Automotives Companies Fight Against Home Repairs

[churchmouse]

I know how to, haven't had to do so for over a decade now. I like having a daily driver that doesn't require tinkering every weekend to keep it running well.

Yeah me to. I still have my Dwell/tach. It is a sun meter. Not used it in forever. I used to be able to field set points to very near dwell by just listening to the engine. Good enough to get you home.

 

[grasshopperlegs]

I was a mechanic in the service for over 22 years. I thought I would try to open my own shop but the way the manufacturers are now the little guy can't keep up with all the things that they put on these net vehicles. My brother in law was in the repair business for over 30 years and every year when a new line of cars came out He had to get new equipment to fix them. He sold his business and it's
a quick Mart station with no service. I do believe that the big boys don't want us to fix our own vehicles.

 

[JettaKnight]

You're right, it is really no different.

Continue to observe as everything that we think we 'own' becomes more and more restricted by IP laws.

Why do you hate the individual's right to prosperity?

 

[steveh_131]

Why do you hate the individual's right to prosperity?

The IP establishment would certainly like us to believe that they have a 'right' to prosperity.

 

[JettaKnight]

Additionally, the open source ECU world is continuing to develop:

rusEfi

It is still in its infancy, but I expect it to grow quickly if auto companies continue down this path.

From their own forum almost all of the cars it's used on are 20th century models. Things have changed a lot since then - like from Apollo to Space Shuttle. Heck, a lot of those cars only had Motorola 16 bit'ers running things.

Being able to easily tweak things in our engine control or body control modules would be awesome.

How awesome will it be when the throttle goes haywire and the car plows through the front window of a Starbucks? How awesome will it be when the insurance agency finds out about the "tweaking"?

Do you really think a car that's completely drive-by-wire is tweakable? Do you not know how many man-hours go into ECU software? More than you have in your lifetime.

 

[JettaKnight]

The IP establishment would certainly like us to believe that they have a 'right' to prosperity.

I have the right to produce works and not have a shiftless laggard copy my work and pass it off as his own.

 

[jamil]

There should be a thread on intellectual property.

 

[steveh_131]

From their own forum almost all of the cars it's used on are 20th century models. Things have changed a lot since then - like from Apollo to Space Shuttle. Heck, a lot of those cars only had Motorola 16 bit'ers running things.

It's looking like some of the same base software can be used, while tweaking variables to match certain models.

How awesome will it be when the throttle goes haywire and the car plows through the front window of a Starbucks? How awesome will it be when the insurance agency finds out about the "tweaking"?

Uhh... I'm talking about modifying performance factors, not the basic driveability.

Do you really think a car that's completely drive-by-wire is tweakable? Do you not know how many man-hours go into ECU software? More than you have in your lifetime.

Everything can be tweaked.

There should be a thread on intellectual property.

This thread demonstrates the end result of government 'intellectual property' constructs.

 

[jamil]

Everything can be tweaked.

When the developing companies develop the code they've invested a **** ton of resources testing it. If they get sued because someone made a mistake, it can cost them $billions. So yes, everything can be tweaked. Are you willing to do the due diligence to make sure you SHOULD tweak it? If so, can you afford the liability if you're wrong and cause other people harm because of it?

 

[BogWalker]

It's not just about tweaking. A huge part of the issue is the manufacturers not wanting you to be allowed to even replace a defective unit by yourself.

 

[steveh_131]

When the developing companies develop the code they've invested a **** ton of resources testing it. If they get sued because someone made a mistake, it can cost them $billions. So yes, everything can be tweaked. Are you willing to do the due diligence to make sure you SHOULD tweak it? If so, can you afford the liability if you're wrong and cause other people harm because of it?

And yet, people are already doing it with open source software. The world has not ended.

It's not just about tweaking. A huge part of the issue is the manufacturers not wanting you to be allowed to even replace a defective unit by yourself.

Tuning is really a side-issue. You're correct, manufacturers are purposely trying to leverage intellectual property laws to prevent owners from doing even the most basic maintenance tasks.

And because intellectual property laws are inherently subjective and inconsistent, this is a fairly easy task.

 

[Woobie]

The service department is the second biggest source of profit at a given dealership, right behind finance. The corporate giants in most industries are doing a good job of doing this juggling act. On the one hand, they financially bully the little guy (small shops, etc.), while in the other hand they put out a couple of "reasonable" arguments, then get people to argue about them. I run a tuner on my diesel. It effects a small percentage of the overall electronics in the vehicle, basically the engine mapping and the transmission shift points. My truck is way more powerful, and almost 50% more efficient now at 250k than it was when it rolled out of the factory. The factory does an ok job, but there are some bright programmers in the aftermarket world. That doesn't sit well with the oem's, and since they own the government, well...

