04-23-2015, 04:12 PM | #23 | |
Lieutenant Colonel
364
Rep 1,517
Posts |
Quote:
|
|
Appreciate
1
|
04-23-2015, 04:12 PM | #24 |
Lieutenant
65
Rep 520
Posts |
Volkswagen Group is on the list. I assume this would then include the companies they own: Audi, Bentley, Porsche, Lamborghini etc. Hopefully not though. I hope it does not pass.
__________________
2017 R8 V10 Plus, 2016 Boxster GTS, 2015 Macan S, 2015 V12 Vantage S - Pending Sale, 2013 911 C4S - Sold, 2012 V8 Vantage S - Sold, 2013 DB9 - Sold, 2011 997.2 Targa 4s - Sold, 2011 E90 335i M-Sport - Sold, 2013 981 Boxster S - Sold, 2006 E46 M3 - Sold, 2010 E60 M5 - Sold, 2006 E46 M3 - Sold, 2011.5 E90 M3 - Sold, 2006 325i - Sold, 2004 Mazda6 - Sold
|
Appreciate
1
|
04-23-2015, 06:26 PM | #25 |
Banned
1770
Rep 6,696
Posts
Drives: F30 340i
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: San Diego,CA
|
I know and porsche was on that list therefore I assumed they all have their own say in the matter.
|
Appreciate
1
|
04-23-2015, 09:37 PM | #26 |
Brigadier General
2882
Rep 4,071
Posts |
I think if the manufactures wanted you to not be able to work on own your car they could. However, neither could most mechanics or do it at a cost efficient rate.
But it would be funny, if a someone built a car so complicated no one could fix it but them. Hey Jeffy Lube I need you to change the flux neutron capacitor in the engine bunker ? I agree I don't see this bill passing. |
Appreciate
1
|
04-26-2015, 03:58 PM | #27 |
Lieutenant Colonel
1538
Rep 1,665
Posts |
I don't know what the big deal is. It's not like the DMCA has had any significant impact on people being able to do whatever they want with their content (burn it, put it on an in-home server, wirelessly broadcast it all over the home, etc.). It also has not prevented people from jailbreaking their iPhones, rooting their Android devices, etc. etc.
Technology has let the genie out of the bottle. No way to put it back in. People will continue to mod/hack their cars just as they do their home computers, cell phones, home media servers, etc. regardless of what the law says. |
Appreciate
1
|
05-01-2015, 02:12 PM | #30 | |
Brigadier General
5139
Rep 3,235
Posts |
Quote:
The DMCA has had a profound effect on people. Many of the lawsuits and threats launched by the RIAA and MPAA have been due to the rights granted to them via the DMCA. Just because you're able to do what ever does not make it legal. If you happen to be caught up in a drag net, you'll understand how bad the DMCA can make your life. The interesting thing about what the DMCA has done is to enforce a licensing model which the computer software industry has used as the foundation of their business operations. They own the software. Even though you "bought" the software, you don't own it. You only bought the rights to use it for a specific purpose. And for those that don't think this will pass, many apathetic citizens thought the DMCA would never pass. Well look at what is law now. Most ill informed people argue fair use supercedes the restrictions imposed by the DMCA. Wrong again. Fair use was only a court interpretation from a lawsuit (Sony vs Universal Studios). Fair use has never been codified into law. Attempts by some legislators to create an official fair use law fell dead even before it was able to brought up for a vote. Again, this was due to lack of interest from us consumers. If fair use was indeed a law, we could have leveraged this as a way to combat the DMCA and what the automakers are proposing to do with access to their engine management software. |
|
Appreciate
1
|
05-01-2015, 02:45 PM | #31 |
Lieutenant
34
Rep 504
Posts |
they are. they are owned by Volkswagen.
so are they talking about the entertainment system computer or the engine control computer? or everything altogether.
