Slashdot Mirror


Three States Propose DMCA-Countering 'Right To Repair' Laws (ifixit.org)

Automakers are using the Digital Millennium Copyright Act to shut down tools used by car mechanics -- but three states are trying to stop them. An anonymous reader quotes IFixIt.Org: in 2014, Ford sued Autel for making a tool that diagnoses car trouble and tells you what part fixes it. Autel decrypted a list of Ford car parts, which wound up in their diagnostic tool. Ford claimed that the parts list was protected under copyright (even though data isn't creative work) -- and cracking the encryption violated the DMCA. The case is still making its way through the courts. But this much is clear: Ford didn't like Autel's competing tool, and they don't mind wielding the DMCA to shut the company down...

Thankfully, voters are stepping up to protect American jobs. Just last week, at the behest of constituents, three states -- Nebraska, Minnesota, and New York -- introduced Right to Repair legislation (more states will follow). These 'Fair Repair' laws would require manufacturers to provide service information and sell repair parts to owners and independent repair shops.

Activist groups like the EFF and Repair.org want to "ensure that repair people aren't marked as criminals under the DMCA," according to the site, arguing that we're heading towards a future with many more gadgets to fix. "But we'll have to fix copyright law first."

59 of 225 comments (clear)

  1. Good by Xenographic · · Score: 5, Insightful

    They sound like good laws. I just hope they pass.

    1. Re:Good by mwvdlee · · Score: 3, Funny

      As soon as the RIAA goons figure out this law might be used to repair defective CD's, it'll be gone.

      --
      Slashdot social media options: AIM, ICQ, Yahoo, Jabber and Mobile Text. Why no MySpace?
    2. Re:Good by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

      CDs aren't encrypted and nothing in the
      DMCA prevents you from ripping them and burning your own backups.

      If you'd have gone with MPAA and DVDs for your example, you'd have had a decent comment, but you didn't.

    3. Re:Good by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

      In MN, Republicans control both the house and senate and the bill was put forward by 2 Rs and 1 D.

      In NE, Republicans control the unicameral legislature and the bill was put forward by 7 Rs.

      In NY, Republicans control the senate, Democrats control the House and the bill was sponsored by 1 R with 1 R and 3 Ds signing on as co-sponsors.

      And actually if it gets shot down it will probably by the unions, they have the biggest interest in keeping small independent shops out of certain areas of the business. Oh wait but that means the Democrats might be the bad guys!!!

    4. Re:Good by mwvdlee · · Score: 2

      The "circumvent" clause is not specifically about encryption, but about any and all technical barriers.
      Many CD's have some sort of laughably stupid or downright evil (remember Sony?) copy protection, which would fall under this anti-circumvention.

      --
      Slashdot social media options: AIM, ICQ, Yahoo, Jabber and Mobile Text. Why no MySpace?
  2. Also need to offer tools, software, and codes. by Joe_Dragon · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Under the DMCA they can lock out jiffy lube by saying the change oil light reset code is under the DMCA and only dealers are to have it.

    But this needs to extended to firmware images, sd card images, etc for embedded hardware.

    Info on old pc based embedded hardware and older video games (arcade) that used custom cards so they can be run in VM's on newer pc hardware.

    Letting people run that hardware in a VM with having to rebuy the software / pay the rights holder again. Yes some like that did have happen in the past and there a free VM system to replace the old pc and custom pci card. That still needed some of the old hardware and they got sued.

    1. Re:Also need to offer tools, software, and codes. by AmiMoJo · · Score: 2

      Some clarification on the status of emulators and ROMs for things you own would be welcome.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
  3. No One Owns Anything by zenlessyank · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Anymore. You just rent it until it breaks so you can re-up on a newer rented item. Greed has no bounds.

    1. Re:No One Owns Anything by DontBeAMoran · · Score: 2

      I believe it's "Greed is eternal". That's the 10th rule if I'm not mistaken.

      --
      #DeleteFacebook
    2. Re:No One Owns Anything by Mitreya · · Score: 5, Insightful

      You just rent it until it breaks

      Renting would be ok if it was stated upfront and you paid rental prices.