 

[Woobie]

When the developing companies develop the code they've invested a **** ton of resources testing it. If they get sued because someone made a mistake, it can cost them $billions. So yes, everything can be tweaked. Are you willing to do the due diligence to make sure you SHOULD tweak it? If so, can you afford the liability if you're wrong and cause other people harm because of it?

Pretty sure their well-paid lawyers and skilled engineers can find the new programming, cram it down your throat in front of your lawyer, or worst case a jury, drop the mic and walk away. You'd never get away with a lawsuit based on reprogramming. Heck, Toyota had some terrible programming from the factory, got folks killed, and still walked away with less than a slap on the wrist.

 

[JettaKnight]

Uhh... I'm talking about modifying performance factors, not the basic driveability.

Everything is interrelated. That's the big problem. Study up on software disasters and you'll see a theme of unexpected interactions in software.

Everything can be tweaked.

Sure, but at what cost? I like tweaking everything I can, but there's limits to what I can do and costs/risks/benefits to be considered.

This thread demonstrates the end result of government 'intellectual property' constructs.

Poppycock. This has nothing to do with IP and everything to do with the march of technology. The fact is with better, more complex software we have better economy, longer life, more reliability, more features, more power...

 

[Woobie]

Everything is interrelated. That's the big problem. Study up on software disasters and you'll see a theme of unexpected interactions in software.


Sure, but at what cost? I like tweaking everything I can, but there's limits to what I can do and costs/risks/benefits to be considered.


Poppycock. This has nothing to do with IP and everything to do with the march of technology. The fact is with better, more complex software we have better economy, longer life, more reliability, more features, more power...

So why should any of that prevent me from working on my own car? Even if I ruin it, it's mine, I can do with it as I please, can't I?

 

[JettaKnight]

Pretty sure their well-paid lawyers and skilled engineers can find the new programming, cram it down your throat in front of your lawyer, or worst case a jury, drop the mic and walk away. You'd never get away with a lawsuit based on reprogramming. Heck, Toyota had some terrible programming from the factory, got folks killed, and still walked away with less than a slap on the wrist.

You're kidding, right?

Toyota to pay $1.2B settlement in vehicle acceleration lawsuit | New York Post

And, it was never proven that the ECU failed. In fact, the plaintiff's star expert, Michael Barr could only predict a there could be a problem at XX% (redacted). That, combined with the horrible coding practices (e.g. high V(g) and MISRA C violations) is what led the jury to side with the plaintiff.

 

[steveh_131]

Everything is interrelated. That's the big problem. Study up on software disasters and you'll see a theme of unexpected interactions in software.

Sure, but at what cost? I like tweaking everything I can, but there's limits to what I can do and costs/risks/benefits to be considered.

Absolutely. I'd expect any open source software solution to have hardcoded limits to any safety issues.

Poppycock. This has nothing to do with IP and everything to do with the march of technology. The fact is with better, more complex software we have better economy, longer life, more reliability, more features, more power...

Did you read the article? This is not about the technical ability to alter your vehicle's software, it's about the legal ability to do so. It is about copyright law.

So why should any of that prevent me from working on my own car? Even if I ruin it, it's mine, I can do with it as I please, can't I?

It contains proprietary software. So it's not yours. You're just renting it. Am I right, IP guys?

 

[steveh_131]

That, combined with the horrible coding practices (e.g. high V(g) and MISRA C violations) is what led the jury to side with the plaintiff.

Horrible coding practices on the part of the manufacturer? I thought relying on the manufacturer was the only way to have good code.

Of course, open source linux distributions have been besting the operating systems of software giant Microsoft for decades in both performance and reliability. So we all know that the open source community can come up with some damn good code.

 

[JettaKnight]

So why should any of that prevent me from working on my own car? Even if I ruin it, it's mine, I can do with it as I please, can't I?

I agree completely. I usually mod tons of things - include my truck.

I'm not arguing anything about copyright - I say you bought it, you own it, you tweak it. I'm arguing that tweaking an ECU is a fool's errand. Most of the time (if the engineers' did the right thing), can't even access the software, which makes this whole argument moot.

And if you can't access the software - then what is this silly argument going on about? What's the point of extending copyrights if they don't matter?

 

[JettaKnight]

Perhaps this has nothing to do with the ECU software (could it be a reporter is wrong?).


This is more likely to do with programmable parameters and diagnostic codes. And those are much easier to alter, intercept, decode, manipulate and tweak. You're not rewriting the ECU and you're not copying their software.

I don't think copyrights apply at all in this case.

Reverse engineering is not wrong. (You hear me Europe?!)
Tweaking / modding something you own is not wrong.


OK, now this whole article makes a heck of a lot more sense.