Slashdot Mirror
Automakers To Gearheads: Stop Repairing Cars
Mr_Blank writes Automakers are supporting provisions in copyright law that could prohibit home mechanics and car enthusiasts from repairing and modifying their own vehicles. In comments filed with a federal agency that will determine whether tinkering with a car constitutes a copyright violation, OEMs and their main lobbying organization say cars have become too complex and dangerous for consumers and third parties to handle. The dispute arises from a section of the Digital Millennium Copyright Act that no one thought could apply to vehicles when it was signed into law in 1998. But now, in an era where cars are rolling computing platforms, the U.S. Copyright Office is examining whether provisions of the law that protect intellectual property should prohibit people from modifying and tuning their cars.
you simply get to use it, and the automaker gets a final say in how you use your car. good grief.
To purchase a nice car from the 60's or 70's with no computer. Easy to fix, and except for crash-readyness usually pretty solid.
Why don't the automakers just seek refuge under the DMCA from all those evil automobile hackers? Clearly, figuring out how your car works is a direct attack on the very hard work and property of those automakers.
Time to pass a bill state by state. I'm the sure the invisible hand of the free market will line all the right politicians' pockets to rush those through. Hopefully someday we won't be able to own our cars and we can go back to the Ma Bell days when every phone was rented.
My work here is dung.
Whilst the DMCA may or may not be a good thing, it is certainly not a means for the car manufacturers to impose a SAFETY based restriction. That organisations pull that sort of abuse is why the legal system is held in contempt.
...didn't think that usage rights could be restricted to cars too. Ebooks and Emusic was just the beginning...
" The dispute arises from a section of the Digital Millennium Copyright Act that no one thought could apply to vehicles when it was signed into law in 1998"
Do the editors even read this site ? Virtually everyone realized this could apply to just about anything that ran code. There was even the infamous use garage door opener case
https://freedom-to-tinker.com/...
And the HP and Lexmark toner cartridge cases which were just about embedded serialization
Just let it happen. Give the car companies what they want: People's money for free. Rent. Guaranteed income. A direct financial incentive to make cars less reliable. I'm tired of fighting bullshit like this up and down the political, economic, legal, and social system. For people who don't care, against people with no morals, conscience, or checks on power.
The only way to get people to take and stand, realise what's going on, and do something about is to charge their wallets, and that's exactly what car companies will do if this gets passed. So let it. Let cars get shitter, more expensive, take longer to repair. Let it happen. All protesting will do is at best delay the inevitable, and at worst just boil the frog.
Let go.
I'm not Joe Mechanic or anything like that, but I know enough to change my air, fuel & oil filters, add fluids, etc. I've even done tune-ups on my older cars, but what about the real grease monkeys who can fix anything on a vehicle? Wouldn't this type of law put the Auto-Zones, Napas & the like out of business? I don't know where they get the majority of their sales, but I know a sizeable amount has to come from home car repair/tuning enthusiasts.
Taking guns away from the 99% gives the 1% 100% of the power.
Being able to maintain your own care can help a lot if you aren't financially well off. I have an '03 VW Jetta TDI Wagon that I bought with 239,000 miles on it, and I've been able to fix every problem it had (and to be honest there haven't been many) all by myself. I diagnosed changed my own thermostat when mine failed, which would've probably cost me a pretty penny instead of 30 or 40 bucks in OEM parts. I had to replace the glass in one of my mirrors once. It took me about 15 seconds to connect the heat wires and snap it into place. The dealership quoted me $50 to do what was quite literally 15 seconds worth of work.
I'm also not convinced that auto makers can't do things do make cars more easily repairable by amateurs, and this idea of a car that's too complex for someone with the ability to fix is not an economically viable one from my standpoint. As a college student, I can't afford to spend $300 to have some dolt in a dealership replace my alternator and do it wrong when I can do it myself at the cost of a little time and have it done correctly.
As a final note, I've worked in the automotive industry among design and RMA engineers, and a lot of them aren't half as smart as they think they are, and even the OEMs get confused at how to work on their own crap, and I know having seen mechanics reports in a return material analysis lab that the people doing the repair work don't always know that much about the vehicles they're working on anyway, even with dealership and OEM support. We've had electronic power steering gears returned with the dealership claiming there was a power steering fluid leak. Seriously.
When you start your new car for the first time, an FBI warning replaces the metering display and an annoying voice from the sound system asks; "You wouldn't pirate a movie, would you?"
In 100 years it will be determined that home based human baby producing process is too dangerous. All the enthusiasts and hobbyists are at great risk of infringing of the global law, 1 baby per family, and are at risk of procreating unauthorized offspring.
Very, very, very (as in I bet most senior mechanics would say they've never done this) few reasons exist to modify the programming on a PCM as a *repair*. Sure, some mechanics will upload new factory made software to it, or change settings in it with factory tools (or change the same settings with non-factory tools), but I can't think of a case where a repair would involve hacking the PCM.
There's plenty of improvements that can be made to the software, and there's lots of hot-rodding and performance tuning opportunities available there, but neither of those activities are repairing a car any more than hacking your BIOS so your PC will support some new peripheral. Repairs typically involve replacing broken stuff with like items. ie: Control arm broken? Put in a new one. Don't go and install leaf springs instead, because that's not a repair, that's an upgrade (or downgrade).
The DMCA sucks, but even if the automakers win, you'll still be able to put a new engine and transmission in your car when the old ones blow up. You'll just have to make sure you're replacing like with like. Now, if you decide you'd like to drive a stick shift and upgrade your automatic to a manual and thus have to "pirate" the PCM software, well, yeah, that's a problem. But that's not really a repair, is it? Thus 99.9999% of people getting work done will NEVER see a change in their garage, and 99.9% of mechanics won't see any difference, either.
