Three States Propose DMCA-Countering 'Right To Repair' Laws (ifixit.org) 225
Automakers are using the Digital Millennium Copyright Act to shut down tools used by car mechanics -- but three states are trying to stop them.
An anonymous reader quotes IFixIt.Org:
in 2014, Ford sued Autel for making a tool that diagnoses car trouble and tells you what part fixes it. Autel decrypted a list of Ford car parts, which wound up in their diagnostic tool. Ford claimed that the parts list was protected under copyright (even though data isn't creative work) -- and cracking the encryption violated the DMCA. The case is still making its way through the courts. But this much is clear: Ford didn't like Autel's competing tool, and they don't mind wielding the DMCA to shut the company down...
Thankfully, voters are stepping up to protect American jobs. Just last week, at the behest of constituents, three states -- Nebraska, Minnesota, and New York -- introduced Right to Repair legislation (more states will follow). These 'Fair Repair' laws would require manufacturers to provide service information and sell repair parts to owners and independent repair shops.
Activist groups like the EFF and Repair.org want to "ensure that repair people aren't marked as criminals under the DMCA," according to the site, arguing that we're heading towards a future with many more gadgets to fix. "But we'll have to fix copyright law first."
Thankfully, voters are stepping up to protect American jobs. Just last week, at the behest of constituents, three states -- Nebraska, Minnesota, and New York -- introduced Right to Repair legislation (more states will follow). These 'Fair Repair' laws would require manufacturers to provide service information and sell repair parts to owners and independent repair shops.
Activist groups like the EFF and Repair.org want to "ensure that repair people aren't marked as criminals under the DMCA," according to the site, arguing that we're heading towards a future with many more gadgets to fix. "But we'll have to fix copyright law first."
Good (Score:5, Insightful)
They sound like good laws. I just hope they pass.
Re:Good (Score:4, Funny)
As soon as the RIAA goons figure out this law might be used to repair defective CD's, it'll be gone.
Re:Good (Score:4, Insightful)
CDs aren't encrypted and nothing in the
DMCA prevents you from ripping them and burning your own backups.
If you'd have gone with MPAA and DVDs for your example, you'd have had a decent comment, but you didn't.
Re: (Score:3)
The "circumvent" clause is not specifically about encryption, but about any and all technical barriers.
Many CD's have some sort of laughably stupid or downright evil (remember Sony?) copy protection, which would fall under this anti-circumvention.
CD copy protection is extremely rare (Score:3, Interesting)
I still buy CDs and it's been 13 years since I saw one which was alleged to contain a technological measure intended to limit access. Out of my approx 2000 CDs, literally exactly one of them has such a thing (which I didn't realize at the time I bought it). (And then I also didn't realize until after I ripped it and later found out that some people's drives (and car players) were having trouble with it.)
If you mak
Re: (Score:2)
DRM simply isn't a factor in the music sales.... Video is where you go to find DRM, which is why I eventually gave up and started just pirating all my movies and TV, whereas I still buy music. Music publishers still want your money; it's the video people who are constantly creating piracy incentives.
Note that playable music does not have DRM, ever. You can record sound easily, always, since you can do analogue recordings. Video only has the appearance of DRM, in truth it is no different than sound, in that you can record everything in analog, and additionally you have the ability to record it digitally as well, if you're willing to open up your hardware. This would not violate the DMCA in anyway. You can also more simply just use certain pieces of hardware that give you access to unencrypted video/soun
Re: (Score:2)
I agree!
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Good (Score:4, Insightful)
In MN, Republicans control both the house and senate and the bill was put forward by 2 Rs and 1 D.
In NE, Republicans control the unicameral legislature and the bill was put forward by 7 Rs.
In NY, Republicans control the senate, Democrats control the House and the bill was sponsored by 1 R with 1 R and 3 Ds signing on as co-sponsors.
And actually if it gets shot down it will probably by the unions, they have the biggest interest in keeping small independent shops out of certain areas of the business. Oh wait but that means the Democrats might be the bad guys!!!
