Copyright Office Ruling Imposes Sweeping Right to Repair Reforms • Hacker News Board

Re: Copyright Office Ruling Imposes Sweeping Right to Repair Reforms

#71

Post by Tyr42 » Thu, Oct 25, 2018, 7:36 PM UTC

0xb100db1ade wrote: post #60

jobu wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Part of the return the public is supposed to see for granting legal protection to IP is that the IP is then made widely available (as well as eventually entering the public domain) and can be built upon for personal use, commentated upon, etc. That's really well said. A bit of a tangent, but it's similar to how software patents should be as well. If you want to patent a software feature, then you have to include a…

This sounds interesting, but I don't completely understand. Does this mean that only that specific implementation may be used without a 3rd party infringing copyright?

It’d mean you have to provide a library which would just work when the patent expires in seven years, at the very least

Re: Copyright Office Ruling Imposes Sweeping Right to Repair Reforms

#72

Post by ngngngng » Thu, Oct 25, 2018, 7:36 PM UTC

jedberg wrote: post #65

nimbius wrote: post #56

As an automotive mechanic, this is awesome. You have no idea how many sensors/controllers in a car can only be reset by violating the DRM. Example: the suspension control computer for newer fords (so far just raptor and newer commercial F series) is separate from the ECU, and if it faults out you need to buy a new $2500 computer and sensor pack. You can, however, replace a commonly blown diode or fuse on the computer…

> With a raspberry pi and a bit of python however you can reset this tamper code once the whole assembly is closed. This sentence is interesting to me. It tells me that now mechanics need to learn programming skills to be successful. Software really is eating the world...

I'm convinced most successful mechanics could be successful programmers. The skill set of looking at a problem and debugging until you really understand the architecture and design of what you're looking at is very similar in both fields.

Re: Copyright Office Ruling Imposes Sweeping Right to Repair Reforms

#73

Post by hamandcheese » Thu, Oct 25, 2018, 7:37 PM UTC

jedberg wrote: post #65

nimbius wrote: post #56

As an automotive mechanic, this is awesome. You have no idea how many sensors/controllers in a car can only be reset by violating the DRM. Example: the suspension control computer for newer fords (so far just raptor and newer commercial F series) is separate from the ECU, and if it faults out you need to buy a new $2500 computer and sensor pack. You can, however, replace a commonly blown diode or fuse on the computer…

> With a raspberry pi and a bit of python however you can reset this tamper code once the whole assembly is closed. This sentence is interesting to me. It tells me that now mechanics need to learn programming skills to be successful. Software really is eating the world...

Or just be savvy enough to use what others put out there.

Then again, when I put it that way I begin to worry about mechanics unwittingly infecting cars with malware...

Re: Copyright Office Ruling Imposes Sweeping Right to Repair Reforms

#74

Post by awalton » Thu, Oct 25, 2018, 7:37 PM UTC

jedberg wrote: post #65

nimbius wrote: post #56

As an automotive mechanic, this is awesome. You have no idea how many sensors/controllers in a car can only be reset by violating the DRM. Example: the suspension control computer for newer fords (so far just raptor and newer commercial F series) is separate from the ECU, and if it faults out you need to buy a new $2500 computer and sensor pack. You can, however, replace a commonly blown diode or fuse on the computer…

> With a raspberry pi and a bit of python however you can reset this tamper code once the whole assembly is closed. This sentence is interesting to me. It tells me that now mechanics need to learn programming skills to be successful. Software really is eating the world...

It tells me that I really shouldn't buy a Ford car, since apparently billing for repair parts is more important to them than building a robust and repairable car. Adding a tamper resistant circuit to random bits of your car's electronics is adding cost while reducing robustness - who wants that in their car?

Re: Copyright Office Ruling Imposes Sweeping Right to Repair Reforms

#75

Post by chrisshroba » Thu, Oct 25, 2018, 7:39 PM UTC

jedberg wrote: post #65

nimbius wrote: post #56

As an automotive mechanic, this is awesome. You have no idea how many sensors/controllers in a car can only be reset by violating the DRM. Example: the suspension control computer for newer fords (so far just raptor and newer commercial F series) is separate from the ECU, and if it faults out you need to buy a new $2500 computer and sensor pack. You can, however, replace a commonly blown diode or fuse on the computer…

> With a raspberry pi and a bit of python however you can reset this tamper code once the whole assembly is closed. This sentence is interesting to me. It tells me that now mechanics need to learn programming skills to be successful. Software really is eating the world...