(at least the ones who think this is a good idea)
Fuck off and die, preferably in a fire.
-SS "Teach the ignorant, care for the dumb, and punish the stupid."
From now on, sticking with cars made before this stupid concept went into effect.
Oliver's law of assumed responsibility: If you're seen fixing it, you will be blamed for breaking it.
The DMCA does indeed suck. You should let your senator know that you don't want this and maybe even create one of those presidential petitions?
Jumpstart the tartan drive.
I want off al-fuckin-ready.
This has got to be the epitome of the stupidity of the DMCA. And it's only the tip of the iceberg.
There is a HUGE difference between maintaining your automobile and manufacturing new automobiles en masse.
I like how people are all up in arms about this, but don't give two flying fucks when the exact same fucking thing happens with their computers and software.
hopefully "you cant tinker with your car" will be to the DMCA as "the gov't can see your dick" was to surveillance, and get the unwashed masses to understand that this isnt just fluff, it's important shit that impacts us in a very real and tangible way. fuck you, you unwashed, bastard, plebeians, we're all fucked, stop being so happy about it!
A cynic might suspect that this is the automakers' response to the coming of the electric car, with its much lower maintenance costs.
I've calculated my velocity with such exquisite precision that I have no idea where I am.
Fuck you.
Show me a car that I'm not allowed to fix, and I'll show you a car that I won't allow myself to buy.
Slashdot still doesnâ(TM)t support Unicode after it was added to the HTML standard in 1997.
How are we supposed to make a car analogy now?
How many deaths and injuries are caused by modded car systems? Is this a large enough value to measure outside a single standard deviation on the number of deaths and injuries caused by motor vehicles?
If the answer to the first is an actual value and the answer to the second is yes, than I have no problem with this. However, if it isn't (which is likely), they should take their FUD and go home, and come back when there's an actual (societal) problem that needs to be fixed.
This is less "Eagle has landed" and more "First stage of Falcon 9 has...landed".
From the article;
Industry concerns are mounting that modifying these ECUs and the software coding that runs them could lead to vulnerabilities in vehicle safety and cyber security. Imagine an amateur makes a coding mistake that causes brakes to fail and a car crash ensues. Furthermore, automakers say these modifications could render cars non-compliant with environmental laws that regulate emissions.
This is not about replacing brakes, oil changes, replacing spark plugs, etc. It is about making software changes that most people do not have the experience or knowledge to do.
If manufacturers don't want people tinkering with their systems because they are genuinely concerned about public safety, then it seems to me like they are already covered... there's no need to bring the DMCA into it at all.
File under 'M' for 'Manic ranting'
Rural voters are going to raise a stink about this. It's a national pastime there. Ironically they'll probably blame it on "gov't control", when in fact it's based on laws pushed by big corporations.
Table-ized A.I.
Came here to say this. This has nothing to do with replacing your spark plugs or ball joints. This is about modding your ECU. That said, I think that if a manufacturer ships an ECU that can be modded to such a degree that it causes the brakes to fail, the manufacturer bears a lot of that fault. However, in general, cars aren't cell phones or PCs. It's no big deal if you load up Cyanogenmod and your phone crashes. It's a pretty big deal if you flash your ECU and you lose traction through a turn thanks to some modified vehicle dynamics and kill someone.
Should this happen, someone will build tools that can be downloaded off the internet to A) change an ECM parameter and then B) conceal that it was ever done. I just put new shocks, springs, trackbar bracket, wheels and tires on my Jeep. The dealership won't make the change in the ECM to correct my speedo for the larger tire size so I had to buy something to do it myself. Also, it took me four hours to do this with my own tools, where the stealership wanted $1500 for the work...
If they do this, they're going against the magnuson moss act.
In a just world they would lose copyright when they stop warranting the product. You want copyright of that ecu? You give a permanent warranty on it and replace them every time they fail, for free. Don't want to have to replace it? then you give up copyright to the code on it because user needs to fix it. I'm not holding my breath though.
Is there nothing more American than taking a mass market car and finding another 10 horsepower?
Or making the stereo loud enough to knock down old barns as you drive by?
What if immersing your motherboard in liquid nitrogen for another 3 frames per second were illegal?
Or writing your own operating system could land you in jail?
What have we come to? We need to protect people from doing stupid stuff, but nobody wants to live in a world with only one flavor...
A.
The more normal uses that the DMCA distrupts and therefore the more disgrunted owners of common technologies then the more hope that there will be a movement to overthrown that aberration of law.
-no sig today-
Well folks, it will either be the automakers or government that will prevent you from modifying your auto. Probably from a automakers stand point is safety. Although I think the automakers pretty much have clauses that any modifications that go horribly wrong is not their fault. But the EPA has pushed against a lot of modifications and I expect more down the road in terms of providing emission validations and compliance for any street modification. I guess pretty soon the only tricked out cars will have to come out of the automakers factory. As a mechanic myself, I can see why the shade tree guy is losing the battle. Cars today are getting so locked down with computers that its really far more complicated to do anything but intake, exhaust and design mods. Engine and trans work need more computer oriented people these days.
Microsoft and Apple know their software best. You should be locked out of doing anything low level with your computer because you might cause damage to the software or the hardware. You just use the computer now. That's basically how things are with "smartphones" today.
I own three cars that I regularly work on.
I have tuners and tuning software that allows me to write my own set of parameters to run the car by.
The learning curve is hard, benefits are low unless you are constantly tinkering, and the cost of entry and training is pretty high.
I do not think Ford gives a rat's ass about my activities; my cars are too old to be on their radar.
None of my cars are Fly-Bt-Wire.