    3. Re:No One Owns Anything by thegarbz · · Score: 2

      Greed has no bounds.

      Neither does personal image. What you want to repair that old shit iPhone 6? Why? It's scratched and everything. Are you a poor person who can't afford a real phone?

    4. Re:No One Owns Anything by Solandri · · Score: 4, Insightful

      And you got rental privileges. e.g. If it broke it was their responsibility to fix it, not the renter's. These companies are taking a page out of the MAFIAA who like to claim you're buying a license when you try to do anything with the CD or DVD you bought, but claim you bought a product and need to re-buy it if you accidentally break the disc and want a free replacement since you already paid for the license.

    5. Re:No One Owns Anything by The-Ixian · · Score: 3, Informative

      Looks like Universal Studios is one of the only ones (if not *the* only one) left to still do this:

      http://www.universalstudioshom...

      I seem to recall there were others like Disney, who would replace damaged optical media as well.

      --
      My eyes reflect the stars and a smile lights up my face.
    6. Re:No One Owns Anything by Fitch · · Score: 5, Insightful

      When I'm not wearing out keyboards I'm an avid "shade tree mechanic", and it just so happened I experienced a tangent of this type of stupidity yesterday working on a car I recently purchased for my daughter. As it turns out the tire pressure monitoring system (TPMS) in many GM vehicles of it's era were flashed with a configuration that would not allow the system to be reset + relearn the wheel sensors without an expensive scan tool (even these aftermarket ones are prohibitively expensive). I'm going to go to a dealer and beg them to fix the firmware so the product will function as the owner's manual states it should (there happens to be a service bulletin on this particular issue). In my case I simply do not allow anyone to work on my vehicles, so when I rotate the tires at every oil change I have no recourse to make the TPMS system functional and accurate once again except to take it to a tire shop or the dealer.

      Thankfully there seems to be a possible workaround - removing the TPMS fuse and letting it "forget" all it's sensors so it doesn't work at all. But imagine if this wasn't the case, and car owners were unable to get their vehicle to pass an emissions inspection because the TPMS sets a malfunction code.

      I'm generally not one to throw fuel on hyperbolic statements like "No One Owns Anything", but in this case I have to side with this sentiment. How far are we from the day when your car disallows you from driving over some ridiculously slow speed until you take it to the dealership for service? Those of us in states requiring emissions inspections are already beholden to the machines because in most counties of my state a vehicle with a MIL / Check Engine light on automatically fails regardless of whether the code is associated to an electronic ride control component, a burned out heated seat controller, or the catalytic converter efficiency monitoring.

      To further complicate things, many of today's vehicles are equipped with autonomous braking systems and other "convenience" features such as park assist, etc. Who's going to be able to fix these systems when they malfunction, and more importantly who will be responsible for the deaths that will be inevitably caused by such?

      For me, the solution is driving old junk and spending the extra time and money to maintain it until it is simply impossible to keep in a safe condition. I simply will not succumb to the perpetual car payment, rent-a-car culture that American society has all to readily embraced at it's own peril.

    7. Re:No One Owns Anything by Grishnakh · · Score: 2

      Stuff like this is one reason why I don't buy GM or American. I have a 2015 Mazda and its TPMS system is about as simple and easy as you can get: there are *no* wheel sensors at all (!), as it just uses the ABS system to look for wheels that are (over some distance) turning a bit more slowly that the others. Resetting it when it alarms is really simple: hopefully you'll check the tire pressures and fix them, but to reset it you just press the TPMS button and hold it for 3 seconds. No special tools required.

      No, this system isn't as accurate as the ones that show you actual tire pressures from sensors, but for those of us who actually check their pressures regularly it has major advantages: no expensive sensors to replace (or buy if you want a second set of wheels), and no special equipment needed if you change sensors.

  4. Re:Sell parts/tools, but at what price? Aha. by Joe_Dragon · · Score: 3, Informative

    sell repair parts at the same price that the dealer pays?

