it in an unsafe manner, you were simply using one of the vehicle’s features as was intended. Would the manufacturer be at fault? Maybe, but if a series of subsequent investigative test parkings went seamlessly, the system would appear to be functioning within specs. Transient or one-time digital glitches can be next to impossible to confirm. HAL9000 can appear to be normal while being a complete fruitcake in reality.
The more I think about this, the more suspicious and disenchanted I become of current automotive technology, and more so of what will be available in the future.
I think the issue here is manuf are trying to pass off liability. Air bags are times to release upon impact because of sensors. If the manuf can prove that someone altered an operating code for better throttle response, they aren’t liable to the tune of millions of dollars in liability. Even though they are responsible. It’s been my experience corporations have a way of keeping the money they have, morally or immorally.
[quote=”Summer_Night” post=162424]Yeah I came to the party late…
I remember back around 1993, going to this informal classic car show that happens every Saturday in spring and summer, classic car owners talking about “They are going to use this thing called “On-board diagnostics two” where you will not be able to work on your own car. You won’t even be able to change spark plugs without a computer…”
Everyone was freaking out. Today, you can get a scanner for $20 to pull those codes out of the big, bad computer. Changing plugs still involves only a ratchet, extension, and socket.
With insurance – is there EVEN a chance they are gonna investigate the vehicle enough to even know if it was modified (unless it is super obvious)?[/quote]No, it will never be illegal to fix your own car. However, I do think it may be illegal at some point to modify your own car, as you could potentially impact the safety of those around you. With the Teslas, I know there are several ethernet ports throughout the car. Messing with them will prompt a polite, but firm, phone call from the offices.
And as far as scanners go, modern BMWs are some of the worst offenders. Need to replace a battery? Oh, that’s “coded” to the computer. How about a fuel injector? Also coded. Spark plugs, as far as I know, are still 100% analog, but it’s probably not far off.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.