I have Real Brakes, Real Steering, and Real throttle action. Not going to say those won't fail, but they are a well proven technology.
I've reprogrammed all three cars to match various modifications, engine swaps, etc. It takes changing computer tables/values to get everything working well together.
This kind of "Programming" is more like changing the build file and recompiling with new values; you are not changing structure, just INI files, kinda.
I can't conceive of a circumstance that a bad ini file could cause a problem in the program structure... lol.
That said: In no way would I ever tinker with a FBW computer; the factory code could Crash my car from a WOT throttle event or some such shit Stock, without any help from me.
If you haven't read it, search out the settlement to the Toyota problems; the code review (postmortem, no less) was brutal.
They violated pretty much every rule I know for real time code; and didn't even realize they were having intermittent stack overflows.
They thought they were using a few stack locations; one routine used 30+, lol.
They didn't go to jail; a normal citizen would in a heartbeat.
They also don't want anyone dicking with their "InfoTainment" revenues; if your car has a cellphone, it's talking about you. :)
Truth isn't Truth - Guliani
No, you can't modify the self-driving software to make your car fly. Or exceed the speed limit. Or run over small children.
Automakers don't want any more liability exposure than they already have.
Crap, "Transformers" is becoming real.
Table-ized A.I.
Religious leaders are supporting provisions in copyright law that could prohibit home writers and book enthusiasts from repairing and modifying their own bibles. In comments filed with a federal agency that will determine whether tinkering with a bible constitutes a copyright violation, churches and their main lobbying organisation say bibles have become too complex and dangerous for believers and third parties to even scribble in. The dispute arises from a section of the Digital Millennium Copyright Act that no one thought could apply to bibles when it was signed into law in 1998. But now, in an era where books are text files, the U.S. Copyright Office is examining whether provisions of the law that protect intellectual property should prohibit people from modifying or even put boogers in their hardcopy bibles.
I have a 1999 Camry - a bit dinged up, but it runs like a Swiss watch after 240,000 miles! It gets 25mpg overall, and 30+ on the road. I will drive it until it dies. My wife has a PriusV, but it isn't something I can work on. Yes, I was a Toyota trained mechanic, but I still let my local garage deal with the repairs - not worth my time any longer. In any case, it hasn't been to a dealer for over 10 years!
It sounds like it would be in the interests of public safety, to use their own quotations to support an injunction from them being able to sell these unsafe cars.
Just as unmaintainable computers should not be allowed on the Internet, unmaintainable cars should not be allowed on public roads.
As copyright owner of this comment, I authorize everyone to defeat any technological measure which limits access to it.
the U.S. Copyright Office is examining whether provisions of the law that protect intellectual property should prohibit people from modifying and tuning their cars.
I'm not seriously considering the two options mentioned in the subject, but one would be driven (cough) to do so. Really? Or is this some kind of smoke screen to hide other changes that are coming? As in "I'm going to KILL you!!" - "Oh, please don't kill me!" - "OK, I'll just take your money instead." - "Oh, thank you! Thank you!"
When the copyright term is "forever minus a day", live every day like it's the last.
https://transportevolved.com/2...
Maybe they have a more compelling argument than most, but I agree you can "see where this is heading" and how the rest of the manufacturers are following suit.
I want to know how driving any of these cars is legal any more?
A lot of states and/or municipalities have poorly written laws about using a two-way-communications device while driving.
Since these cars are more computer than machine, and with Onstar or Sync and so forth they may be constantly communicating, it would seem driving one of these vehicles is outlawed in many places.
Even more so if you consider the cars with anti-collision technology.
(Maybe this is what is really driving the autonomous car movement - we can't continue to sell cars that are computers, until/unless the car drives itself, without being in violation of these anti-driving-and-texting/communicating/electronic device laws)
I drove to work today in a 1973 IH Scout II. I doubt I need to worry about IHC sending me a take-down notice..
When IBM said you could not service their typewriters, fought to gain access to manuals and parts.
We're gonna have to have this fight over cars. I service my cars regularly,repairing items from brakes to heater cores. When I finally buy one younger than 2006 I will have to confront the electronics, the locked-down systems, and the self-diagnostics that will not tell me anything beyond 'take me to a dealer'. then I will be disappointed.
I can understand the desire manufacturers have to lock their ECU code and such, but it's past that, and something as simple as sticky window could result in a code thrown, needing to use the dealer tool to reset the computer that supervised that, and being a bit lighter in the pocket than you expected.
Having driven a Saab 900NG, the Tech II tool was allegedly needed for everything from a disconnected battery to a sticky convertible top. I got past every one of those issues, but back then Saab and GM had not yet envisioned the opportunity for exploitation. The 900NG merely had electronics where mechanisms had been. They missed the boat. Not that Saab ever made things easy to fix - my mechanic reminding me the only right way to do most engine service was to drop the subframe... Thanks buddy...
deleting the extra space after periods so i can stay relevant, yeah.
For years these pricks have been ripping off their customers with deceptive pricing and dealer networks that are nothing more than a middle man. They want you to believe that you have to bring your car to the dealer for service but if you read the fine print you will see that any competent neighborhood mechanic can service you car and not void the warranty.
Then along comes Tesla and Uber and others that threaten their monopolies. So instead of changing their business to suit the way consumers want it they double down and try to lock you in. Right out of the playbook of the movie studios and cable companies and utilities. They will litigate and use political pressure to force you to play the game the way they want it played. Same old same old.
If someone made an open source car I'd buy it.
to eliminate the DMCA violation from modifying the cars electronics, remove the OEM electronics and install aftermarket versions. Aftermarket controllers typically allow tuning and can meet all of the requirements served by the original computers. It may require changing sensors and wiring harness as well. Not something a typical consumer will do; but, the moders we're talking about here who would do this are probably not the typical consumer.