  5. IDK, but... by interkin3tic · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Thankfully, voters are stepping up to protect American jobs

    Can't help but feel like my anus is being forcibly greased up whenever "protect american jobs" is being waved around.

    "Right to X" in the title of a new law is also a red flag.

    I mean, I'm aware the DMCA is awful. They should just do something about that. Maybe say, we're going to repeal and replace it? Introduce the All-new Copyright Act, or ACA for short?

    1. Re:IDK, but... by oldgraybeard · · Score: 2, Informative

      Sorry to tell you President Bill Clinton Signed the DMCA into law and in 1998 I think. The congress was republican but President Clinton is a dem.

      So both parties are equally guilty ;) Just saying, since I am a bi-partisan and an independent, I dislike both political parties ;)

    2. Re:IDK, but... by NormalVisual · · Score: 4, Interesting

      I mean, I'm aware the DMCA is awful. They should just do something about that.

      It'd be nice if it were that easy, but the controversal parts of the DMCA are implementations of two treaties to which the U.S. is a signatory. The U.S. would have to revoke the treaty in order to remove the offending parts of the DMCA. To those that say it's the Republicans' fault that we have this law, please note that the DMCA was signed by a Democratic president and passed in the Senate unanimously - all 45 Democratic senators wanted this.

      --
      Please stand clear of the doors, por favor mantenganse alejado de las puertas
    3. Re:IDK, but... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

      Sorry. The DMCA is Republican creation. Republicans are only opposed to laws created by Democrats.

      Why is this modded flamebait? The members of the republican party admitted to deliberately voting against anything proposed by the Democrats during Obama's time

    4. Re:IDK, but... by silentcoder · · Score: 3, Interesting

      >To those that say it's the Republicans' fault that we have this law, please note that the DMCA was signed by a Democratic president and passed in the Senate unanimously - all 45 Democratic senators wanted this.

      Yeah, but those were the years when the DINOs ran the democrat party with their center-right "suck up to the liberals a little in the primaries then ignore them for 8 years" style of governance...

      Those years are well and truly over, Bernie Sanders and Trump both pretty much shattered that consensus.

      --
      Unicode killed the ASCII-art *
    5. Re:IDK, but... by Fire_Wraith · · Score: 2, Informative

      To be precise, they weren't opposed to any law that the Democrats liked at the time, since Clinton was President then. It was only after Obama's election that they adopted a policy of complete refusal of any cooperation short of total capitulation.* So, in all fairness, DMCA -was- a bipartisan law, in that the opposition from the left was not sufficient to persuade the president to veto it (there really wasn't any opposition to it from the right, to my knowledge, save perhaps complaints that it didn't go far enough).

      *And we could debate why that is, but it's somewhat getting away from the topic at hand.

  6. Re: American Jobs? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

    That is a good comment, you know it's getting bad when when Americans have to depend on Chinese hackers to be able to repair their own cars because American auto makers have gotten so greedy that they are locking down via artificial electronic means out of the repair business.

  7. Repair Costs by tquasar · · Score: 2

    The last time I took my Ford to a dealer they charged $150.00 per hour for labor with a 4 hour minimum. And outrageous parts pricing. A friendly parts man sold me items at 40% off list and there were 50 and 60% off columns in the list. There aren't many repairs that I can do but some independent shops will negotiate costs.

    1. Re:Repair Costs by Mashiki · · Score: 4, Informative

      The last time I took my Ford to a dealer they charged $150.00 per hour for labor with a 4 hour minimum.

      A 4h minimum is set by what's called the "blue book" which details exactly how much time the repair is supposed to take. Those hours are set by government. That means if they get the job done in 20minutes the book says the job is 30min, they have to charge for 30. On the flip side of that, this also protects you from overzealous pricing charges. That means if the job is listed at 4hr and it takes them 5hr to do it, they can only charge you for 4hr. Some places allow small incremental increases, but most don't. And in those cases there is a hard cap to the limit that can be charged. When you look around the "waiting area" you should also see a sign which states the minimum hourly rate. Depending on the state/province it will right now be between $80 and $140/hr(when I was an apprentice the hourly rate set by the province was around $35/hr). That again is set by the state or province, those are the minimum hourly rates that they have to charge by law. The higher hourly rate above the minimum requirement is called a "rate premium" which any shop can charge. Meaning a independent can charge $80/h or more if they can get away with it. Or a dealership can charge $80/h or $300/h if they can get away with it.