__________________
2008 BMW 128i
2022 BMW 330e |
Appreciate
1
|
05-02-2015, 02:28 AM | #32 | |
Lieutenant Colonel
1538
Rep 1,665
Posts |
Quote:
|
|
Appreciate
1
|
05-02-2015, 08:18 AM | #33 | |
Brigadier General
5139
Rep 3,235
Posts |
Quote:
In fact it has already happened. I'm an audiophile and have been involved in many high end playback devices. When DAT (digital audio tapes) were released on the market, the RIAA had a total fit. So they moved to block importing of DAT devices unless there was something that protected them against POTENTIAL pirating. SCMS (serial copy management system) was created and enforced on all DAT devices and later showed up in Mini Disc and Digital Compact Cassette. What made this a raw deal for an originator of content. Musicians for example used DAT to record their sessions yet SCMS was forced onto their content even though the RIAA had nothing to do with it. As an additional side bar, the RIAA was also able to get a royalty tax levied on blank DAT tapes to provide monetary compensation for possible pirating. Also many music companies have embedded additional information into the digital audio called watermarking and per your example Apple has their own DRM mechanism to enforce control over audio content you purchased from them. So how does this all relate to cars? Have you looked into the new OBD 3 proposal? If you haven't, look at this: http://lobby.la.psu.edu/_107th/093_O..._questions.htm I bring your attention to these sections: "WHAT IS OBD-III? A program to minimize the delay between detection of an emissions malfunction by the OBD-II system and repair of the vehicle Two basic elements: Read stored OBD-II information from in-use vehicles. Direct owners of vehicles with fault codes to make immediate repairs OBD-III TECHNOLOGIES Three ways to send/receive data: Roadside reader Local station network Satellite" Now add in DMCA into the mix and I ask you to rethink why the current action by the automakers coupled with the above push for OBD 3 isn't something you would be concerned about. Last edited by zx10guy; 05-02-2015 at 08:25 AM.. |
|
Appreciate
1
|
05-02-2015, 09:20 AM | #34 | |
1Addict
3197
Rep 7,859
Posts |
Please stop with the nonsense. There's no law one way or the other yet, and some media is expressly permitted to be used in copying. Hence, we have historical precedence for it being not only allowed, but legal. Now, if automakers want to build in some sort of "protection" to prevent owners from accessing their cars software, then they are also expressly permitted under law to do so. However, the law does not say whether it is, or is not, permissable to circumnavigate said preventative protections.
Quote:
__________________
|
|
Appreciate
1
|
05-02-2015, 11:25 AM | #35 | |
Brigadier General
5139
Rep 3,235
Posts |
Quote:
http://www.copyright.gov/1201/2006/r...talitz_AAP.pdf Which they move to argue that space shifting and format shifting do not count as non-infringing uses. And this nugget from their filing on page 22: "Similarly, creating a back-up copy of a music CD is not a non-infringing use, for reasons similar to those the Register canvassed in detail in her 2003 determination that back-up copying of DVDs cannot be treated as noninfringing." So while you're right there has been historical precedence in covering fair use starting with the Sony vs Universal Studios case, I go back to what you've said; there's been no law stating one way or the other concerning personal fair use. Because there is no law codifying fair use, you have these potential games being played as demonstrated above with an actual codified law, DMCA. |
|
Appreciate
1
|
05-03-2015, 05:10 PM | #36 |
Captain
143
Rep 942
Posts |
Better ban the 2nd amendment first.
__________________
'07 335i Sedan, base pkg, 6spd Manual, Procede 3 V5 w/NLS, Macht Schnell Downpipes, 18" Staggered 313's w/Conti DWS's, OS Giken TCD LSD, VAC Street Diff Cover, Dinan Oil Cooler, Dinan Intercooler, Akebono Euro Pads, CDV Removed, Black BMW Grilles, Interior & Exterior white LED lighting, LUX Angel Eyes, Debadged, Blend V1 mount, Llumar ATR Tint.
|
Appreciate
1
|
05-04-2015, 08:09 AM | #38 | |
Lieutenant Colonel
364
Rep 1,517
Posts |
Quote:
|
|
Appreciate
0
|
Post Reply |
Bookmarks |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
|
|