REVscene - Vancouver Automotive Forum


Welcome to the REVscene Automotive Forum forums.

Registration is Free!You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join our community today! The banners on the left side and below do not show for registered users!

If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact contact us.


Go Back   REVscene Automotive Forum > Automotive Chat > Vancouver Auto Chat

Vancouver Auto Chat 2016 VAC Community Head Moderator: Raid3n

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 04-05-2015, 09:43 PM   #1
What hasn't Killed me, has made me more tolerant of RS!
 
rcoccultwar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Canada
Posts: 170
Thanked 25 Times in 15 Posts
Automobile makers are sort of saying you don't really own your car

https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2015/0...y-own-your-car

Quote:
EFF is fighting for vehicle owners’ rights to inspect the code that runs their vehicles and to repair and modify their vehicles, or have a mechanic of their choice do the work. At the moment, the anti-circumvention prohibition in the Digital Millennium Copyright Act arguably restricts vehicle inspection, repair, and modification. If EFF is successful then vehicle owners will be free to inspect and tinker, as long as they don’t run afoul of other regulations, such as those governing vehicle emissions, safety, or copyright law.

You can support EFF's exemption requests by adding your name to the petition we'll submit in the rulemaking.

Most of the automakers operating in the US filed opposition comments through trade associations, along with a couple of other vehicle manufacturers. They warn that owners with the freedom to inspect and modify code will be capable of violating a wide range of laws and harming themselves and others. They say you shouldn’t be allowed to repair your own car because you might not do it right. They say you shouldn’t be allowed to modify the code in your car because you might defraud a used car purchaser by changing the mileage. They say no one should be allowed to even look at the code without the manufacturer’s permission because letting the public learn how cars work could help malicious hackers, “third-party software developers” (the horror!), and competitors.

John Deere even argued that letting people modify car computer systems will result in them pirating music through the on-board entertainment system, which would be one of the more convoluted ways to copy media (and the exemption process doesn’t authorize copyright infringement, anyway).

The parade of horribles makes it clear that it is an extraordinary stretch to apply the DMCA to the code that runs vehicles. The vast majority of manufacturers' concerns have absolutely nothing to do with copyright law. And, as the automakers repeatedly point out, vehicles are subject to regulation by other government agencies with subject matter expertise, which issue rules about what vehicles are and are not lawful to operate on public roadways.

The DMCA essentially blundered into this space and called all tinkering and code inspection into question, even acts that are otherwise lawful like repairing your car, making it work better at high altitude, inspecting the code to find security and safety issues, or even souping it up for use in races on a private course. We’re presenting the Copyright Office with the opportunity to undo this collateral damage and leave regulating auto safety to specialized agencies, who understandably have not seen fit to issue a blanket prohibition against vehicle owners’ doing their own repairs and safety research.

Here’s how you can help. The opponents of the vehicle exemptions say that no one really cares about the restrictions they place on access to vehicle code, so the Copyright Office should deny the exemptions. Now, we cited a number of projects, and thousands of people wrote to the office to support the exemptions, but we are confident there are even more projects, businesses, and individuals out there who need these exemptions and it would be a shame if the Copyright Office didn’t know it.

If you have had problems with vehicle repair or tinkering because you were locked out of your vehicle’s computers, if you would have engaged in a vehicle-related project but didn’t because of the legal risk posed by the DMCA, or if you or your mechanic had to deal with obstacles in getting access to diagnostic information, then we want to hear from you—and the Copyright Office should hear from you, too.
Dangonay? Are you there?
Advertisement
rcoccultwar is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-07-2015, 11:51 AM   #2
I STILL don't get it
 
R. Mutt's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: VanCity
Posts: 486
Thanked 931 Times in 183 Posts
The code in the ECU and other computerized units is technically the manufacturers intellectual property. But like any electronic system people can break it down: sometimes for malicious reasons, sometimes for curiosity and harmless tinkering.