      Now onto the parts, since you were able to buy them through a "friendly parts man" that means you're buying a OEM-non dealership part. Under the old auto-pact treaty, OEM parts suppliers can make these parts and sell them to anyone for as long as there is demand. The automaker themselves must make these parts for your vehicle for a minimum of 10 years -- some will make them for longer if the vehicle sales were amazing. Now, there is no set prices on auto parts. Meaning a dealership don't have to price you out anything other then in their parts from their warehouses unless you request it. You can bring your own parts, and they have to install them though. You can request that they buy the parts from a OEM parts supplier like NAPPA, Pep boys, or whatever else.

      --
      Om, nomnomnom...
    2. Re:Repair Costs by Opportunist · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Those crazy Europeans and their pinko commie ways. That's never gonna fly in Free America!

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
  8. I have altered the deal by DontBeAMoran · · Score: 2
    --
    #DeleteFacebook
  9. Great Idea and I live in MN by oldgraybeard · · Score: 5, Interesting

    i have a 1999 Ford Expedition, great truck for the 2-3k I drive it a year. Had a cracked windshield replaced which leaked (they fixed it) but it got my Gem Module(General Electronics Module) and fuse box wet. Darn truck, kept draining the battery, most of the electric stuff did not work, no lights, flashers, turn signals, dash indicators, windows ;) lol, !. Got it to the dealer. They said my GEM Module was bad, and they would order one.

    It would be 700.00 dollars up front and they had no idea when it would arrive. In fact they had one customer that has been waiting 7 months.

    OK so I talk about getting one from the junk yard. But!!!! it needs to be programmed with the exact options my truck has and only Ford can do that and that is 500.00

    I went home and just charged the battery everytime I wanted to drive the truck. And over time things dried out. All is good now.

    I have been gathering every scrap of info so I can build a jig and write a program to dump the firmware from my electronic modules on my truck, since I am keeping it forever ;)

    1. Re:Great Idea and I live in MN by Versa · · Score: 2

      This might do what you want:
      http://forscan.org/
      FORScan is a software scanner for Ford, Mazda, Lincoln and Mercury vehicles, designed to work over ELM327 and J2534 Pass-Thru compatible adapters

    2. Re:Great Idea and I live in MN by rjune · · Score: 2

      Ford cars have always had weird electrical systems. We had a Ford station wagon where if you pressed the brake pedal and pushed the emergency flasher knob in about half-way, the rear window could be opened or closed (without the engine running or the key in the ACC position) I'm sure with the advanced electronics there are even more strange things to be found. I'm glad you were able to fix the problem without shelling out a boatload of money to Ford.

  10. Re:Protect American jobs? by Dog-Cow · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Most people don't ship their vehicles to China for service. You moron.

  11. Re:American Jobs? by Dog-Cow · · Score: 2

    When was the last time you shipped your car to another country to have it serviced? You fucking idiot.

  12. Corporate Stupidity by GerryGilmore · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I used to work at Dialogic, which was then bought by Intel. In all my time there, new prospects/customers would invariably say: "This is really hard to configure (we had line resource cards, DSP resource cards, and various ways to map these resources together.) don't you guys have a card configuration utility?" Well, for Windows, yes. For Linux, no. "Too hard and no demand" says Engineering. So, taking the bull by the horns, I found the PCI ID codes for the various cards, wrote a utility to configure them, got approval from my manager to release it as open-source and all was well. Until...The head of Engineering at our division found out about it and lodged a formal internal complaint that I had "released Intel proprietary information" and was summoned to Parsippany to face legal. Fortunately, my manager's support and basic common sense prevailed, the Eng manager was sent packing with his tail between his legs and I flew home drunk as a skunk. The legal guy basically said: "when you expose a PCI ID to the OS, it's no longer proprietary - dumbass!". Point is that when information is documented and exposed in any way, it is not "proprietary" in the sense that it cannot be used, just not stolen and used inappropriately.

