Auto makers say you can't work on your own vehicles any more.

[camrat68]

If you're like me and into performance modifications or just routine maintenance, then this is a must-read article.

http://www.autoblog.com/2015/04/20/automakers-gearheads-car-repairs/


-Jim

[minendrews68]

Wow, aren't the automakers trying to monopolize.... I can't see this happening, but who knows. That would surely put a lot of mechanics out of business. Then the automakers could charge what ever they wanted to for repairs.

[sam 74]

i doubt this will go anywhere. but if it does its enough to keep me from buying new cars anymore.

[camrat68]

Unfortunately, it looks like this IS moving forward.

Now the OEM's are saying you don't actually own your vehicle.

http://www.wired.com/2015/04/dmca-ownership-john-deere/

-Jim

[lzdick]

I'm starting to like my old Holley 4150's more and more.

[andrewb70]

Gee, a whole industry lobbying government for protection? Shocking...LOL

Andrew

[BMR Sales]

Some of German Car Companies have been trying to limit the Sales & access to Electronics & Factory Repair Manuals for years

[Bob in St. Louis]

I work in the service department of a dealership. To be quite honest, I know there are people that hate me and my position "automatically". If the Feds ever forced those people to come see me, it's not going to be pretty.
I'm frankly fine with those that don't want to come in finding service elsewhere. I'm good with that.

[cluxford]

my view is really simple on this. My comment relate to the overall presumption that buying doesn't mean owning (i.e. the manufacturer still owns the code and all associated IP).

Nothing has changed for over 100 years since the patent office came about. You can't copy or modify someone else's IP.

Now with cars etc, OK so if the manufacturers say we don't own it, even though we believe we entered a purchase agreement (by the way watch all the T&C's change in the sale agreements), then by mere "right to use" common legal premise they still own it and we are using it. That means it must be fit for purpose, it must do what it is being purchased to do. I don't own it, i've purchased it to perform a task. On that basis watch the lawsuits fly. It basically means the manufacturer now must have an obligation to ensure that vehicle is fit for purpose and doing the things it was sold but not owned) to do. In short, here comes free lifetime warranty, here comes free replacement to a new vehicle when the old one can't be repaired to a new state. The manufacturers need to be very careful, as they are rapidly heading down a rental style commercial model where customers "pay as they use" and the manufacturer is responsible for wear, tear, registration costs etc etc....

[parsonsj]

The Wired article was about the software within a vehicle. And the manufacturers have a point. I write software for use by the FAA, and we don't let the end users change the software either. There's too much at stake.

OTOH, I dream of a world where my new Corvette (or truck, or whatever) comes with a complete maintenance manual including all the source code and vehicle parameters, along with USB ports with which I can hook my laptop! That would be sweet.

[cornfedbill]

This type of action has been tested to void warranties in the past. Eventually sanity prevailed and the consumer won.

My guess is that this will die when tested in court. I do not believe that the automakers will be able limit an owner from working on a car that they legally own.

They can, however, void the warranty for a modified vehicle. There is some dispute here. They have sometimes been limited to voiding only the part that was modified.

I am not worried yet.

[TheJDMan]

Does anyone know what position SEMA and the SEMA Action Network is taking on this issue? On the one hand I can see them supporting the car enthusiast like us, but on the other hand I can see them supporting their members copyrights. SEMA is first and foremost an industry trade association. As more specialty equipment products enter the aftermarket incorporating proprietary software it is reasonable to assume these aftermarket manufacturers will want to protect their software copyrights as well. Stay tuned boys and girls, this could get very interesting.

www.semasan.com

[vintageracer]

Always remember that the VAST majority of new vehicles sold are for basic transportation or use to support commerce as in a vehicle for business use. As much as we might like to "think" WE are the automotive market the OEM's must sell to we are NOT! People who modify a late model or new vehicle are by far in the minority when it comes to the demographics of new vehicle or late model used vehicle buyer's.

With the possible exception of "Halo" cars for which the OEM's which get their best FREE promotion and print their "Bread & Butter" is selling vehicles for what they are:

Basic transportation & vehicles to supporting business commerce!