Also need to offer tools, software, and codes. (Score:5, Insightful)
Under the DMCA they can lock out jiffy lube by saying the change oil light reset code is under the DMCA and only dealers are to have it.
But this needs to extended to firmware images, sd card images, etc for embedded hardware.
Info on old pc based embedded hardware and older video games (arcade) that used custom cards so they can be run in VM's on newer pc hardware.
Letting people run that hardware in a VM with having to rebuy the software / pay the rights holder again. Yes some like that did have happen in the past and there a free VM system to replace the old pc and custom pci card. That still needed some of the old hardware and they got sued.
Re: (Score:3)
Some clarification on the status of emulators and ROMs for things you own would be welcome.
Re: (Score:2)
Even more so when you have crappy paid emulators that are inferior to the free / open source emulators.
Even old dos games can use some Clarification on the status of emulators!
Re: (Score:2)
And who will buy a car that will need to go to the dealer for an oil change each 3000 miles?
Re: (Score:2)
Unless Trump passes a new law, the Magnusson-Moss Warranty Act of 1975 prevents manufacturers from voiding warranties for using 3rd-party tools, using 3rd-party parts, etc.
Honestly, it seems like I read some dumb comment every week or two about carmakers or dealers "voiding" someone's warranty for some silly reason. It's "only" been 42 years now since that law was passed; you'd think people would know about it by now.
No One Owns Anything (Score:5, Insightful)
Anymore. You just rent it until it breaks so you can re-up on a newer rented item. Greed has no bounds.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:No One Owns Anything (Score:5, Insightful)
You just rent it until it breaks
Renting would be ok if it was stated upfront and you paid rental prices.
Re:No One Owns Anything (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:No One Owns Anything (Score:4, Informative)
Looks like Universal Studios is one of the only ones (if not *the* only one) left to still do this:
http://www.universalstudioshom... [universals...inment.com]
I seem to recall there were others like Disney, who would replace damaged optical media as well.
Re: (Score:3)
Greed has no bounds.
Neither does personal image. What you want to repair that old shit iPhone 6? Why? It's scratched and everything. Are you a poor person who can't afford a real phone?
Re: (Score:2)
Are you kidding? We're heading into a time reminiscent of old Soviet times where used goods cost more than new goods because the new shit is actually WORSE than what you could buy in the good ol' days. We're there already with routers and WiFi equipment, and I dare say that phones will be next.
Who the FUCK wants phones with the stability of tinfoil due to being of equal thickness?
Re:No One Owns Anything (Score:5, Insightful)
When I'm not wearing out keyboards I'm an avid "shade tree mechanic", and it just so happened I experienced a tangent of this type of stupidity yesterday working on a car I recently purchased for my daughter. As it turns out the tire pressure monitoring system (TPMS) in many GM vehicles of it's era were flashed with a configuration that would not allow the system to be reset + relearn the wheel sensors without an expensive scan tool (even these aftermarket ones are prohibitively expensive). I'm going to go to a dealer and beg them to fix the firmware so the product will function as the owner's manual states it should (there happens to be a service bulletin on this particular issue). In my case I simply do not allow anyone to work on my vehicles, so when I rotate the tires at every oil change I have no recourse to make the TPMS system functional and accurate once again except to take it to a tire shop or the dealer.
Thankfully there seems to be a possible workaround - removing the TPMS fuse and letting it "forget" all it's sensors so it doesn't work at all. But imagine if this wasn't the case, and car owners were unable to get their vehicle to pass an emissions inspection because the TPMS sets a malfunction code.
I'm generally not one to throw fuel on hyperbolic statements like "No One Owns Anything", but in this case I have to side with this sentiment. How far are we from the day when your car disallows you from driving over some ridiculously slow speed until you take it to the dealership for service? Those of us in states requiring emissions inspections are already beholden to the machines because in most counties of my state a vehicle with a MIL / Check Engine light on automatically fails regardless of whether the code is associated to an electronic ride control component, a burned out heated seat controller, or the catalytic converter efficiency monitoring.