  13. "Us" versus "them" by Okian+Warrior · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I mean, I'm aware the DMCA is awful. They should just do something about that. Maybe say, we're going to repeal and replace it? Introduce the All-new Copyright Act, or ACA for short?

    Sorry. The DMCA is Republican creation. Republicans are only opposed to laws created by Democrats.

    The DMCA was a bipartisan effort. Created by Republicans, but signed into law by a Democratic president. The husband of the same person who almost became our current president.

    Get away from the "us versus them" mentality. All the bad shit we have right now is the result of bi-partisan cooperation among politicians.

    Your side is crap as well as the other side.

    Insulting "the other side" does nothing to solve the underlying problem.

    1. Re:"Us" versus "them" by silentcoder · · Score: 3, Insightful

      >All the bad shit we have right now is the result of bi-partisan cooperation among politicians.

      Really ? I could have sworn we just had 8 years where not a single bipartisan moment happened, and things which USED to be matters of bipartisan consensus were actively opposed purely because of who was president.

      Are you seriously saying that ALL the problems in the USA predate the Obama administration ? Hell even most liberals won't give him that much of a free pass - we tend to think there were a few things we wished he'd done differently.

      Bipartisanship is NOT a bad thing, it's not a good thing either. Fundamentalism of any kind - tends to be evil - and that is more commonly associated with obstruction than bipartisanship.
      It's not an unqualified good, but it is definitely not a bad thing either - whether any particular idea is good or bad, in fact, is entirely divorced from whether it's supported by one party or two. The idea should be judged on it's own merit.

      --
      Unicode killed the ASCII-art *
    2. Re:"Us" versus "them" by Impy+the+Impiuos+Imp · · Score: 2

      Your argument assumes the government doing anything other than being ground to a halt is a good thing.

      All judgeships below Supreme Court are simple majority votes now, thanks to the Democrats nuclear option in 2013. Short-sighted buffoons on both sides.

      --
      (-1: Post disagrees with my already-settled worldview) is not a valid mod option.
    3. Re: "Us" versus "them" by silentcoder · · Score: 2

      Its not an assumption. Its a fact. If you want to live under a government ground to a halt then go to Mogadishu.

      --
      Unicode killed the ASCII-art *
  14. Re:Let's talk about Trump now! by x0ra · · Score: 4, Insightful

    That's the beauty of a FEDERAL state. Don't like Cali, got to Idaho, don't like Idaho, go to New York...

  15. Re:Let's talk about Trump now! by x0ra · · Score: 5, Informative

    Bill Clinton, a DEMOCRAT, signed it into law.

  16. Re:DMCA is a federal law by x0ra · · Score: 3, Insightful

    State legalization of pot is a precedent.

  17. Re:DMCA is a federal law by bluegutang · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Not really. The Obama administration decided not to enforce the marijuana laws, but they are still on the books. From Wikipedia: "On August 28, 2013, a federal executive agency announced that it would no longer actively pursue marijuana offences taking place in the states that have legalized the small consumption and possession of marijuana." A future president could reverse that.

  18. Re:American Jobs? by geekmux · · Score: 4, Insightful

    That is a bit of anger! Relax Mr. Anonymous Coward!

    This has nothing to do with Anonymous Coward. This has everything to do with Common F. Sense.

    And if it's not about foreign v. American jobs, why does the summary say "Thankfully, voters are stepping up to protect American jobs"?

    Because TFS is inaccurate. Sure as hell wouldn't be the first time. This has to do with protecting the rights of any car owner or 3rd party repair shop to service or repair a car if they have the knowledge and skill to do it. And to give TFS some credit for accuracy, yes, that would include American jobs, but more accurately any American who happens to own a device they hold the skill to service or repair, regardless if they hold a job doing it.

