GM trying to keep you from modding your vehicle

Ductape wrote:
Yawn... just buy your modified software from the aftermarket software vendor and install it. Replacing the original code. GM may own the code they sell you, but they can't prevent competitors from selling code...

There's a problem with that. They're are trying to get DMCA rules to apply to their products. The DMCA has a provision in it which criminalizes any act that defeats or circumvents locks that are implemented to restrict access to copyrighted material. To load custom code, you would first have to defeat the lock the manufacturers have placed on their modules.

Cell phone manufactures and providers were successful at getting these rules applied to themselves. Before 2012, jailbreaking or rooting a phone was essentially illegal since you had to defeat the manufacturer's lock first. Lawmakers heard the outrage and passed a law which basically granted DMCA exemptions for phones.

BenK wrote:
Forgot about this on the computer analogy...you are dealing with compiled software
NOT source code

Once you get past the API level, you are into source code territory

Ditto any automotive software...at the API level, compiled software and no
source code

Once you go past that and into actually changing the software...that is at the
source code level...

A case can be made that the tuner only changes at the API level and I can totally
make that case...but if something requires warranty or liability coverage...I'd
be the first to say 'you touched it, you own it'...that is business in the
software world (world wide, not just here in North America)

I do agree with the idea that users should not be allowed to load in their own code to the ECU's or have access to hack the ECU's, especially with the litigous happy environment we have, I could see people modding their vehicles and blaming everything on the OEM. The whole overclocking thing was a good analogy actually (and I've fried some AMD cores back in the day). I'm enjoying my air-cooled sandy core overclocked 4.8 ghz i5 thank you very much. but then my computer isn't an 8,000 lbs device hurtling down the road that could put my and everyone around me's lives in possible jeopardy should an ECU fail.

However, I do believe that diagnostics of all those ECU's and such shouldn't be proprietary which it seems like they're trying to do. Consumers should also be able to purchase new modules and replace them themselves (or have a qualified independent mechanic change the unit). Hell, Tesla updates their ECU's over the web and give new functionality to existing customers. However, I believe the old school OEM's think it would cut into their bottom line if they adopted a similar strategy.

Forgot about this on the computer analogy...you are dealing with compiled software
NOT source code

Once you get past the API level, you are into source code territory

Ditto any automotive software...at the API level, compiled software and no
source code

Once you go past that and into actually changing the software...that is at the
source code level...

A case can be made that the tuner only changes at the API level and I can totally
make that case...but if something requires warranty or liability coverage...I'd
be the first to say 'you touched it, you own it'...that is business in the
software world (world wide, not just here in North America)

Burbman...a good analogy, but take it a bit farther to where this topic on this
forum is at...

Sure the diagnostics is similar to a vehicle...the difference is in that the
tools require a deeper level than API's

Now try to over clock your computer by 150% or 200% that the gamer crowd does

Then when it burns up...try to convince your computer OEM that they have to
provide warranty...

That you knew over clocking (tuner for those here) does raise the heat significantly
and that you did buy an after market water cooling heat rejection system.

That you followed the instructions from that water cooling system's manual to
the letter. Might even say you added another fan with higher RPMs and higher
FPS/CFM

That, that all should tell the OEM that it was 'their' computer's fault and that
they should provide warranty...

Ditto if one or more of the bios/PROMs popped just like a fire cracker
when the new software was installed (been there...done that...but did
NOT claim warranty)

Like it or not, there is a trend toward licensing (lease) use rather than purchase. Music, books, vehicles, computers, phones etc. Keeps the revenue stream more controlled.

Not a fan myself, but businesses like it no matter which side of the contract they are on. I work for a large corporation and they don't want to own anything except IP.

Key difference here...I run MS Windows on my Dell laptop....Windows doesn't block me from diagnosing hardware problems with the Dell. In fact, Windows includes some hardware diagnostics, and won't prohibit me from installing a 3rd party diagnostic program if I so choose.

GM on the other hand is claiming that I shouldn't make my own hardware repairs because running diagnostics will expose their source code. If Dell and MS teamed up to do what GM is doing they would be in court with an anti-trust suit in about 5 minutes.

I understand about user licenses for software etc., and completely agree. But I OWN THE HARDWARE, and what GM is doing is using their software to hold me hostage and prevent me from repairing the hardware THAT I OWN. If they are so concerned about their source code, then they need to step up their coding/compiling and structure the OS in such a way that the source code is not exposed to users running diagnostics.

That is a USER LICENSE...rarely do you ever get source code privilages without having to pay big bucks. Even then, you do NOT own their source code...most license agreements will also give them rights to whatever source code you then generate from theirs...

Now computer jargon will become necessary in our conversations on these forums...just like home to me...

Talk about taking the OEM off the warranty and liability hook when a vehicle software is modified...

Most software is not owned when you write that check, hand them the green, or put it on plastic. If you read the licensing agreement for your iPhone, Android, Mac, Windows PC, laptop, or tablet, it will tell you you own the hardware, but any firmware/software you are only licensed to use, do not own, and must seek permission to change or redistribute, they are protecting their R&D dollars, as well as covering themselves should someone make a change that disables a safety feature. I guess most auto manufacturers will jump on that bandwagon if they have not already.

steve-n-vicki wrote:
what's next , the farmers will claim what they produce cant be modified ?so that means you can buy it but not eat it or it will be modified,

LOL, I'll sell you this ear of corn to eat but if you put butter and salt on it the warranty will be void.

Well its more than just government motors folks:

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

And guess what the dear old government is right in there with them.