Ownership of a car implies that you can do with it what you want within reason. It is private property, but runs on public roads. Unless a modification causes an actual safety issue, it should be completely legal, including re-programming the ECU. I have an '03 F250 turbo diesel pickup with a ton of mods, which resulted in much better towing performance, much better fuel efficiency, and better longevity. One of those mods was a chip that lets me pick different tunes on the fly. I can go from stock to a tune that gives me +65HP and firmer shifting for towing, to a tune that gives me an engine brake, to a tune that gives me +80HP for running solo at the touch of a button. If the manufacturer were responsive they would have made these mods at the factory. Since they didn't, I reserve the right to build the truck I would have bought had it been available.
If they're going to be like that about it, how's about setting up a copyright-free car project that you could build down at the local makerspace? You could probably do something on the order of complexity of the Ariel Atom without too much difficulty, and pull in an engine from a local junkyard. If that's what it takes to own your own car in this day and age, the guys the automakers are cock-blocking are more than capable of coming up with the designs.
I'm trying to teach myself to set people on fire with my mind... Is it hot in here?
We want you to buy a new car every 3 years and with auto drive cars they will shutdown after software updates end after 2-3 years.
Ok, automakers want to force me to obey their license terms? WHERE ARE THEY?
I've never had a dealer make me sign a EULA or license terms to use the car they just sold me... Go ahead guys, TRY IT!.
Once you do this, I'm going to review all the software I can find in my car and start looking for Open Source libraries in all that fancy user interface stuff you are providing now and make you comply to the license terms for it all. I have a feeling that we will find that you have some legal problems..
Next they are going to try this on hand tools....
"File to fit, pound to insert, paint to match" - Aircraft Maintenance 101
We owe the purchaser the exclusive right to modify the vehicle in anyway he sees fit.
or some such wording.
If certain automakers are successful in their effort to outlaw tinkerers, I imagine there will be certain other automakers will be sure to reach out this same group, and perhaps you'll see cars that are EVEN easier to work on at home than ever before as a result of these manufacturers competing for these tech savvy customers.
This is about locking down their future business model.
No one but Dealer Certified folks will be allowed to even LOOK at the software running the car. Anyone pointing out vulnerabilities and zero-days will be charged with everything under the sun because recalls cost a lot of money. I mean, we can always count on the manufacturers to do the right thing when it comes to safety right ? ( cough *ignition switch issues*, cough *toyotas phantom acceleration issues*, cough *Fords randomly catching fire*, cough *Bridgestone tires* )
Absolutely ! Because lives always > profits ! lol
There are thousands of types of kit car around, not exactly "open source hardware" but as close as it gets in the automobile industry.
The kit car community and its large base of manufacturers and insurers have been around for decades, or perhaps for as long as cars have existed, and they're fully integrated into the system of roadworthiness testing and vehicle licensing.
You can change pretty much any element of a kit car you want in most countries. If your change is structural then it will probably cost you quite a bit of money to get it fully tested, but the rules are generally quite reasonable and intended to prevent carnage on the road.
Says the AC who probably isn't old enough to drive and thus enjoy the experience of being charged 3x normal price for " Certified " parts at the local dealership.
Fail. Most people do not have the experience or knowledge to do any of those things - at least 80% of the people in the world cannot safely change the brakes in a modern car. Do you understand how to retract the caliper pads in an ABS system from the 1980s without damaging the master cylinder? I do. (Also in a 2014 Nissan Leaf, or a non-ABS '57 Chevy, for that matter.)
Those of us who know - right off the top of our heads - what the optimum gas/air mixture is and what our ignition timing curves look like, have been rewriting our car's firmware for decades. It's not a new thing, and it's not newly dangerous. Modifying your car is not substantially more dangerous than driving for a couple of years in a state of ignorance concerning the workings of your car, and we let anybody do that.
(What is new is ever-increasing numbers of ignorant drones who find it perfectly reasonable to be told nobody should have the legal freedom to modify their own property, because it might not be "safe".)
Kill off nascar, mechanics, after market upgrades, personalization this is the type of crap that will push everyone against the DCMA resulting in wide spread copy write law reform. I hope these greedy bastards get exactly what they want in the short term then get blind sided by the tidal wave of consumer revolt that ensues.
They don't want independent mechanics to have access to diagnostic tools that read "proprietary" ECU data. That's why Ford is suing Autel, a maker of diagnostic scan tools used by independent shops. This is an attempt to undermine that "Right to Repair" compromise that was put in place last year. (http://www.autonews.com/article/20140125/RETAIL05/301279936/automakers-agree-to-right-to-repair-deal). The goal is to force consumers to have to go to an authorized dealer for repairs. f**k these people. If Americans ever emerge from their on-going somnambulistic stupor, they're going to be pissed.
forever.
if this is supposed to be a new economy, how come they still want my old fashioned money?
Mega squirt and home built cars. The way of the future.
by TheSpoom (715771) Uncaring Linux user here. I have nothing to add to this but please continue. *munches popcorn*
Of course a lot of people thought. They've warned of such scenarios back there, and they could do nothing, just as little can be done now.
-><- no
I have found that in recent (say 10 or so) years dealerships have become a lot more cost competitive; at least for some types of repairs and maintenance procedures. One example I have noticed is with oil changes. My car uses synthetic oil, and a lot of it. I priced out what it would cost me to change the oil myself if I bought the appropriate oil at the local parts store, and the filter. I then called the dealership and their cost to me for the same was only $5 more. If I had done it myself I would have spent $5 running the used oil somewhere for disposal, and likely had to spend time afterwards cleaning up part of my garage. it was well worth the $5 to let them do it.