    I've been maintaining my own vehicles for almost three decades, and as a result my cars have lasted me at least 200,000 miles each time. I've also not had to waste thousands of dollars on misdiagnosed issues of questionable legitimacy; otherwise known as why we call them stealerships. It's no secret the department driving considerable profit into a stealership is the service department, and I'm not about to be forced to have my car "serviced" by pure unadulterated greed just because they didn't get enough profit from me when I bought the damn car.

    If automakers and stealerships had their way, every Discount Auto Parts and Autozone would be shut down, Haynes and Chilton repair manuals would be illegal, you would need a federal license to even look at the Craftsman tool department in Sears, and opening the hood on your car would require an encryption key. Abusing the shit out of the DCMA seeks to destroy an entire industry that has been established for decades, along with the thousands of jobs within. Are automakers likely trying to protect some American jobs? Sure, but the end result would still be a rather massive net loss.

    In this case, Common F. Sense needs to prevail over Corruption N. Greed. Plain and simple.

  19. Re:American Jobs? by geekmux · · Score: 5, Insightful

    You fulfill the stereotype that people with low user IDs are autistic middle age weirdos, likely unemployed, who can't work out conversations.

    The parent has a valid point here, and the GP is an idiot for bringing up Chinese hackers. The actions of both those for and against the DCMA in this case is fighting over American jobs, but siding with the automakers and stealerships would result in a massive net loss for American jobs, since they would not seek to hire everyone they wish to put out of business by turning auto repair into some sort of DMCA-protected black magic.

    This pretty much has fuck-all to do with China, apart from giving them credit for cracking a "code" that should have never been allowed to exist in the first place, under a weak-ass DMCA argument. Ironically enough, the hacking in this case creates American jobs.

  20. Not so fast. by jxander · · Score: 2

    There is a use-case for locked down hardware in an automobile: self-driving vehicles.

    As much as you should have the rights to tinker on the things you own (and you should) things get a lot trickier when we start talking about the software or sensors that actually control your vehicle as it drives down the road.

    It's going to be a complex issue with a LOT of debate, so I won't pretend like I can solve it in a single post. Suffice to say, lets not dismiss the entire concept of non-user-serviceable vehicles, in the long term. (though one thing I will say, that fact would have to be fully disclosed at time of purchase)

    --
    This signature is false.
    1. Re:Not so fast. by sjames · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Actually, lets.

      It is perfectly legal for me to repair my own brakes or steering. People have done so for decades even though a failure while driving could be very bad. The upshot is simple, if you're going to work on safety critical parts of your car, you'll want to make sure you know what you're doing. If you screw up, you might face significant liability.

  21. Re:DMCA is a federal law by Jbcarpen · · Score: 2

    Presumably that's why these anti-DMCA laws "would require manufacturers to provide service information and sell repair parts to owners and independent repair shops."

    The DMCA might still say you aren't allowed to crack the encryption, but if the car manufacturer is required to give you the unencrypted version for free, you don't need to crack it either.

    --
    GENERATION 667: The first time you see this, copy it into your sig on any forum and add 1 to the generation
  22. Re:DMCA is a federal law by geekmux · · Score: 3, Informative

    Federal laws automatically override all state laws. So these laws will have no effect.

    I think you may have forgotten the entire point of states maintaining a level of checks and balances with their own laws. A good example is the fact that marijuana is an illegal substance at the federal level, while many states have turned it into a legal industry.

    Enough states get behind DMCA abuse, and it will likely drive modifications into DMCA laws at the federal level as well. That's usually the approach to combating shitty laws driven by greed.

  23. Re: Let's talk about Trump now! by Crashmarik · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Yah but Obama championed internet privacy and freedoms, no??

    The one that expanded NSA Spying ?
    https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/...

