Automakers to gearheads: Stop repairing cars
- Thread starter aldaman
- Start date
BumblebeeZA
New member
This is almost like saying, if you buy a CD, you may only play it X volume, and set the bass X amount, it may damage your ears and become a health issue to you and others :rolleyes2: :thinking: :idontknow: :hmm: :daydream: :doh:
Wardell
New member
Wow... just wow...
Shit like this really boggles my mind. Ford, General Motors, John Deere and the members of the Auto Alliance should be ashamed of themselves for thinking people would still want to buy vehicles from them if they put these kind of limits on what owners can do with them. If I wanted to be constrained to leaving it stock and going through the dealer for everything, I'd have leased it. But then, I wouldn't have wanted a Jeep either.
Unfortunately, FCA is a member of the Auto Alliance... I can only hope they got out voted on this by Ford and the others, since they have tended to be very supportive of the third party aftermarket industry (and not just for the Jeep brand either).
Shit like this really boggles my mind. Ford, General Motors, John Deere and the members of the Auto Alliance should be ashamed of themselves for thinking people would still want to buy vehicles from them if they put these kind of limits on what owners can do with them. If I wanted to be constrained to leaving it stock and going through the dealer for everything, I'd have leased it. But then, I wouldn't have wanted a Jeep either.
Unfortunately, FCA is a member of the Auto Alliance... I can only hope they got out voted on this by Ford and the others, since they have tended to be very supportive of the third party aftermarket industry (and not just for the Jeep brand either).
BlackHawk08jk
New member
If you ask me they are just making it legal for stealerships to strong arm people into having to take their cars back to the stealership to be worked on.
DWiggles
Caught the Bug
The Truth has been spoken. :daydream:
bigmikesndtech
New member
That's where you are mistaken, most automakers consider it their car that you have a long term right to drive. And at the end of the day they're basically right, you don't and can't own most of the things that make your car actually go, like software in the ECU and even in the case of some higher end cars parts of the transmission, thanks to the way they have worded their functions and things like the DMCA and other intellectual property rights. Say goodbye to ownership my friends, and hello to a world of micro payments to continue use of "your" car.
tastethebeast
Member
This is truly horrible. So I pay for a vehicle, own it, but can't make modifications to it or fix it? This would put so many good, hardworking people out of a job.
tastethebeast
Member
Amen, at least Texas is free.
Zstairlessone
New member
So where is the EULA you obviously signed agreeing that you only have the right to use these parts? A car isn't an OS is it? I can hack Windows all I want, I can personalize my operating system as I chose - I just can't copy it and use it on multiple computers without paying for it. I also seem to have ceded the right to have software that actually works and can't hold the originators responsible for their inability (or lack of desire) to make a fully functioning product void of flaws.
Funny, before Microsoft bought the operating system it was sold and every purchaser owned his or her copy of it. MS changed it to a licensing arrangement so they could recover profits on an immense scale, and for no other reason. With that arrangement in place they never have had to actually fix issues with their products, in fact known deficiencies are carried forward from one generation to the next. how does that model fall in with the argument that only the automakers know ....?
Everybody involved can see that this is all about maximizing profit for the automobile manufacturers, but they are the ones with the deep pockets and lobbyists so be prepared to lose more freedom.
SmokinV10
Caught the Bug
Stop trying to sympathize with the fascist/corporatist mindset. They didn't sell me a "license" to operate the vehicle like some type of software in the cloud. They sold me the vehicle. It's MINE. I can burn it to the ground and use the scrap metal to make sculptures of genitalia if I want. I can repurpose the lights for my living room and the engine to power a f'n Kia. If they say otherwise, they can pound sand.
Last edited:
Clem319
New member
Lol. I will take two of your penis sculptures when you make them. Thanks
Wardell
New member
A car might not be an OS, but a modern vehicle is so heavily computerized now that there's a lot you can't do to it without also changing the computer's programming. (By the way, changing a user configurable setting in the interface is one thing, but actually hacking and reprogramming windows or any other program would violate the user agreements and is also one of the things the Digital Millennium Copyright Act is there to prevent.)
In the comments submitted about the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (same link was in the article), the big thing to notice is that they are mainly referring to the computers and programming used on the vehicles. Basically, they want to make it illegal for anyone to mess with the coding and reprogram the settings or create / use third party diagnostic tools to read fault codes off them that would enable repairs (among a few other things). Of course, this approach affects what we can do with the hardware (parts) since modern vehicles are so heavily computerized.
The biggest thing that could affect Jeep owners that I can think of: if I upgrade the tires on my Jeep and regear it to match, what they're proposing would make it illegal for me to use a Flashcal or Procal (etc) to calibrate the settings for the speedometer and odometer. So in that sense, they're forcing me to keep stock tires on it. To me, that's not on and completely contrary to what owning a Jeep is about.
Another one mentioned in the article (less applicable to the Jeep crowd but still relevant as some of us do this), is to prevent someone from changing the tuning settings for the engine performance and transmission.
Of course the big one that affects DIY repairs and independent shops is preventing anyone from making 3rd party diagnostic tools. The article even mentions Ford has already tried to sue Autel US over this under the argument that they must have stolen trade secrets. This isn't so much preventing anyone from using anyone else's parts, but when they make it impossible for anyone else to figure out what's wrong with a vehicle they don't leave many other options than bringing it into the dealer. Honestly, since this would practically shut down independent auto garages I can't see it getting much support. There's just too many jobs at stake. But it's a scary prospect. And the other thing is, when a mechanic is quoting me that a ton of work needs to be done that I didn't bring it in for, I'd like to be able to take it somewhere else for another opinion. If I can only take it to a dealer or approved shop, what are my chances of being able to get an honest opinion about what needs to be done...?
In the comments submitted about the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (same link was in the article), the big thing to notice is that they are mainly referring to the computers and programming used on the vehicles. Basically, they want to make it illegal for anyone to mess with the coding and reprogram the settings or create / use third party diagnostic tools to read fault codes off them that would enable repairs (among a few other things). Of course, this approach affects what we can do with the hardware (parts) since modern vehicles are so heavily computerized.
The biggest thing that could affect Jeep owners that I can think of: if I upgrade the tires on my Jeep and regear it to match, what they're proposing would make it illegal for me to use a Flashcal or Procal (etc) to calibrate the settings for the speedometer and odometer. So in that sense, they're forcing me to keep stock tires on it. To me, that's not on and completely contrary to what owning a Jeep is about.
Another one mentioned in the article (less applicable to the Jeep crowd but still relevant as some of us do this), is to prevent someone from changing the tuning settings for the engine performance and transmission.
Of course the big one that affects DIY repairs and independent shops is preventing anyone from making 3rd party diagnostic tools. The article even mentions Ford has already tried to sue Autel US over this under the argument that they must have stolen trade secrets. This isn't so much preventing anyone from using anyone else's parts, but when they make it impossible for anyone else to figure out what's wrong with a vehicle they don't leave many other options than bringing it into the dealer. Honestly, since this would practically shut down independent auto garages I can't see it getting much support. There's just too many jobs at stake. But it's a scary prospect. And the other thing is, when a mechanic is quoting me that a ton of work needs to be done that I didn't bring it in for, I'd like to be able to take it somewhere else for another opinion. If I can only take it to a dealer or approved shop, what are my chances of being able to get an honest opinion about what needs to be done...?