I have found other similar situations with brake jobs (I would normally do these myself but in situations involving stuck calipers or parking brake pads that won't release, I call and price it out at the dealership and local brake shops).
Now, I haven't encountered the need for a really large repair yet. I don't know if this scales or not. But it does suggest that the dealerships are aware of consumers pricing out these things and have brought their charges down in response.
Damn_registrars has no butt-hole. Damn_registrars has no use for a butt-hole.
If their products are too complex and dangerous, perhaps they shouldn't be allowed to sell them.
I think they kiddies call It call "Street Legal"
Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
Draconian/dystopian controls are completely unnecessary. Population explosion projections fall prey to the xkcd rule on extrapolation - they don't properly account for the impact that modern technology/medicine/family planning options have.
In fact, I'd go so far as to say our problem isn't going to be having too many babies, it's going to be having enough of them.
Several advanced nations have already fallen well below replacement level (i.e., roughly 2 births per female). The USA is even one of those nations at 1.88 births per woman as of 2012. Some places are even worse, like South Korea at 1.3, a rate at which if it continues, the South Korean population would be gone by 2700 or so (though of course, see previous statement on extrapolation). It's true for pretty much every sufficiently advanced nation. The USA and many of these countries have started replacing their population via immigration (which is why the US population is still growing despite the slowing birth rate), but that's only going to work for so long...
Because it's spreading. In 1970, Mexico's birth rate was 6.72 per female. In 2012, it had fallen to 2.22. What about India? 5.49 in 1970, 2.50 in 2012. Yes, it's still pretty high in some of the most undeveloped nations, but that will change, not because governments enforce it, but because on the whole people want it.
Dont't tell us what to do!
We are your customers and you don't have a business without us!
Don't forget the moment your product or business model steps outside of the lines of what we decide to spend our hard- earned money on, rest assured we will go elsewhere! This is just the nature of the game and you already know this!
I remember telling my friends well over ten years ago that if cars got any harder to work on, then eventually only the dealers would be able to repair them.
As an example, the last pickup truck I drove had super easy to replace headlights. I actually replaced one of them at night in the rain on the side of the road (I always keep a spare) using no tools. The truck I'm driving now has the hardest to replace headlights I've ever seen. I had to take it to the dealer to have one replaced, and even the mechanic had a hard time with it. GMC had learned a lesson in the few years between those two trucks. They had made the first one way too easy.
Ridiculous!
We pride ourselves on being a nation that respects individual and property rights. Slowly, as treachery like this come to light, we realize the lawyers are making it so we lease everything and don't actually own property. As this continues, I realize my rights are disappearing. Where did my freedom go?
Maybe Ayn Rand was right after all. Maybe it's too late to bring back that which made this country great. Maybe all we can do is run away into the woods, start a xenophobic society, band together like a labor union under a "Freedom" banner, and go on strike.
With today's surveillance technology, however, we cannot get lost inside our own country like Rand suggests. So, maybe all we can do is build some boats and the beginnings of a floating platform, gather a lot of metal scrap and/or carbon fiber et al, and set sail.
Still, the lawyers are patting themselves on the back for their ingenuity, the government bureaucrats are patting themselves on the back for maximizing their taxation streams, and most of the public are singing praises in the streets because they got free stuff like cell phones. Far too many people think everything is just fine.
So this is how liberty dies... with thunderous applause.
I guess I'll have to buy only "Open Source" cars from now on?!
-L
I don't take kindly to being talked down to. "This new car has computery things in it and more sensors! A lowly commoner such as yourself couldn't possibly understand it! You should be restricted from modifying it, even if you buy it!" Well you can piss right the fuck off then, because it sounds to me like you don't want my money. I'll find somebody who does want money. Or just continue to maintain and upgrade my current car. I've been perfectly fine changing my own brakes, engine, transmission, suspension components and ECU for years now. I don't need somebody to come in, treat me like a child and restrict that too.
Printer manufacturers tried this several years ago with chips in ink cartridges. The supreme court ruled it was ok to reverse engineer the code on these chips if it was required to allow other companies to make make compatible cartidges. I would think the same would apply to cars and after market parts and upgrades.
"cars have become too complex and dangerous for consumers and third parties to handle..." Ya don't say? The sucker is loaded with fuel that rates at dozen or more sticks of dynamite per gallon, spews poisonous gas while running properly, and doing the wrong thing to a MacPherson strut assembly can put a hole in something you like too much to have a hole in... Remember the original compleat idiot's guide - about the VW beetle? The story about the ponytail? CARS CAN BE DANGEROUS. They want to lock down the ECU, fine. Just leave the rest of it to anyone brave and sober enough to turn a wrench and think straight.
"Win treats sysadmins better than users. Mac treats users better than sysadmins. Linux treats everyone like sysadmins."
Way to much money in aftermarket parts / upgrades.
My property (once the tile is clear). K.M.A.! I'll do with MY property, as I see fit. Screw your DMCA
Stallman was right. Although in his story, it was about books, not babies or cars.
https://www.gnu.org/philosophy...
When I worked at eBay, these "gearheads" were routinely copying dealer documents, software, everything, and putting it online, and in turn more of them would throw it on eBay for a few pennies.
I once had a DMCA from I think it was Toyota to kill like 10,000 listings by one person who had listed service manuals for every car you could think of. It only takes an order to kill like 3 listings to get rid of a seller. So you can imagine how well that went. Many of the service manual pirates also pirate the books you can get at Walmart, Canadian Tire, etc.
Nuts.