  24. Re:DMCA is a federal law by sjames · · Score: 4, Interesting

    He did that because he HAD to. Otherwise, he starts a small scale war where the state then makes most activities that might support enforcing the federal law illegal. Next thing you know, there are DEA agents sitting in jail while it all winds it's way slowly through the courts. Worst case (for the president), the legitimacy of invoking interstate commerce to permit the federal laws to exist ends up in court with an opponent that can actually afford to fight it.

  25. Re:American Jobs? by geekmux · · Score: 4, Informative

    Let's remember, Autel is a company based in Shenzhen, China. Ford is based in Dearborn, MI, USA. So these bills are all about robbing American jobs, to support Chinese hackers.

    To give you an idea of just how wrong you are, in this case, "hackers" cracking a code has created and secured American jobs by enabling American workers to thrive in a 3rd party industry that has been established for decades, fighting against automakers who wish to turn auto repair into some kind of fucking black magic voodoo, driven by greed.

    The larger issue is the fact that we're reliant upon hackers from any country to crack codes that should have never been allowed to exist in the first place, codes created and protected by abusing the shit out of the DMCA.

    And yes, this issue does get rather sticky because it's actually about fighting over American jobs. Those jobs created by automakers and "authorized" repair centers (read: stealerships) vs. the much larger industry of 3rd party repair shops and DIY mechanics wanting to maintain their own vehicles.

    Perhaps if they didn't get so fucking greedy to earn the moniker of stealership, this wouldn't have grown to be such an issue. Either way, the DMCA abuse needs to stop.

  26. Idiots... People want open ECUs by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Interesting

    I specifically left Ford for motorsport vehicles (Cobra, GT500) and went over to Mitsubishi (Evolution IX, Evolution X) for this reason. Tired of having to pay for $1000+ tuning software just to be able to write the tunes myself, when a crash or new build happens the ECU ID changes and the software locks you out again.

    Where as on the Evo I literally had to buy a $120 cable and I can tune an unlimited number of cars with full control over ever parameter and essentially a fully professional environment to write custom tunes and even sell them if needed. We're not talking about end-user "hit apply" type tunes, I'm talking about changing individual load cells on hundreds of maps over months to dial in an exact tune.

    Besides that the car was built so much better I felt like an idiot for parading the domestic brands for so long. I literally traded a 32 valve V8 Cobra for an Evolution IX that had a four wheel drive turbo 2.0 liter 4 cylinder which pulled *harder* and was easier to get serious horsepower out of. My jaw literally dropped on the test drive of a modded 450whp Evo9. I had driven supercharged 500-700hp V8's but this little car never broke traction and made it's power lower in the RPM range which made it feel many times faster. Plus you could floor it around corners and it was just unbelievable how well it gained traction as boost kicked in around a corner.

    I never went back and almost nothing is locked down on these cars. Stop wasting your time with other brands... *Edit* Captcha was "inducer".

  27. Re: And Trump will back it by PoopJuggler · · Score: 2

    Doubt it. Trump and his cronies are most certainly on the auto industry's payroll.

  28. Re:Let's talk about Trump now! by thegarbz · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I find the partisanship of the USA electorate incredible. The government has in general a bipartisan agreement to not give a shit about the people yet everyone will blame something on one side or the other.

  29. Re:Let's talk about Trump now! by Curunir_wolf · · Score: 2

    You don't vote for policies, do you?

    If you ever made an effort to get involved with the legislature at the state level, you would be very surprised how easy it is to influence policy. Some state lawmakers saying getting just 1-3 letters about a bit of legislation can sway their vote on it. You should try it some time.

    --
    "Somebody has to do something. It's just incredibly pathetic it has to be us."
    --- Jerry Garcia
  30. Re:DMCA is a federal law by Solandri · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I believe the question here is one of scope. The DMCA was created to protect copyrighted works - stuff that's supposed to be distributed throughout the public, but the creator still retains ownership rights.

    These companies (and printer manufacturers with their ink cartridges) have been trying to extend the DMCA to cover what's traditionally considered a trade secret - stuff that nobody except the creator is supposed to know about. The "problem" with trade secrets (from the owner's perspective) being that if anyone figures out or reverse engineers the secret, it's no longer a secret.

