I-Like-To-Bike

Sure, as long as they keep the recklessly and/or illegal modified dangerous vehicles off the road.

You must like the sound of cars and pickups with exhaust/muffler modifications made in order to make as much noise as possible.
Or encountering approaching vehicles at night with modified blinding headlights, fog lights and spot lights all shinning bright.

I-Like-To-Bike

Purchased any Apple Phones lately? Can the battery be replaced by the user without voiding the warranty?

I-Like-To-Bike

Doncha know the silver lining? These people are likely to decide to become carfree as a result!

Roody

But those actions are regulated by the Motor Vehicle Code and civil/criminal codes. They are not controlled by the fiats of a corporation claiming property rights over a product they already sold to somebody else.

If a car owner modifies the physical brakes of his/her car in a way that makes it street-illegal, they can be prosecuted and/or sued. An unlicensed mechanic who makes unsafe modifications is also civilly and criminally liable. But the car companies don't claim to still "own" the brakes that they sold to a consumer. Why should it be any different for software that they have sold to consumers?

Walter S

Software is considered to be intellectual property. It is usually not sold, and certainly not to consumers. You buy a license to use the software in your device, not ownership of the software itself.

If you modify the software and cause mechanical failures as a result, it would not be terribly difficult to cover your tracks and then make a warranty claim. Manufacturers understandably don't want to facilitate that.

Blue Belly

Hot rod culture was built on guys modifying factory cars. What is wrong with this? Apple is company model that suits no one but Apple. Is this how you want the world to be?

Roody

Thanks for the explanation. This is something I have difficulty understanding.

The ideas in a book or artwork are considered to be intellectual property. But if I buy a book I can do almost anything I want with it, even sell it. I just can't copy the book and sell the copy, unless I have made arrangements with the copyright holder.

Why should software be any different?

Blue Belly

This is the type of attitude is one of controlling people who wish to better themselves, pursuing their interests & bettering themselves. So many people i meet can't change their own oil. They can't & won't try things because they have been taught to be afraid, though the tasks are well within their competence. I have spent some time working with some older mechanics who taught me a valuable lesson. You can build or do just about anything you want, if you take the time to learn to do it properly. We are human & our gift is our ability to solve our way through problems & life. you take that away from people & you only further separate them from their humanity. Vehicle inspections are there for those who decide not to take the time to do good work.

Walter S

To follow the book analogy, the software is the content of the book - the actual composition of the words. You don't own that. You just own the medium onto which those words have been recorded - i.e. a printed page vs a computer chip.

350htrr

In this case, "tuners" can/do change the parameters of the ECU to make more HP, more HP causes more stress on all the drivetrain, more wear faster... What's wrong with that? Nothing if the person is willing to pay for the repairs themselves when things break/wear out... But ... a lot of these people feel that the car company should cover the cost of things going wrong with the car, that's why there's a warranty, isn't that right? So they re-program the ECU back to stock and take the car back to the dealer saying WTF? 1 year old car and the engine blew you must fix it...

Roody

Right, I don't own the content of a book. But I do have certain rights to use the content of the book.

Walter S

And you can use your software too. You just can't modify it. You have not paid for the right to make new, novel creations of your own that leverage the R&D of the software designer.

Walter S

The book analogy only goes so far. Books have words that people read. Software is a set of intricately designed instructions that are executed by a microprocessor. In this case those instructions influence the operation of various engine functions.

In in the old days you might bore out cylinders and modify camshafts in a way that leads to premature engine failure. That was easily detected, so the manufacturer is covered with warranty language that lets them off the hook. Modifying software creates the same opportunities for engine failure but is harder to detect.

The manufactures are IMO taking reasonable measures to prevent abuse.

I'm just glad it's not a bicycle problem.

cooker

The word "repair" (or "repairing") is used at least 10 times in the article. including in quotes both from manufacturers and the EFF, as well as by the author in the text, title and captions. In other words, the issue of people repairing their own vehicles is part of the discussion.

gerv 

The answer is yes and no.

Hacking the software or, better yet, requiring that the source be available for scrutiny ("open source") would probably make the job cheaper and would also disclose to the public exactly what said software is actually doing... which has a wide implication.

Apple phones are off my list. Partly for the reason you mention.

Walter S

The manufactuer doesn't want to publish the software. That gives away what they rightly consider to be trade secrets that may involve expensive research leading up to finished code. Why should the leader in innovation have to pay the cost of getting there, but the free loading followers get the same advantages for free?

gerv 

Actually, there are many reasons why a manufacturer should consider giving the software back to the community. First reason is that with complex software, open sourcing gets many more eyes on the software, which reduces testing costs. Second reason is to disclose what the software is doing (ie, no back ports to the NSA). But the big reason is that the software tends to be overall much better. That's why IBM nowadays uses and pays for so much open software. Google, Microsoft, Yahoo, etc... all invest heavily in open source software. Eve, though rarely, Apple.


Just think about it. The web server delivering this page, as well as the browser you use, are either 100% open source or very close to it.


Time the auto industry noticed the writing on the wall.

Go Trek!!

Walter S

You're right. But open source has not really caught on when it comes to embedded software. There are some unique problems there. And for a manufacturer, it would be a big deal to consider safety liabilities in the context of open source software that follows an evolution that's not totally under their control.

wphamilton

I don't see how any of that falls legitimately within the realm of manufacturer control. Manufacturers should limit themselves to providing products which are safe to operate and to advising as to appropriate use. This is all part and parcel of the First Sale doctrine that I referred to earlier. Standard, codified law. Exceptions you might come up with, such as modifying odometers, various provisions of the DMCA and so on, are all exceptions.

wphamilton

Open sourcing facilitates development by the community, at a fraction of the cost of in-house development. My job includes open source development in fact, and we did decide to release a very high profile big data computing systems platform under open source license. I am not speaking for the company btw, and I'm not directly involved in that project. But there are a number of reasons to do this.

I-Like-To-Bike

What ECU software do you think needs to made available for scrutiny ("open source") that would make a brake job cheaper?

IRT to Apple, Will you be posting another thread that speculates that Apple's lack of open source policy and user inability to tinker with their code and chips could spell the end of the smartphone era? Perhaps it will encourage some people to become cell phone free!

wolfchild

Cell phone free while operating a vehicle would greatly reduce accidents on our roads, many of those accidents are a result of a driver being distracted by their smartphone.

Walter S

Clever

I-Like-To-Bike

So does that mean hacker proof software in Apple/Google/Motorola et al cell phones, that could spell the end of the era of portable communications/cell phones, is good for the safety of all our carfree friends menaced by these devices?

350htrr

Easy, Manufacturers need to protect themselves from people who abuse the system, like some "tuners"... As I said before, there are some tuners that change the parameters of the engine control and when things go boom, they re-boot the ECU to stock and there you are... The manufactures is/are held responsible for the problem, even tho it wasn't caused by them in any way shape or form, their product would have performed as it should have...