All the folks who hang here are car guys and the chances are better than the average population that you may have completed some performance upgrades to your new or very late model "Daily" driver in the form of a chip, programmer, exhaust etc. The rest of the world could give a crap less as vast majority of buyers NEVER modify their vehicle in any way!

Given the "current" performance levels virtually all new and late model vehicles have attained why would anyone want to or need to modify their vehicle? That has to be on the mind of OEM's especially when it comes to product liability in our law suit happy society.

It's seems like a natural progression to me for the OEM's to do everything they can protect their intellectual property and limit their product liability.

Having said that I do not agree with that but as a business person I certainly understand it and would probably do the same thing IF I was able to do so.

[BMR Sales]

my view is really simple on this. My comment relate to the overall presumption that buying doesn't mean owning (i.e. the manufacturer still owns the code and all associated IP).

Nothing has changed for over 100 years since the patent office came about. You can't copy or modify someone else's IP.

Now with cars etc, OK so if the manufacturers say we don't own it, even though we believe we entered a purchase agreement (by the way watch all the T&C's change in the sale agreements), then by mere "right to use" common legal premise they still own it and we are using it. That means it must be fit for purpose, it must do what it is being purchased to do. I don't own it, i've purchased it to perform a task. On that basis watch the lawsuits fly. It basically means the manufacturer now must have an obligation to ensure that vehicle is fit for purpose and doing the things it was sold but not owned) to do. In short, here comes free lifetime warranty, here comes free replacement to a new vehicle when the old one can't be repaired to a new state. The manufacturers need to be very careful, as they are rapidly heading down a rental style commercial model where customers "pay as they use" and the manufacturer is responsible for wear, tear, registration costs etc etc....

Pay for Use = Lease!

[High Plains Mopars]

Now with cars etc, OK so if the manufacturers say we don't own it, even though we believe we entered a purchase agreement (by the way watch all the T&C's change in the sale agreements), then by mere "right to use" common legal premise they still own it and we are using it. That means it must be fit for purpose, it must do what it is being purchased to do. I don't own it, i've purchased it to perform a task. On that basis watch the lawsuits fly. It basically means the manufacturer now must have an obligation to ensure that vehicle is fit for purpose and doing the things it was sold but not owned) to do. In short, here comes free lifetime warranty, here comes free replacement to a new vehicle when the old one can't be repaired to a new state. The manufacturers need to be very careful, as they are rapidly heading down a rental style commercial model where customers "pay as they use" and the manufacturer is responsible for wear, tear, registration costs etc etc....

Good counter argument and I think this position could be pushed as viable if push comes to shove.


My guess is that this will die when tested in court. I do not believe that the automakers will be able limit an owner from working on a car that they legally own.


Agreed, this will need to head to court for the acid test. As the latter quote says, if they own the device, then their responsibility to long term maintenance and support can also be tested as well.

If the software is their primary issue that they are using to springboard this argument, then that will create an entirely new dimension of service, leases, and potential companies/services to create new codes to be loaded in expired cars.

[TheJDMan]

Here is SEMA's position statement:

By SEMA Washington, D.C., Staff

In response to a petition and formal comments filed with the U.S. Copyright Office by public interest groups and auto industry stakeholders, SEMA will submit comments supporting the right of industry members and vehicle owners to maintain and upgrade their cars and trucks. The move comes as the Copyright Office considers requests for exemptions from the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA).

Enacted in 1998, the DMCA makes it illegal to circumvent technological firewalls put in place by a copyright owner to prevent copyrighted works from being illegally copied, distributed or used to create derivative works. SEMA’s position maintains that industry members and enthusiasts have today, and have always had, the right to access vehicle systems and components in order to utilize, maintain and upgrade their vehicles, copyright laws notwithstanding. Although SEMA believes these rights stand regardless of an exemption from the DMCA, the association will actively engage in the rulemaking procedure and work to prevent any Copyright Office ruling that would curtail the opportunity to access, maintain and modify vehicles within the law. SEMA’s position signals that the association will advocate on all fronts to ensure that copyright, safety and environmental laws are not used to unfairly curtail these rights.

Attention:
Anyone who is not currently a member of the SEMA Action Network needs to join today. Membership is free and SAN is our legal watchdog protecting the aftermarket car guys/gals rights to enjoy our cars/trucks/bikes.

http://semasan.com/