GM says you dont own your car they do

[backeddy]

Whats next my house ?

No....your 401K, the Grabberment has dozens of bills in committees all over the country, to seize YOUR retirement, with the "promise" to pay it when you retire. The unfunded Grabberment union pensions are worried about THEIR future, and our retirements are the solution.

[The_Blur]

While I can't speak for GM, I'm confident that their interest in protecting their code—it is their code—from other corporate entities, like knockoff brands both in the US and abroad. You and I are not threats to their corporate success. Also, staking a claim to the computer code reinforces their position in warranty disputes.

[ex11b90]

I think my credit union would beg to differ...

[jd10013]

Originally Posted by 95birdible

This will never fly or past muster. Once you purchase said car, or let's say a Microsoft OS disc, you can and people do modify to their liking. If somebody modifies a car and the airbags do not deploy in a crash, that is their own damn problem.

people do it, but it's illegal. that's one of the reasons third party software can be so buggy with windows. the software writers only get access to the code MS allows them to. your thinking of open software like Linux. but whether it's open or not is up to the person who writes it, not the end user. when you buy software, your buying a license to use it, not own or modify.

[Red2014SS]

Originally Posted by The_Blur

While I can't speak for GM, I'm confident that their interest in protecting their code—it is their code—from other corporate entities, like knockoff brands both in the US and abroad. You and I are not threats to their corporate success. Also, staking a claim to the computer code reinforces their position in warranty disputes.

Yes, this is correct! .. Plus, with self-driving cars just around the corner, if someone modifies the code it could create a very dangerous situation. Especially if that car had been traded in and resold to someone who didn't realize it.. It won't matter who modified it, lawyers go after the deepest pockets... and the deepest pockets belong to GM.

Of course, I am in favor of tunable cars... but, this issue will not just go away. Eventually some judge will rule in the favor of the manufacturers. Then you will see an end to tuning.

[jd10013]

Originally Posted by Red2014SS

Yes, this is correct! .. Plus, with self-driving cars just around the corner, if someone modifies the code it could create a very dangerous situation. Especially if that car had been traded in and resold to someone who didn't realize it.. It won't matter who modified it, lawyers go after the deepest pockets... and the deepest pockets belong to GM.

Of course, I am in favor of tunable cars... but, this issue will not just go away. Eventually some judge will rule in the favor of the manufacturers. Then you will see an end to tuning.

it could also be an attempt by the manufactures force all tuners to pay to have access to the code and or get approval from the manufacturer.

[Red2014SS]

Originally Posted by jd10013

it could also be an attempt by the manufactures force all tuners to pay to have access to the code and or get approval from the manufacturer.

Could be, but I doubt it. The number of customers who actually get their car custom tuned is miniscule... almost zero percent of total sales. This is about protecting their code from being copied and/or modified and used in other manufacturer's vehicles. Manufacturers are spending billions of dollars writing new software to control self-driving features on new cars. It is the future of automobiles. They want to protect that investment.

[Vroom_vroom]

i dont see sema and apex just letting this go down with out a fight. if would have a heavy hand for the aftermarket parts

[ChocoTaco369]

Yea, I'm really not concerned about this.

Open up that can of worms, please. That way any kind of injury that occurs due to use can be blamed on GM. You know, since they're technically driving you around, not you. Could you imagine the implications for lawsuits due to accidents? Why go after a little individual's pissant insurance policy? Now, you can sue GM. Since it's their car, not yours, they're assuming liability for any type of accident. Since the software drives the car, not you, I guess GM is liable for every vehicle accident on the road involving their car in some way, right? A good lawyer can blame any accident on technology, somehow. And this is GM's tech, not yours. You're just licensing it.

Your move, GM.

[6bangerBOOM]

I can just see it now. One day we'll buying ECU tunes off Steam.

[CamaroCracka]

Originally Posted by jd10013

people do it, but it's illegal. that's one of the reasons third party software can be so buggy with windows. the software writers only get access to the code MS allows them to. your thinking of open software like Linux. but whether it's open or not is up to the person who writes it, not the end user. when you buy software, your buying a license to use it, not own or modify.

It's not illegal to remove Windows and load Linux. The hardware is not licensed.

I wonder how fast the open source crowd would get into this.

[Red2014SS]

Originally Posted by CamaroCracka

It's not illegal to remove Windows and load Linux. The hardware is not licensed.

I wonder how fast the open source crowd would get into this.

Do you really want to be running open source software on a vehicle that communicates with other vehicles, and that you are inside of? I'm crazy, but that's nuts.

[jd10013]

Originally Posted by CamaroCracka

It's not illegal to remove Windows and load Linux. The hardware is not licensed.

I wonder how fast the open source crowd would get into this.

I was saying it's illegal to modify or change windows.

[KR4545]

You can use the open source fuel injection controller called Megasquirt. They have been developing this thing for a few years now.