    As Congress hasn't made any moves to address whether or not the scope of the DMCA covers trade secrets under the guise of copyright, these states are. That way the conflict between these state laws and DMCA can be resolved through the courts, and case law setting the boundary on whether the DMCA can be extended to protect trade secrets in this manner..

  31. CD copy protection is extremely rare by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Many CD's have some sort of laughably stupid or downright evil (remember Sony?) copy protection

    I still buy CDs and it's been 13 years since I saw one which was alleged to contain a technological measure intended to limit access. Out of my approx 2000 CDs, literally exactly one of them has such a thing (which I didn't realize at the time I bought it). (And then I also didn't realize until after I ripped it and later found out that some people's drives (and car players) were having trouble with it.)

    If you make a CD player which can play 99.95% (1/2000) and fails on one, it will not only be perfectly legal, but people will be ok that it doesn't play the one broken CD. (They can just go pirate it, instead of buying it, if they want to hear the album.)

    DRM simply isn't a factor in the music sales. It effectively doesn't exist, except maybe in some of those streaming services. Video is where you go to find DRM, which is why I eventually gave up and started just pirating all my movies and TV, whereas I still buy music. Music publishers still want your money; it's the video people who are constantly creating piracy incentives.

    1. Re:CD copy protection is extremely rare by Gr8Apes · · Score: 2

      DRM simply isn't a factor in the music sales.... Video is where you go to find DRM, which is why I eventually gave up and started just pirating all my movies and TV, whereas I still buy music. Music publishers still want your money; it's the video people who are constantly creating piracy incentives.

      Note that playable music does not have DRM, ever. You can record sound easily, always, since you can do analogue recordings. Video only has the appearance of DRM, in truth it is no different than sound, in that you can record everything in analog, and additionally you have the ability to record it digitally as well, if you're willing to open up your hardware. This would not violate the DMCA in anyway. You can also more simply just use certain pieces of hardware that give you access to unencrypted video/sound. There are various legal and some questionable ways to do so.

      --
      The cesspool just got a check and balance.
  32. A headline, but not an effective law. by ColoradoAuthor · · Score: 3, Informative

    The proposed Nebraska statute says "Sec. 7: Nothing in the Fair Repair Act shall apply to motor vehicle manufacturers." As for other manufacturers, they get to take into account whether compliance would be too expensive, and the maximum penalty is $500. So regardless of whether or not you think these laws are a good idea, it's nothing close to being a Tech Writer Full Employment Act, an Everybody Can Repair Their Own Car Act, or a Put All The Small Manufacturers Out Of Business Act.

  33. Re:Let's talk about Trump now! by Dread_ed · · Score: 2

    And passed the senate with 99 yes votes, 54 Republicans and 45 democrats. One republican did not vote. The House put it to a voice vote, and it passed overwhelmingly. This was obviously something that our entire government thought was a STELLAR idea. Interesting that anyone would think that blaming any one party for this law is a correct or honest approximation of what really happened.

    This is just another example of how our "parties" act as a single organism when presented with the chance to circumvent or eliminate rights guaranteed to the US people. This is what they do. They love to talk about the wedge issues, and recirculate those endlessly to incite division in the voting populace. But when it comes to fucking us, the American people, they show their true colors and vote as a unit.

    If any of you partisan fools are brave enough to study the voting record you might learn something interesting. Your party, whichever one you choose, routinely does things you might find objectionable. If you weren't so absorbed in spewing vitriol at the people you have been programmed to blame and hate, and if you were not so desperately looking for that super-addictive high you get when you just know for sure you are right and someone else is wrong, and if you could stop emoting long enough to engage in rational thought and observe facts for what they are, you might be able to see exactly what you are fomenting with your idiotic partisan ranting and raving. Namely, you are giving your own party the impetus it needs to make political policy in direct contravention to your best interests.

    Quit being a sucker. Neither party has your interests at heart. The sooner you realize this, the sooner we can get the kind of government we need.

    --
    When the only tool you have is a claw hammer every problem starts to look like the back of someone's skull.