Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

EFF Wins Petition to Inspect and Modify Car Software

supporters.eff.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 112 posts

Re: EFF Wins Petition to Inspect and Modify Car Software

#51

Post by gknoy »

VonGuard wrote: post #45
jxcl wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> This does not mean these titles can be redistributed, only that they can be modified for the sake of preservation. But once the copyright expires on the disks, they may then be redistributed?

Then they would enter public domain. Copyright, however, lasts a very, very long time. Longer than the history of computing.

It sounds like archivists could image the disks and transport those across mediums, in the interest of archival, as long as they didn't distribute them, though. Am I mistaken?

Re: EFF Wins Petition to Inspect and Modify Car Software

#52

Post by jellicle »

jxcl wrote: post #44
VonGuard wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I actually worked on this part of the exemption. It was granted in two parts. First, fans may now reverse engineer and host servers for games that are no longer hosted online. Metal Gear Solid 4 is a perfect example, but there are plenty of others. This is now legal, and considered fair use. MMO's are exempted, and defined as games where the world is persistent reguardless of number of players connected (IE, is the g…

> This does not mean these titles can be redistributed, only that they can be modified for the sake of preservation. But once the copyright expires on the disks, they may then be redistributed?

Nearly nothing has entered the public domain in the U.S. in decades, and likely nearly nothing ever will again.

Re: EFF Wins Petition to Inspect and Modify Car Software

#53

Post by Zizzle »

I recently put a turbo on my van since I live high in the mountains where the atmospheric pressure is low and the performance loss is noticeable.

Of course the ECU needs adjustments to the fuelling tables (you need to run rich under boost to prevent detonation), spark timing tables, as well as a patch to the OS to allow the use of a different manifold pressure sensor (default OS doesn't recognise press above 100kpa).

I guess this was illegal.

I have heard rumblings from the professional engine tuners that the OEMs are already starting to lock down ECUs. Not only via DRM, but by having enough checks in the code that modifying parameters to up performance results in error codes and limp home mode. They expect to be having to go to after market ECUs soon.

Some of them would have cost more than my whole project:

https://www.holley.com/products/fuel_systems/fuel_injection/...

Fortunately there are more DIY friendly set ups:

http://megasquirt.info/products/diy-kits/

But it seems a waste to have to throw away a perfectly good ECU because the OEM (or gov) decided to lock it down.

Re: EFF Wins Petition to Inspect and Modify Car Software

#54

Post by [deleted] »

BinaryIdiot wrote: post #27
Azew wrote: post #22

While I agree with the premise of all of this, when it comes to modifying car software, who now maintains the liability? If a hobbyist were to modify something incorrectly and cause a malfunction of the car which in turn injured another, or damaged property, who is liable? Surely it cannot be the automaker, they did not intend for that. Insurance companies are going to fight it, maintaining that unauthorized changes…

> If a hobbyist were to modify something incorrectly and cause a malfunction of the car which in turn injured another, or damaged property, who is liable? The hobbyist. Why would anyone else be liable for something a person did that then failed and caused harm? > Insurance companies are going to fight it, maintaining that unauthorized changes were made which would release their liability. The insurance company covers…

[deleted]

Re: EFF Wins Petition to Inspect and Modify Car Software

#55

Post by schoen »

VonGuard wrote: post #36
Karunamon wrote: post #2

They also got an exemption for modifying of abandoned games whose activation systems are long since gone, as well as extending/clarifying the jailbreaking exemption.

I actually worked on this part of the exemption. It was granted in two parts. First, fans may now reverse engineer and host servers for games that are no longer hosted online. Metal Gear Solid 4 is a perfect example, but there are plenty of others. This is now legal, and considered fair use. MMO's are exempted, and defined as games where the world is persistent reguardless of number of players connected (IE, is the g…

Hi VonGuard,

> and considered fair use

The 1201 exemption process doesn't adjudicate whether things are fair use in a way that's binding on courts, although the Copyright Office does believe that it has to express some opinion about that the uses it approves are noninfringing. But a court doesn't have to agree with that substantive question: if someone sued you for running the server they could argue that it's not a fair use, and the court that they sue you in isn't bound to agree that the Copyright Office was right to view it as noninfringing (or that this is true in the particular circumstances).

Re: EFF Wins Petition to Inspect and Modify Car Software

#56

Post by baobabaobab »

BinaryIdiot wrote: post #27
Azew wrote: post #22

While I agree with the premise of all of this, when it comes to modifying car software, who now maintains the liability? If a hobbyist were to modify something incorrectly and cause a malfunction of the car which in turn injured another, or damaged property, who is liable? Surely it cannot be the automaker, they did not intend for that. Insurance companies are going to fight it, maintaining that unauthorized changes…

> If a hobbyist were to modify something incorrectly and cause a malfunction of the car which in turn injured another, or damaged property, who is liable? The hobbyist. Why would anyone else be liable for something a person did that then failed and caused harm? > Insurance companies are going to fight it, maintaining that unauthorized changes were made which would release their liability. The insurance company covers…

>The hobbyist. Why would anyone else be liable for something a person did that then failed and caused harm?

The hobbyist isn't the one with money. The manufacturer will be sued, and they usually settle because there is probably something they could have done that would have made the failure less likely, injury trials are bad press, and jury sympathy is always on the injured little guy's side.

This is how it plays out with physical products, I don't see why it would be any different with code.

Re: EFF Wins Petition to Inspect and Modify Car Software

#57

Post by rnovak »

gknoy wrote: post #50
yasth wrote: post #33

It should be noted that this is a very limited ruling. Only the owner can modify the car, and you can't go to a mechanic or third party to modify it (or inspect it), which will greatly restrict the application. Also this doesn't apply to Entertainment or Telemetrics portions. So your car could be straight up spying on you, or your manufacturer can leave unpatched security holes in your "Entertainment" system (which h…

I wonder if you could sell your car to the inspector, let them inspect it, and then buy it back.

Maybe a "Mechanic's Lien" could work for that[1]?

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mechanic%27s_lien

Re: EFF Wins Petition to Inspect and Modify Car Software

#58

Post by VonGuard »

gknoy wrote: post #51
VonGuard wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Then they would enter public domain. Copyright, however, lasts a very, very long time. Longer than the history of computing.

It sounds like archivists could image the disks and transport those across mediums, in the interest of archival, as long as they didn't distribute them, though. Am I mistaken?

You are correct. We can now do just about anything we want short of redistribution or commercialization.

Re: EFF Wins Petition to Inspect and Modify Car Software

#59

Post by VonGuard »

jellicle wrote: post #52
jxcl wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> This does not mean these titles can be redistributed, only that they can be modified for the sake of preservation. But once the copyright expires on the disks, they may then be redistributed?

Nearly nothing has entered the public domain in the U.S. in decades, and likely nearly nothing ever will again.

There was that time in the 70's when you had to re-up your Copyright, and a lot of stuff fell out, like Night of the Living Dead.

Re: EFF Wins Petition to Inspect and Modify Car Software

#60

Post by dripton »

kefka wrote: post #19
kapitalx wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yep. This is a great reminder why we should all donate to EFF [and that I haven't renewed my membership since a few months ago] Edit: membership now renewed

Also, if you shop at Amazon, use smile.amazon.com for purchases, after hooking it up to EFF. It's the "Give % of sales to non-profit of your choice" option in Amazon.

And consider installing the Amazon Smile Redirect browser extension.
Post reply on HN