To further complicate things, many of today's vehicles are equipped with autonomous braking systems and other "convenience" features such as park assist, etc. Who's going to be able to fix these systems when they malfunction, and more importantly who will be responsible for the deaths that will be inevitably caused by such?
For me, the solution is driving old junk and spending the extra time and money to maintain it until it is simply impossible to keep in a safe condition. I simply will not succumb to the perpetual car payment, rent-a-car culture that American society has all to readily embraced at it's own peril.
Re: (Score:3)
Stuff like this is one reason why I don't buy GM or American. I have a 2015 Mazda and its TPMS system is about as simple and easy as you can get: there are *no* wheel sensors at all (!), as it just uses the ABS system to look for wheels that are (over some distance) turning a bit more slowly that the others. Resetting it when it alarms is really simple: hopefully you'll check the tire pressures and fix them, but to reset it you just press the TPMS button and hold it for 3 seconds. No special tools requir
IDK, but... (Score:5, Insightful)
Thankfully, voters are stepping up to protect American jobs
Can't help but feel like my anus is being forcibly greased up whenever "protect american jobs" is being waved around.
"Right to X" in the title of a new law is also a red flag.
I mean, I'm aware the DMCA is awful. They should just do something about that. Maybe say, we're going to repeal and replace it? Introduce the All-new Copyright Act, or ACA for short?
Re:IDK, but... (Score:5, Interesting)
It'd be nice if it were that easy, but the controversal parts of the DMCA [wikipedia.org] are implementations of two treaties to which the U.S. is a signatory. The U.S. would have to revoke the treaty in order to remove the offending parts of the DMCA. To those that say it's the Republicans' fault that we have this law, please note that the DMCA was signed by a Democratic president and passed in the Senate unanimously - all 45 Democratic senators wanted this.
Re:IDK, but... (Score:4, Interesting)
>To those that say it's the Republicans' fault that we have this law, please note that the DMCA was signed by a Democratic president and passed in the Senate unanimously - all 45 Democratic senators wanted this.
Yeah, but those were the years when the DINOs ran the democrat party with their center-right "suck up to the liberals a little in the primaries then ignore them for 8 years" style of governance...
Those years are well and truly over, Bernie Sanders and Trump both pretty much shattered that consensus.
Re: (Score:2)
Well, Trump is telling anyone who wants to listen that he's going to nix TPP, with a bit of luck the other contracts go out the window, too.
Re: (Score:2)
Usually these treaties are created and pushed by the USA.
Re: (Score:2)
I'm pretty sure State governments don't have the authority to actually repeal a federal law.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
So both parties are equally guilty
"Us" versus "them" (Score:5, Insightful)
I mean, I'm aware the DMCA is awful. They should just do something about that. Maybe say, we're going to repeal and replace it? Introduce the All-new Copyright Act, or ACA for short?
Sorry. The DMCA is Republican creation. Republicans are only opposed to laws created by Democrats.
The DMCA was a bipartisan effort. Created by Republicans, but signed into law by a Democratic president. The husband of the same person who almost became our current president.
Get away from the "us versus them" mentality. All the bad shit we have right now is the result of bi-partisan cooperation among politicians.
Your side is crap as well as the other side.
Insulting "the other side" does nothing to solve the underlying problem.
Re:"Us" versus "them" (Score:4, Insightful)
>All the bad shit we have right now is the result of bi-partisan cooperation among politicians.
Really ? I could have sworn we just had 8 years where not a single bipartisan moment happened, and things which USED to be matters of bipartisan consensus were actively opposed purely because of who was president.
Are you seriously saying that ALL the problems in the USA predate the Obama administration ? Hell even most liberals won't give him that much of a free pass - we tend to think there were a few things we wished he'd done differently.
Bipartisanship is NOT a bad thing, it's not a good thing either. Fundamentalism of any kind - tends to be evil - and that is more commonly associated with obstruction than bipartisanship.