Finally, this silly "Digital Millenium Copyright Act" stuff can apply to the larger population. Those pencil-necked computer geeks whined and whined about it, and big software had their way, and big media had their way. And now farmers and mechanics and people who can ably swing heavy large pieces of steel and aren't shy about using firearms are going to be in the cross hairs of the DMCA, and instead of courts and 'computer pirates', legislators will be dealing with an armed, angry and motivated populace. Suddenly 'open systems', and 'compatible' will be things everyone looks for. It didn't used to be this way. I know its getting to be a bigger problem. A lot of farmers don't want to buy new John Deere tractors because their control systems are tamper proof and proprietary and very very costly to update, upgrade or replace, and can only be done by the (many dollars per hour), licensed, authorized dealer. If the tractor is down, the dealer closed, the crop ready and frost pending, I can't imagine farmers cheering closed control systems on their units. Warranty is worthless if you can't make money from the thing, and you can't fix it on your time and your dime. Rinse repeat with (name your vehicle/machine here). I can also see the development of open systems as drop in replacements for the proprietary nightmares companies are feeding farmers.
I would say that this is all about the coming wave of cars which prevent you from speeding (already a reality), track your position and relay that information to authorities (already happening) and then finally, the gradual transition to self-driving cars. They need to get this legislation in place long before our cars are all coordinating with each other to manage their own traffic patterns. It is pretty annoying, but if the future is that all of our cars drive themselves and AI controls speed, movement, etc. relative to the cars around it, then the guy who tinkers with his on-board computer system, to prioritize his car in traffic over others, is a bit of a problem.
I havn't read a single comment about buying vs renting.
If I rent a car and the lender has rules around modifications and makes them known before I commit then there is no problem right? So if car manufacturers want to stop people from modifying their cars then they should start renting them out.
However, currently, they SELL a car. Meaning it is now my property to do with as I please. If I want to modify the car horn by swapping it with a oil tanker horn then that is my business. I recently replaced my car navigation unit with a Chinese Android nav unit, which cost me (including installation) 25% of what it would have cost if I had done it at an official dealer (+-450$ vs 1500$). I think car manufacturers are trying to prevent this, especially with the self-driving innovations around the corner. They want to capitalize on the high margin electronics.
Also, the US should be thinking about more critical car related problems such as milage and fuel consumption. You guys are out of control driving those huge SUVs. The whole world is bleeding because your nation's consumption spree.
What are they talking about? The last time I heard a "hobbyist" repairing a car must have been 20 years ago. Modern cars are way too complex too repair or modify at home or even by a professional without a fully equipped garage. I doubt that the small number of people who can actually pull this off poses a problem to the car industry. Conclusion: they have other motives.
IP protection too. It's all far too powerful. Rather than providing a means for people to get a reasonable return from their creativity and investments, it is just a massive cash cow that people get to milk ad infinitum.
Copyright and IP should be severely limited in length, and should only be eligible for extension in cases where a low rate of return has been seen. People will still make a living, but we'll see a lot more creativity encouraged.
You didn't give a shit when it was EULA and "you don't buy a game, you license its use" was the counter you used to explain how we didn't have rights to what we bought for the PC.
Now they're going for your cars.
Good luck finding anyone to defend you now.
Anyone that's had a look at the software embedded in cars these days will realize that it's a monstrosity of bad programming and even worse programming. People modding ECUs run the risk of triggering one of thousands of bugs that have been left in because the car makers are too horrible at coding to try fixing it. So rather than fix it with clean effective coding which costs lots of money they throw lawyers at it and say proprietary this and that so people can't have a look. Anyone saying it could open cars up to hackers and such nonsense don't realize just how big of a gaping security holes are already there, just not enough people bothering to hack the software and point it out to the public...yet.
Comment removed based on user account deletion
My freedom. My right to do whatever the f*ck I want, with me and what's mine, is, and always has been, "too complex and dangerous" to handle, be it by a private company, lobby group, or even a government. My right to be human is not a commodity you can meddle with. It just happens to collide with your business model, and to that I suggest you change it, instead of changing me.
I learned the hard way why a warranty is only as good as the man selling it (thank you Tommy Boy).
We have an extended warranty with Audi that basically forces us to take it to the dealership for any kind of repair (instead of Midas, etc.). When we took it for the 60,000 mile check up, even though there was nothing wrong/to repair, Audi still wanted $600 just to do the diagnostics (which just involves hooking up a cable to a computer port). The diagnostics was not covered under warranty, but if I take it somewhere else, they will not honor anything else that arises later on. It's a game they play: your warranty is a contractual agreement to make sure the manufacturer gets all your post-sale costs.
This isn't just about lock-in. Car manufacturers have a huge risk in the form of damage to the brand if something happens. Unfortunately with the way our media works these days, the outrage and damage occurs first, and only later do we find out if it was justified.
No company wants their brand to be the one involved in a sudden news story where they become the punching bag (justified or not), it's extremely costly.
Out of modpoints but really liked a post? 1BDkF6TtmmeZ3yqXbz9yhdYVqRYnwFoXDj
until Mickey Mouse becomes public domain, there will be no copyright.
The reneged on their side of the social contract... there is no reason for us to uphold ours.
We have two choices: we can be free, or we can be safe. These are mutually exclusive. And in the United States of America, the only correct choice is to be free.
False dilemma. Those are not mutually exclusive and you are ludicrously over-simplifying reality. There is a spectrum between freedom and safety and we have to decide where on that spectrum to be. Complete freedom and perfect safety are both impossible ideals that are incompatible with a civilized society not to mention the laws of physics.
Since I'm not buying it I shouldn't be taxed on it, but aren't we taxed on the phones even though they're leased?