There is a sub culture of ecu dis-assembly within the automotive tuning world. What started off as scripters and programmers who are also car enthusiasts sharing information for the community's benefit has turned into small one man operations - selling remote tuning services. But these people are profiting off the backs of those who put in the hard work to disassemble the ECU's for the benefit of disseminating knowledge throughout the community and helping DIY'er skip a trip to the dealer/mechanic.

They disassemble the code and often use xml to create definition files to point their open source programs to read the binary. The side effect is now anyone that has a $200 cable can read/write the ecu on cars. While some (like myself) do this for tuning it can also be used to change things like the immobilizer, force pass emissions and a myriad of other things.

That said, it's a two way street, people like to have power over what they believe is their own property, but I can also appreciate where the companies are coming from. But like the internet you can't control it...technology evolves with culture. It's an open market and as long as people "want to find a way to ______" you'll always have hacking be it an iPhone or a Car.

Recently I saw two US based tuners arguing on a forum over the IP of a Mitsubishi's Evo ACD ecu rom, saying "we had this first...you can't sell it to customers." yada yada yada...when in fact the Manufacturer technically owns that IP and should be payed royalties if 3rd parties are profiting.
R. Mutt is offline   Reply With Quote
This post thanked by:
Old 04-07-2015, 12:16 PM   #3
To me, there is the Internet and there is RS
 
Manic!'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Nanaimo
Posts: 16,015
Thanked 7,383 Times in 3,465 Posts
From what I understand repairs on John Deere tractors cost a lot and you have to take to a authorized service centre take time away from farming. Farmers want to be able to fix it themselves on site but can't because of the ECU.
__________________
Until the lions have their own historians, the history of the hunt will always glorify the hunter.
Manic! is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-07-2015, 01:13 PM   #4
To me, there is the Internet and there is RS
 
underscore's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Okanagan
Posts: 16,268
Thanked 8,914 Times in 3,874 Posts
As much as I support DIY, I don't think any Joe Schmo should be able to dick around in the programming of a car. Pulling codes for repairs, sure, but anything beyond that should be locked out.

As a side note whoever wrote this article sounds like a bit of a twat.
__________________
1991 Toyota Celica GTFour RC // 2007 Toyota Rav4 V6 // 2000 Jeep Grand Cherokee
1992 Toyota Celica GT-S ["sold"] \\ 2007 Jeep Grand Cherokee CRD [sold] \\ 2000 Jeep Cherokee [sold] \\ 1997 Honda Prelude [sold] \\ 1992 Jeep YJ [sold/crashed] \\ 1987 Mazda RX-7 [sold] \\ 1987 Toyota Celica GT-S [crushed]
Quote:
Originally Posted by maksimizer View Post
half those dudes are hotter than ,my GF.
Quote:
Originally Posted by RevYouUp View Post
reading this thread is like waiting for goku to charge up a spirit bomb in dragon ball z
Quote:
Originally Posted by Good_KarMa View Post
OH thank god. I thought u had sex with my wife. :cry:
underscore is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-07-2015, 02:50 PM   #5
Willing to sell body for a few minutes on RS
 
Great68's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Victoria
Posts: 10,427
Thanked 4,799 Times in 1,763 Posts
People have been dicking around with a car's programming since cars were invented. Except back then all you needed was a screwdriver.

As far as I'm concerned, I paid my money and it's mine to do whatever the hell I want with.
If I want to crank the boost until the motor explodes I should be able to do that, just void the warranty.
__________________
1968 Mustang Coupe
2008.5 Mazdaspeed 3
1997 GMC Sonoma ZR2
2014 F150 5.0L XTR 4x4

A vehicle for all occasions

Last edited by Great68; 04-07-2015 at 03:17 PM.
Great68 is online now   Reply With Quote
This post thanked by:
Reply


Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -8. The time now is 09:27 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
SEO by vBSEO ©2011, Crawlability, Inc.
Revscene.net cannot be held accountable for the actions of its members nor does the opinions of the members represent that of Revscene.net