It's not an unqualified good, but it is definitely not a bad thing either - whether any particular idea is good or bad, in fact, is entirely divorced from whether it's supported by one party or two. The idea should be judged on it's own merit.
Re: (Score:3)
Your argument assumes the government doing anything other than being ground to a halt is a good thing.
All judgeships below Supreme Court are simple majority votes now, thanks to the Democrats nuclear option in 2013. Short-sighted buffoons on both sides.
Re: "Us" versus "them" (Score:3)
Its not an assumption. Its a fact. If you want to live under a government ground to a halt then go to Mogadishu.
Re: (Score:2)
Get away from the "us versus them" mentality. All the bad shit we have right now is the result of bi-partisan cooperation among politicians.
you guys need a third side, something fierce
Re: (Score:2)
There are times when any rational, honest person can conclude there's a right side and a wrong side. You're right that the DMCA is bipartisan shit, but it's not ALWAYS both sides, and there are times when one side is a bad actor.
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
Sorry. The DMCA is Republican creation. Republicans are only opposed to laws created by Democrats.
Why is this modded flamebait? The members of the republican party admitted to deliberately voting against anything proposed by the Democrats during Obama's time [time.com]
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
The Republicans were in the minority in both House and Senate from 2006 (predating Obama) to 2010. The Dems could have (and did) pass anything they wanted. So stop the idiotic BS.
Do you think the Dems are going to vote for Trump policies they disagree with? Do you actually believe the BS you wrote?
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Repair Costs (Score:2)
Re:Repair Costs (Score:5, Informative)
The last time I took my Ford to a dealer they charged $150.00 per hour for labor with a 4 hour minimum.
A 4h minimum is set by what's called the "blue book" which details exactly how much time the repair is supposed to take. Those hours are set by government. That means if they get the job done in 20minutes the book says the job is 30min, they have to charge for 30. On the flip side of that, this also protects you from overzealous pricing charges. That means if the job is listed at 4hr and it takes them 5hr to do it, they can only charge you for 4hr. Some places allow small incremental increases, but most don't. And in those cases there is a hard cap to the limit that can be charged. When you look around the "waiting area" you should also see a sign which states the minimum hourly rate. Depending on the state/province it will right now be between $80 and $140/hr(when I was an apprentice the hourly rate set by the province was around $35/hr). That again is set by the state or province, those are the minimum hourly rates that they have to charge by law. The higher hourly rate above the minimum requirement is called a "rate premium" which any shop can charge. Meaning a independent can charge $80/h or more if they can get away with it. Or a dealership can charge $80/h or $300/h if they can get away with it.
Now onto the parts, since you were able to buy them through a "friendly parts man" that means you're buying a OEM-non dealership part. Under the old auto-pact treaty, OEM parts suppliers can make these parts and sell them to anyone for as long as there is demand. The automaker themselves must make these parts for your vehicle for a minimum of 10 years -- some will make them for longer if the vehicle sales were amazing. Now, there is no set prices on auto parts. Meaning a dealership don't have to price you out anything other then in their parts from their warehouses unless you request it. You can bring your own parts, and they have to install them though. You can request that they buy the parts from a OEM parts supplier like NAPPA, Pep boys, or whatever else.
Re:Repair Costs (Score:4, Insightful)
Those crazy Europeans and their pinko commie ways. That's never gonna fly in Free America!
Great Idea and I live in MN (Score:5, Interesting)
It would be 700.00 dollars up front and they had no idea when it would arrive. In fact they had one customer that has been waiting 7 months.
OK so I talk about getting one from the junk yard. But!!!! it needs to be programmed with the exact options my truck has and only Ford can do that and that is 500.00
I went home and just charged the battery everytime I wanted to drive the truck. And over time things dried out. All is good now.