Taxes can be assessed on purchases as well as leases. There is nothing sacred about a lease from a taxation standpoint. Your government can tax pretty much whatever they want to. Furthermore you almost certainly are not leasing your phone. You are buying it on an installment plan in most cases. The difference may sound minor to you but I can assure you that difference is enormous both from an accounting and legal standpoint.
Although Chrysler is really an Italian company, as it is owned by Fiat.
Chrysler LLC is an American company majority owned by the Italian company Fiat S.p.A. Might sound like a trivial distinction but it is not trivial at all.
To purchase a nice car from the 60's or 70's with no computer.
I have NO interest in any car from that era. Driven plenty of them and almost all of them suck badly by today's standards. Some of them look nice enough but that's about the end of their appeal.
Easy to fix, and except for crash-readyness usually pretty solid.
Easy to fix IF you can get parts. "Solid"? Don't make me laugh. They are unreliable rust buckets for the most part with shitty fuel economy, terrible handling, and horrid interiors which are far less safe in a crash than most vehicles sold today.
I don't know, I hit someone's van with my Bronco (full size) my bumper was fine, his side had a big dent in it. It's easy to go through these crumple cars when yours doesn't.
In a high speed crash the van occupants would almost certainly have a better chance of survival than you in your Bronco. Those crumple zones aren't there because they are cheap. They demonstrably and significantly improve passenger safety. Would you rather have some crumpled sheet metal or a trip to the local ER?
I guess we can't keep using that old open source/proprietary analogy: Would you buy a car with the hood welded shut?
I find this hilarious. Being someone who was completely opposed to the DMCA, and trying to get people to give a shit about how bad it was and how it will irrevocably break everything, people constantly thought I must be one of the tin foil hat types. I pointed out several things that might be done like limiting car tinkering, and people thought I was paranoid because it only applied to software and digital things, so they couldn't. You got what you deserve for your own lack of foresight. Good luck now trying to get it repealed when every congressman and senators get their money from these "lobbyists". We need to start calling it what it is, it's not "lobby", it's "bribery" plain and simple.
This. Toyota doesn't want to be responsible if some third party garage or vehicle owner hacks the braking software and causes a car not to stop at a stop light resulting in a multi-car pile up.
Change the brakes, struts, suspension, transmission etc etc - fine. Hack the software to make it perform some trick? No thanks.
Take the simple example of vehicles with in-dash displays. By law if you have a DVD player manufacturers are not allowed to have the video show unless the car is in park (or maybe the engine is off?). There are guides around to modify this behaviour so that you can watch the DVD while the car is driving.
Sounds harmless enough. Suppose this has an effect on the number of fatal injuries in that particular brand of car (hypothetically speaking).
Now all of a sudden, brand X has been damaged because the stats only show that drivers of brand X vehicle are more likely to die in a car accident. There is no way to pick apart those statistics to understand that it was due to a vehicle modification.
Once you get into more critical components the effect would likely be more pronounced.
The real reason behind their corporate sociopathic behavior flares like this: ...makes sense now.
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2014-05-16/where-worlds-unsold-cars-go-die
Young people are already abandoning car ownership as a value in and of itself. This kind of lawyered-up intellectual property protection will only insure that innovation will be eliminated in the automobile market - and continue to discourage personal ownership of vehicles. The Trans Pacific Partnership will help spread this pernicious model across the world, so everyone will become sheeple together.
Not even close, you jackass.
"What the American public doesn't know is what makes them the American public." -Ray Zalinsky (Tommy Boy)
Ban Tesla sales, and require everyone to use the dealership for everything by force of law, and we will have it made!
The shepherds did so well protecting the flock that the sheep no longer believed that wolves existed.
Even for something as straightforward as getting new tyres fitted, I just pay the professionals.
Sure, it's more expensive than doing it myself. But it gets done better, and it's not sufficiently more expensive to justify the grief and hassle of doing it myself.
Of course, they don't always get it right: Last week the two new tyres I had fitted were put onto the front wheels of my car, not the rear.
I didn't even look at the wheels, just noticed there was vibration at high speed. So I took the car back to the garage today, they spotted the issue, realised they'd thrown away my otherwise good front tyres, and as a result I now have the new tyres on the rear wheels as required, and a new pair of tyres on the front wheels too at no charge.
Good customer service, and worked out far cheaper than doing my own tyres, even though I'd have replaced the right ones to start with.
Could I screw up my stability control so the left-side brakes drag me in a circle? Sure.
But there are a whole host of things I'd love to be able to tweak in the "control panel" on my car.
Drive-by-wire throttle is a big one. Changing the mappings is like customizing the cursor speed when you move your mouse. I should be able to tweak it how I like. The stupid gas/brake interlock (where it closes the throttle if you touch the brake pedal) is another one. No more heel&toe downshifting, which means downshifting in a turn becomes a suicide mission as your powered wheels try to lock up when you let the clutch out.
The only pro argument I can see is based on the "idiot mechanic" argument. Thing is, cars have been complex for a lot longer than integrated computers. Up until now it there had been a reasonable response: publish books that specify everything about the vehicle. Warning: tampering voids warranty, modifications outside specifications transfers culpability in the case of a mechanically induced accident to the modifier.
If they do this, DIY cars and rebuilt junkers from the trash bin will be coming to a road near you... SOON! If one of the automakers would do a non-digital controlled car where the 'puters just monitor and report, not control, it will sell. This will allow pulling out the DCMA'ed puters by the roots. Or even better, someone does a OSS computer that doesn't use the computer or DCMA software that Detroit/Tokyo/EU/etc use and just does a wholesale 'field replacement'. With DIY & custom 3D printed cars, doing non-DCMA might be easier.
... "When you pry the source from my cold dead hands."