Is this true? There are mechanics everywhere, so why would every one need to learn to program something that could be made by one and sold as a commercial (or open source) project? Sure, there are many types of cars and situations that need handling, but there are far more mechanics than that.

I'm genuinely asking this because I often question whether it's true that "everyone should learn to program", or it's more like, "we have a programmer shortage".

Re: Copyright Office Ruling Imposes Sweeping Right to Repair Reforms

#76

Post by olefoo » Thu, Oct 25, 2018, 7:41 PM UTC

0xb100db1ade wrote: post #60

jobu wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Part of the return the public is supposed to see for granting legal protection to IP is that the IP is then made widely available (as well as eventually entering the public domain) and can be built upon for personal use, commentated upon, etc. That's really well said. A bit of a tangent, but it's similar to how software patents should be as well. If you want to patent a software feature, then you have to include a…

This sounds interesting, but I don't completely understand. Does this mean that only that specific implementation may be used without a 3rd party infringing copyright?

I read that as, you would be able to use the sample code verbatim once the patent expired and would be able to read and understand the principle behind the patent.

Re: Copyright Office Ruling Imposes Sweeping Right to Repair Reforms

#77

Post by gnopgnip » Thu, Oct 25, 2018, 7:42 PM UTC

Multicomp wrote: post #9

For all the times the government does stupid things and we complain about it, this is a step in the correct direction. I hope that at some point, this exemption will be written into law, and not just an exemption by the LoC. OTOH, if you think of this as the government being able to attempt this as a 'Free Trial' for 3 years, we can show them that this exemption does not have oodles of unintended side effects. Edit:…

Under common law, case law is the largest part of the law. Codified law is only a small part

Re: Copyright Office Ruling Imposes Sweeping Right to Repair Reforms

#78

Post by awalton » Thu, Oct 25, 2018, 7:43 PM UTC

WalterBright wrote: post #64

As the owner of a very heavily modified muscle car, I wholeheartedly agree with this. Half the fun of a muscle car is modifying it. This was easy to do with the older ones, there's an entire industry catering to it. With modern cars, manufacturers only make parts for them for 10 years or so. What are you going to do after that when the computer system in it fails? Aftermarket parts would be illegal, etc. The whole ca…

> The whole car just becomes trash.

It's a fairly safe argument it was trash before it was purchased. Planned Obsolescence should be the last thing on a car manufacturer's mind. But they see the phone companies making disposable hardware and charging a thousand bucks every year for it, and their mouth drools with the prospect of those kinds of returns...

Vote with your dollars folks.

Re: Copyright Office Ruling Imposes Sweeping Right to Repair Reforms

#79

Post by pritambaral » Thu, Oct 25, 2018, 7:44 PM UTC

bduerst wrote: post #27

JoeAltmaier wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm terrified. I saw John Deere code, and its tortuous. Nobody should try to fool with it without serious study.

"If it's not broken, don't touch it" For the longest time Zara used an MS-DOS based POS system, and hey, it worked.

I agree with this philosophy. I also believe "when it breaks, it'd be better if it's easy to fix".

Re: Copyright Office Ruling Imposes Sweeping Right to Repair Reforms

#80

Post by nimbius » Thu, Oct 25, 2018, 7:46 PM UTC

chrisshroba wrote: post #75

jedberg wrote: post #65

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> With a raspberry pi and a bit of python however you can reset this tamper code once the whole assembly is closed. This sentence is interesting to me. It tells me that now mechanics need to learn programming skills to be successful. Software really is eating the world...

Is this true? There are mechanics everywhere, so why would every one need to learn to program something that could be made by one and sold as a commercial (or open source) project? Sure, there are many types of cars and situations that need handling, but there are far more mechanics than that. I'm genuinely asking this because I often question whether it's true that "everyone should learn to program", or it's more li…

i started learning python in my spare time after I attended a training course for shop software that ran on Linux. As for the pi, theyre awesome. for $30 or so I have a computer powerful enough to pull OBD codes and do pretty much anything else in the shop wirelessly. And if someone drop it, backs over it, or splashes it with friction modifier or something I can just ask my boss for $40 to replace it instead of $1400 for a new laptop.