I have been gathering every scrap of info so I can build a jig and write a program to dump the firmware from my electronic modules on my truck, since I am keeping it forever
Re: (Score:2)
This might do what you want:
http://forscan.org/ [forscan.org]
FORScan is a software scanner for Ford, Mazda, Lincoln and Mercury vehicles, designed to work over ELM327 and J2534 Pass-Thru compatible adapters
Re: (Score:3)
Ford cars have always had weird electrical systems. We had a Ford station wagon where if you pressed the brake pedal and pushed the emergency flasher knob in about half-way, the rear window could be opened or closed (without the engine running or the key in the ACC position) I'm sure with the advanced electronics there are even more strange things to be found. I'm glad you were able to fix the problem without shelling out a boatload of money to Ford.
Corporate Stupidity (Score:5, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
Stolen is an interesting term to use there.
If I tell you something in confidence then it is protected. If on the other hand tell you something publicly on Slashdot I can put as many disclaimers and wavers on that I want. Anyone else seeing it can't be said to have stolen it.
Much the same is anything that is exposed to an OS.
DMCA is a federal law (Score:2, Interesting)
Federal laws automatically override all state laws. So these laws will have no effect.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:DMCA is a federal law (Score:5, Interesting)
Not really. The Obama administration decided not to enforce the marijuana laws, but they are still on the books. From Wikipedia: "On August 28, 2013, a federal executive agency announced that it would no longer actively pursue marijuana offences taking place in the states that have legalized the small consumption and possession of marijuana." A future president could reverse that.
Re:DMCA is a federal law (Score:5, Interesting)
He did that because he HAD to. Otherwise, he starts a small scale war where the state then makes most activities that might support enforcing the federal law illegal. Next thing you know, there are DEA agents sitting in jail while it all winds it's way slowly through the courts. Worst case (for the president), the legitimacy of invoking interstate commerce to permit the federal laws to exist ends up in court with an opponent that can actually afford to fight it.
Re: (Score:2)
There were a few skirmishes, sure. But notice how the feds didn't go on a crazy all out assault in spite of the location of each and every dispensary being well known and there being thousands of them.
Instead, they picked on a few where they had some shred of evidence (often bogus, but still) that the state law wasn't being strictly followed.
In return, they lost support of state law enforcement and their costs shot up.
Re: (Score:3)
The DMCA might still say you aren't allowed to crack the encryption, but if the car manufacturer is required to give you the unencrypted version for free, you don't need to crack it either.
Re:DMCA is a federal law (Score:4, Informative)
Federal laws automatically override all state laws. So these laws will have no effect.
I think you may have forgotten the entire point of states maintaining a level of checks and balances with their own laws. A good example is the fact that marijuana is an illegal substance at the federal level, while many states have turned it into a legal industry.
Enough states get behind DMCA abuse, and it will likely drive modifications into DMCA laws at the federal level as well. That's usually the approach to combating shitty laws driven by greed.
Re:DMCA is a federal law (Score:5, Interesting)
These companies (and printer manufacturers with their ink cartridges) have been trying to extend the DMCA to cover what's traditionally considered a trade secret - stuff that nobody except the creator is supposed to know about. The "problem" with trade secrets (from the owner's perspective) being that if anyone figures out or reverse engineers the secret, it's no longer a secret.
As Congress hasn't made any moves to address whether or not the scope of the DMCA covers trade secrets under the guise of copyright, these states are. That way the conflict between these state laws and DMCA can be resolved through the courts, and case law setting the boundary on whether the DMCA can be extended to protect trade secrets in this manner..
States can restrict trade too. (Score:2)
The states just have to ban sales of products that do not allow people to fix them. This does not overrule federal copyright law, it just restricts sales. You can be damn sure that if the car companies are only allowed to sell repairable cars in the state of California, car companies will make repairable cars.
Not so fast. (Score:3)
There is a use-case for locked down hardware in an automobile: self-driving vehicles.
As much as you should have the rights to tinker on the things you own (and you should) things get a lot trickier when we start talking about the software or sensors that actually control your vehicle as it drives down the road.
It's going to be a complex issue with a LOT of debate, so I won't pretend like I can solve it in a single post. Suffice to say, lets not dismiss the entire concept of non-user-serviceable vehicles, in the long term. (though one thing I will say, that fact would have to be fully disclosed at time of purchase)
Re:Not so fast. (Score:5, Insightful)
Actually, lets.
