[ChrisMT79]

Wow... just... wow...

https://www.yahoo.com/autos/s/gm-for...160000229.html

http://www.wired.com/2015/01/let-us-hack-our-cars


GM, Ford, And Others Want to Make Working on Your Own Car Illegal

One of the inherent rights of owning a vehicle is the ability to get on ones backside a wrench in one hand and a grease rag in the other, and just tinker to your little hearts desire. Since the vehicle was invented, its been an important facet within the community of gearheads.

General Motors the same company responsible for 87 deaths related to faulty ignition switches, FYI wants to take that right away from you citing safety and security issues. Along with a few other big names.

It's called the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA). It'™s been around since 2000 and started as anti-Internet piracy legislation. But automakers want to use it to try and make working on your own car illegal. Yes, illegal. The general premise is that unlike cars of the past, today'™s vehicles are so advanced and use such a large amount of software and coding in their general makeup, altering said code could be dangerous and possibly even malicious.

Listing the vehicle as a œmobile computing device, the law would hypothetically protect automakers from pesky owners looking to alter any sort of technology in the vehicle that relates to the onboard computer. Flashing your ECU would be a big no no, which could also lead to all sorts of problems for aftermarket shops.

What GM, and even tractor companies like John Deere, argues is that you, as an owner, don€™t actually own your car. Rather, you a™re sort of just borrowing it for an extended amount of time and paying for the rights to use the technology. If it sounds ridiculous” it is. But it gets even more ludicrous.

According to the Electronic Frontier Foundation, John Deere argued thatbœletting people modify car computer systems will result in them pirating music through the on-board entertainment system.

That's right” pirating music. Through a tractor.

[Sassicaia]

So basically you don't own the car if you buy it? Essentially after "buying it" the seller still has a say everyday after what you do with it?

No.

[GOLFFRR]

IF this were to happen it would be a complete game changer in so many ways.

[MasterC17]

This will never pass.

[solstice]

Illegal? Redicolous. Voiding warranty? Absolutely. Selling SW modification services....grey area, but more freedom is better than less, so I think it's should remain legal.

[ChrisMT79]

I hate to say it, but if you have the means to afford these cars, you should already know what the reality is.

[Sal@AUTOcouture]

I totally can't wait to pirate music thru Napster on my John Deere

[BMV///M3]

Originally Posted by MasterC17

This will never pass.

+1

[48Laws]

Mattress companies have been trying this for years...

[ChrisMT79]

Originally Posted by Sassicaia

So basically you don't own the car if you buy it? Essentially after "buying it" the seller still has a say everyday after what you do with it?

No.

I believe there is a certain company who's logo is a prancing horse, that already does this.

[48Laws]

What about the LFA?

[domd817]

Money maker. They'll put the aftermarket companies out of business and start making their own tunes for insane amounts of money.

[rr006rbc]

This can't be right...businesses will fight this to the death. Literally.

[gblansten]

BMW just plummeted in my esteem for being on this list. That's despicable. I hope they reconsider this stance.

[04cobra]

1) This will never go through
2) If it does, it will take years to go through
3) This would put ALOOOOOT of shops out of business

Never gonna happen IMO.

Now what I suspect might happen is similar to computer software and video games, where people sell "in game items for cash". The automobile code is the manufacturers property, if a 3rd party shop modifies the code and then sells isnt that some sort of property infringement (sorry don't know the legal jargon)?

It would be if i took the Coke symbol changed a few lines on it and sold it for a profit. Do you think Coke would let that fly? I HIGHLY doubt it.

So long story short, I bet there will be an increase in legal cases around shops modifying the cars code and selling the "tunes". Will this every become outlawed? Probably not.

[rjd598]

surprised audi isn't on that list. seems right up their alley

[fecurtis]

Originally Posted by domd817

Money maker. They'll put the aftermarket companies out of business and start making their own tunes for insane amounts of money.

No it won't, the proposal doesn't affect them at all, it wouldn't surprise me if OEM's charged them a fee to tweak the code and give them legal go-ahead to view the source code and modify it. Only individuals trying to deal with software code are affected. So in our case, coding our cars.

The argument is that you may own the car, but you don't own the software in the ECU. You're merely paying for a license in order to enjoy the software that runs your car. Aftermarket companies and the like will still be allowed to tweak it as needed, it just means if you're in the US and you want your mirrors to fold in automatically when you turn your car off, you're shit out of luck unless you're willing to break the law.

[RowanBuds]

Originally Posted by ChrisMT79

I believe there is a certain company who's logo is a prancing horse, that already does this.

They don't control what you do after taking delivery, per se, they simply reserve the right to not sell you a car in the future if they disagree with what you do with yours. You, if lucky enough, could go buy a La-F, and farm it right out to testing orgs for comparo's, but rest assured you would not get invited to purchase their next halo car. Going even further, you may be blacklisted from ordering any of their models, not just the halo ones. But, that doesn't make it illegal for you to do what you want with the already acquired La-F. Catch me? Beyond that, you could still walk into a dealership with a briefcase full of big faces and leave that day with an inventory car.

Originally Posted by 48Laws

What about the LFA?

None were sold by Toyota. Lexus only leased the LFA's to clients - I don't know for certain what the terms were, but the price was HIGH and the term was long. Their goal was to curb above MSRP speculation - little did they know you can still go acquire a new one to this day.

I think there is a term for buy-out known up front, so you have seen some for "sale", but the ones gotten new from OEM were all leases. Yes, even Paris Hilton's.

*edit* Now that I think about it, when there were some celebrity leaks a few years ago that included Paris Hilton, one of the things leaked included details of her LFA monthly payment to Toyota.

[///MFanatic]

I think those of you who believe this couldn't pass are dead wrong. If they feed the Government BS about 1) this is proprietary information/intellectual property and can't be tampered with; 2) stress that fact that this could POTENTIALLY cause havoc in the system functions (such as steering or braking) they totally have a case.

Don't get me wrong, I think this is total BS. I'm just saying those companies have the money, man power and political pull to paint a picture that would make it seem like tuners are driving around stolen death traps that will hunt down and kill every first born child in America unless something is done about it.

[NickyC]

This is Amerika, whoever has the most money to give to the scumbag lobbyists will win. In this regard, wave goodbye to your tunes.

[RowanBuds]

Those fools on the hill are actually debating renewal of Section 215. If any members think any absurd bill is too stupid to pass, I have a bridge to sell you.

[48Laws]

Reminds of the thread where the a-hole BMW mechanic colored the bolts to deter the owner from working on his engine