Why do people think the DMCA even exists????
Big lazy companies, whether they make cars or press audio tracks into vinyl disks, fear innovation and competition more than anything else. Innovation is expensive (not just for R&D but also new prduction requirements, marketing costs, and so-on) and risky (sometimes it produces flops, or causes customers to stop buying current products in anticipation of new ones). Competition is doubly-dangerous because it forces innovation while also threatening existing sales and product lines. If you are an exec at a big business, you fear competition and innovation like little else - like a politician facing a rising popular young opponent, you see your own forced retirement looming with loss of pay, prestige and benefits.
The natural result is that big businesses embrace big government as it moves into their areas of the economy; their executives see politicians as easier to manipulate/purchase than the chaotic marketplace. Big business will happily accept new rules and regulations, while contributing to the campaigns of politicians who can be encouraged to erect barriers to new competitors in the markets. It's a two-way love-fest with politicians preferring a limited number of huge businesses over a wildly chaotic market with many little companies popping-up and shutting down... too many companies makes it too hard to remember who to shake-down for more campaign contributions, and it makes oversight of those markets too much of a hassle.
Run a record company and don't want to deal with all the fast-moving digital stuff? Buy some politicians and get the DMCA passed.
Run a car company and want to stop all those amateurs keeping their cars on the road when they SHOULD have to get to the dealer and buy new ones? Buy some politicians and get them to help stop the gear heads from fixing their cars (no-doubt under the slogan "it's for the environment!" or "safety!")
People who want this stuff to end need to stop supporting politicians who keep growing the government and shoving it into every aspect of our lives. The founders of the US decided a few cents' tax on their TEA was sufficient reason to go to war against the mightiest army on Earth, they'd be absolutely STUNNED to see the federal government having ANY role in a citizen's car (which to them would have been equivalent to a horse-and-buggy they could freely design, build, own, buy, sell, maintain, modify, operate without ANY government involvement). Yeah, our founders gave us patent laws to protect innovators from having their inventions taken-over by the government (as always happend back then in Europe) and to give inventors power to profit from their work (there WERE no patent troll firms back then). Contrary to the claims of the corporate lawyers and lobbyists and politicians who created it, the DMCA is NOT the patent law our founders created (if it WERE, then it would have been redundant and never have been written). There used to be something called "freedom"...
I can't wait till all restaurtants are Taco Bell!!!!!!!!
Wasn't this the ridiculous argument / car analogy that was discussed when the DMCA was initially debated?
Sorry, teleporters just kill you and then make a copy. A perfect, soul-less copy.
The "industry concerns" are just horror stories from hired lawyers. That DMCA is a criminal law, and it doesn't only cover "most people", it covers everyone. And it covers many situations other than "modifying these ECUs", including normal repair/upkeep/modernization for the durable-goods item that is an automobile (or truck, or self-propelled vacation home).
Face it, manufacturers completely abandon product service after a few years, which causes aftermarket suppliers at the high end, and junkyards at the low end, to take over. When you criminalize aftermarket/junkyard operations, some manufacturer gets another new-product sale (and some owner has to abandon his vehicle for metal scrap value). So, some (not all) manufacturers might hire lawyers to argue for criminalization.
I wince whenever I hear flaky claims like "most people do not have the experience or knowledge..."; heck, most people don't have the experience or knowledge to read Slashdot. That is just arrogance, and dismissal, and is entirely unworthy.
and I decide to rip out some pages and insert pages from another book or something I wrote nobody can stop me.
Autoblog has been spamming this link on every forum they can to generate clicks. Good thing nobody reads slashdot anymore :^)
The GNU CAR, Core Automobile for Research. http://goo.gl/vcGe1X
Move countries then.
The process to qualify for a work visa is easier said than done.
For years these pricks have been ripping off their customers with deceptive pricing and dealer networks that are nothing more than a middle man.
No auto manufacturer wants dealers. They're forced to have dealers, courtesy of your fine and lovely state governments.
Then along comes Tesla and Uber and others that threaten their monopolies.
Tesla isn't a real threat, and the concern is that Tesla is somehow going to be exempted from the necessity of having dealers sell cars with nary a change for existing manufacturers.
Uber? You're really bringing up shitheads (can't recall Ford jacking up the price to flee from shootings, hey?) like Uber while whining about 'pricks'?
This is why volunteers have started with a Bible translation from 1901 (the ASV), updated it to use modern English, and released it to the public domain as the World English Bible.
Well the patriot act went through without a problem, shame about your rights.
Snowden let up know that all phone calls and internet traffic are under government surveillance, no real opposition to that either.
Are we to believe that suddenly a backbone will emerge over the right to modify your own car; I don't think so.
43 years young buddy... I've been ripped off plenty of times at this point.
Would you buy a computer with the hood welded shut?
"Nine times out of ten, starting a fire is not the best way to solve the problem." - my wife
The DMCA is a law for the tech sector.
As such, like much 18 year old tech, it needs to keep up with the times and lawmakers should be upgrading it to account for new things (such as things that weren't yet available in the late 90's), remove cruft that no longer applies (or shouldn't have applied) and rewritten to prevent the broad abuse that companies are able to use it for.
Founder & COO, Hayai India (hayai.in) / USA (hayaibroadband.com)
The copyright act still allows you to copy your own tapes, cd's, dvd's, and material for personal use. You just can't redistribute for profit. So unless they can prove you are somehow mass producing your car, i think the courts will agree.
Mega Squirt, gets a little tricky with a electronic automatic. Not street legal in CA of course. If you put it on it will pass emissions on '68 Camaro and then fail when the hood is opened. in fact it be tuned to pass '88 camaro e-misellee-lesions with low emission cam at the tail pipe.