It is perfectly legal for me to repair my own brakes or steering. People have done so for decades even though a failure while driving could be very bad. The upshot is simple, if you're going to work on safety critical parts of your car, you'll want to make sure you know what you're doing. If you screw up, you might face significant liability.
Re: (Score:2)
Had a car 8 years ago that 2 weeks after a State Inspection, the brake lines blew and I nearly died coming down a hill.
Pros aren't anything special. Doubt most hit triple digit IQs.
Re: (Score:2)
Actually, lets.
It is perfectly legal for me to repair my own brakes or steering. People have done so for decades even though a failure while driving could be very bad. The upshot is simple, if you're going to work on safety critical parts of your car, you'll want to make sure you know what you're doing. If you screw up, you might face significant liability.
Self guidance software isn't the same as brakes.
In the future, once the market and regulatory environment has matured, the code that is operating a self-driving vehicle will have been certified to operate safely and within traffic regulations. The code you write yourself, or more likely, the firmware some yahoo downloads from the internet, has not. Since the software is in effect the operator of the vehicle, this is like driving without a license, and yes, should be illegal. Civil liability isn't good en
Re: (Score:2)
Self guidance software isn't the same as brakes.
I would think that a guidance failure can result in as much damage as a brake failure but probably wouldn't.
Brake failure: Plow into a group of people crossing the street
Guidance failure: Head toward a group of people crossing the street or on the sidewalk or in the oncoming traffic lane (etc), but at least you have brakes to stop the vehicle and avoid a collision.
Re: (Score:2)
And since the odds are the guidance software won't break, very few will care to touch it anyway. Much like very few people design their own replacement braking system. There are some who install after-market brakes, but those do go through safety testing so that the seller doesn't get sued into the stone age.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
There is a use-case for locked down hardware in an automobile: self-driving vehicles.
As much as you should have the rights to tinker on the things you own (and you should) things get a lot trickier when we start talking about the software or sensors that actually control your vehicle as it drives down the road.
It's going to be a complex issue with a LOT of debate, so I won't pretend like I can solve it in a single post. Suffice to say, lets not dismiss the entire concept of non-user-serviceable vehicles, in the long term. (though one thing I will say, that fact would have to be fully disclosed at time of purchase)
If liability is what you're attempting to justify with DMCA, let me tell you what will happen.
Can't maintain your own trees on your property because you might do it wrong and it could fall and kill a human. Gotta pay a licensed professional.
Can't clean your own kitchen because there's a chance you could do it wrong and kill a human via food poisoning. Gotta pay a licensed professional.
Can't install apps on your phone because you could do it wrong and be part of a botnet that attacks some corporation or co
Patchwork (Score:2)
It looks like big corp buying laws at the expense of the people.
Re: (Score:2)
In this case please enlighten us what is our benefit? What part of the DMCA is actually in favor of the general population instead of catering to the interests of an insignificant minority to line their pockets.
So we no longer own the cars we 'buy'? (Score:2)
Then why 'buy' them at all? Preventing people from repairing cars is going to be a massive incentive for people to switch over to ridesharing services, starting with urban drivers who have been used to keeping a second car. Let Ford and Uber fight over the DMCA.
Idiots... People want open ECUs (Score:3, Interesting)
I specifically left Ford for motorsport vehicles (Cobra, GT500) and went over to Mitsubishi (Evolution IX, Evolution X) for this reason. Tired of having to pay for $1000+ tuning software just to be able to write the tunes myself, when a crash or new build happens the ECU ID changes and the software locks you out again.
Where as on the Evo I literally had to buy a $120 cable and I can tune an unlimited number of cars with full control over ever parameter and essentially a fully professional environment to write custom tunes and even sell them if needed. We're not talking about end-user "hit apply" type tunes, I'm talking about changing individual load cells on hundreds of maps over months to dial in an exact tune.
Besides that the car was built so much better I felt like an idiot for parading the domestic brands for so long. I literally traded a 32 valve V8 Cobra for an Evolution IX that had a four wheel drive turbo 2.0 liter 4 cylinder which pulled *harder* and was easier to get serious horsepower out of. My jaw literally dropped on the test drive of a modded 450whp Evo9. I had driven supercharged 500-700hp V8's but this little car never broke traction and made it's power lower in the RPM range which made it feel many times faster. Plus you could floor it around corners and it was just unbelievable how well it gained traction as boost kicked in around a corner.
I never went back and almost nothing is locked down on these cars. Stop wasting your time with other brands... *Edit* Captcha was "inducer".
Precedent (Score:2)
A headline, but not an effective law. (Score:4, Informative)
Re:Sell parts/tools, but at what price? Aha. (Score:4, Informative)
sell repair parts at the same price that the dealer pays?
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
So I can only assume the GOP is going to smack them down on it somehow.
Re:Let's talk about Trump now! (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
And it seems like states rights only work for silly republican ideas. Like "Hey, no sales taxes" or "We don't like the gays." California, Illinois, DC, or New York decide to limit guns and screams of "Tyrrany!" and legal challenges abound.
Re: (Score:3)
You don't vote for policies, do you?
If you ever made an effort to get involved with the legislature at the state level, you would be very surprised how easy it is to influence policy. Some state lawmakers saying getting just 1-3 letters about a bit of legislation can sway their vote on it. You should try it some time.
Re: (Score:2)
See the comment above. All three states are controlled by R and R politicians are the ones that put forward these bills. Perhaps it will NOT be the GOP that is going to try to put the smack down, down. sigh
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Let's talk about Trump now! (Score:5, Informative)
Re:Let's talk about Trump now! (Score:5, Insightful)
I find the partisanship of the USA electorate incredible. The government has in general a bipartisan agreement to not give a shit about the people yet everyone will blame something on one side or the other.
Re: (Score:2)
I'm constantly astonished at the lengths people will go to to pretend that both sides are always equally bad in every example.
Re: (Score:3)
And passed the senate with 99 yes votes, 54 Republicans and 45 democrats. One republican did not vote. The House put it to a voice vote, and it passed overwhelmingly. This was obviously something that our entire government thought was a STELLAR idea. Interesting that anyone would think that blaming any one party for this law is a correct or honest approximation of what really happened.
This is just another example of how our "parties" act as a single organism when presented with the chance to circumvent
Re: Let's talk about Trump now! (Score:4, Insightful)
Yah but Obama championed internet privacy and freedoms, no??
The one that expanded NSA Spying ?
https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/... [eff.org]
Re: American Jobs? (Score:3, Insightful)
That is a good comment, you know it's getting bad when when Americans have to depend on Chinese hackers to be able to repair their own cars because American auto makers have gotten so greedy that they are locking down via artificial electronic means out of the repair business.
Going by your logic (Score:2)
If I can't diagnose and fix the car myself or an independent shop but only through expensive Stealership shops, it means the extra money I paid to the Stealership for labour and parts vs self repair/indie shop, the money will not be spent at other local businesses which hire local workers.
Re: (Score:2)
When was the last time you shipped your car to another country to have it serviced? You fucking idiot.
Re:American Jobs? (Score:5, Insightful)
You fulfill the stereotype that people with low user IDs are autistic middle age weirdos, likely unemployed, who can't work out conversations.
The parent has a valid point here, and the GP is an idiot for bringing up Chinese hackers. The actions of both those for and against the DCMA in this case is fighting over American jobs, but siding with the automakers and stealerships would result in a massive net loss for American jobs, since they would not seek to hire everyone they wish to put out of business by turning auto repair into some sort of DMCA-protected black magic.
This pretty much has fuck-all to do with China, apart from giving them credit for cracking a "code" that should have never been allowed to exist in the first place, under a weak-ass DMCA argument. Ironically enough, the hacking in this case creates American jobs.
Re: (Score:2)
Yes, but it is American independent mechanics who will use it to fix American cars in America. Also, perhaps if the gray area was cleared up, an American company might dare to make such tools as well.
Re:American Jobs? (Score:5, Informative)
Let's remember, Autel is a company based in Shenzhen, China. Ford is based in Dearborn, MI, USA. So these bills are all about robbing American jobs, to support Chinese hackers.
To give you an idea of just how wrong you are, in this case, "hackers" cracking a code has created and secured American jobs by enabling American workers to thrive in a 3rd party industry that has been established for decades, fighting against automakers who wish to turn auto repair into some kind of fucking black magic voodoo, driven by greed.
The larger issue is the fact that we're reliant upon hackers from any country to crack codes that should have never been allowed to exist in the first place, codes created and protected by abusing the shit out of the DMCA.
And yes, this issue does get rather sticky because it's actually about fighting over American jobs. Those jobs created by automakers and "authorized" repair centers (read: stealerships) vs. the much larger industry of 3rd party repair shops and DIY mechanics wanting to maintain their own vehicles.
Perhaps if they didn't get so fucking greedy to earn the moniker of stealership, this wouldn't have grown to be such an issue. Either way, the DMCA abuse needs to stop.
Re:American Jobs? (Score:5, Insightful)
That is a bit of anger! Relax Mr. Anonymous Coward!
This has nothing to do with Anonymous Coward. This has everything to do with Common F. Sense.
And if it's not about foreign v. American jobs, why does the summary say "Thankfully, voters are stepping up to protect American jobs"?
Because TFS is inaccurate. Sure as hell wouldn't be the first time. This has to do with protecting the rights of any car owner or 3rd party repair shop to service or repair a car if they have the knowledge and skill to do it. And to give TFS some credit for accuracy, yes, that would include American jobs, but more accurately any American who happens to own a device they hold the skill to service or repair, regardless if they hold a job doing it.
I've been maintaining my own vehicles for almost three decades, and as a result my cars have lasted me at least 200,000 miles each time. I've also not had to waste thousands of dollars on misdiagnosed issues of questionable legitimacy; otherwise known as why we call them stealerships. It's no secret the department driving considerable profit into a stealership is the service department, and I'm not about to be forced to have my car "serviced" by pure unadulterated greed just because they didn't get enough profit from me when I bought the damn car.
If automakers and stealerships had their way, every Discount Auto Parts and Autozone would be shut down, Haynes and Chilton repair manuals would be illegal, you would need a federal license to even look at the Craftsman tool department in Sears, and opening the hood on your car would require an encryption key. Abusing the shit out of the DCMA seeks to destroy an entire industry that has been established for decades, along with the thousands of jobs within. Are automakers likely trying to protect some American jobs? Sure, but the end result would still be a rather massive net loss.
In this case, Common F. Sense needs to prevail over Corruption N. Greed. Plain and simple.
Re: (Score:2)
But this is about preventing the tool from being made in the first place. An American toolmaker wouldn't be able to make a Ford diagnostic tool either.
Lies. They'd be able to make that tool with Ford$ ble$$ing.
Re: (Score:2)
Copyright has been "overhauled" several times. And each time it gets worse.
I have altered the deal (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Can you name one instance when it didn't get worse?
Re: (Score:2)
1710 when the Statute of Anne (long name, An Act for the Encouragement of Learning, by Vesting the Copies of Printed Books in the Authors or Purchasers of such Copies, during the Times therein mentioned.) was passed. To quote wiki,
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Most people don't ship their vehicles to China for service. You moron.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: And Trump will back it (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Depends. Does he have stock in the megacorp?
Re: (Score:2)
Just wait 'til 3D printing catches on.
In case you're not familiar with this, spare parts for cars is a HUGE business. And everyone involved is fleecing you, no matter where you get that part, whether it's a "genuine" original, a knockoff, even if you get it from a junk yard from a wreck, in the end you'll be charged many, many times over what the part actually costs you to build it in a 3D printer.
Can you imagine just what kind of industry you're standing against if that takes off? If you think the MAFIAA's