How Automakers Abuse Intellectual Property Laws To Force You To Pay More For Repairs
from the it's-all-a-big-scam dept
Back in May, we wrote about the effort to get a Right to Repair bill passed for automobiles:There is no legitimate basis for this at all. It's a clear misuse of intellectual property laws -- which were never designed for this sort of thing -- to prevent independent auto mechanics from repairing newer cars. But it's the end result of the increasing creep of intellectual property rights, and the growing computerization of everything. It allows manufacturers to extend "IP" rights to physical goods, and create all sorts of new monopolies. In a perfect world, this wouldn't need a separate law. It would be a clear violation of antitrust laws. But, we don't live in a perfect world, and for the time being you're probably paying a lot more money to repair your car because of it.
Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.
Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.
While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.
–The Techdirt Team
Filed Under: cars, intellectual property, repairs
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
That's exactly what will happen if they have exclusive rights to fix their own products. Manufactures would turn that into a cash cow. You need an oil change? You have to take it to us. You need a new filter? You have to pay us. Every single thing that goes wrong with your car would have to be fixed by the manufacturer or its licensed agent. Without any competition in the repair business, the costs of repairs would skyrocket.
Suddenly, the money made from repairing automobiles would outweigh the cost of selling them.
To anyone who thinks the intellectual property of the manufacturers need protecting, can you answer me this: How would giving automobile manufacturers a monopoly on repairs promote the progress of science and useful arts? Until you can answer that question, shut the frick up.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Will? It's already happening. Why do you think they want to lock down maintenance through IP? It's so you can't complain about current cars, which would be their incentive not to build better quality vehicles.
Not that it matters anyway. The secondary market to obtain parts to work on ones own vehicles more than makes up for the loss at the dealership. Special pronged tools required for bolts which aren't standard?
There's even a beef about OBD codes and how they're purposely designed to return a generic error. A friend of mine received an error on a light bulb for the air bag system which then disabled the entire air bag system. Over a burned out light bulb?
I smell the return of the horse and buggy whip in our future.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
So in conclusion, they need to make the software available to the mass market so there is more people out there able to work on all types of cars and well all know what competition is supposed to do to prices.....Although the manufacturer could just easily void your warranty if you do not have it repaired an authorized dealer......
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Over a hundred...try over $300
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Over a hundred...try over $300
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
Each key is coded electronically to the particular to prevent theft - there is no "master key" that thieves can get cheaply. The result has been that auto theft like it used to be in the 1970s and before has largely disappeared. Now, of course, auto theft still occurs by towing the entire vehicle or by carjacking but the number of thefts even with these methods are a tiny fraction of what they used to be in the US. Also now, theft doesn't result in selling or using the vehicle but as fodder for "chop shops" which sell the pieces or for transshipment to developing countries without strict property law enforcement or networking into the US law enforcement systems.
Maybe you want to go back to the 1970s levels of auto theft. I don't.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: keys
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
New car key cost
C$130 to start up my car. If I use it to unlock the car, the alarm goes off.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
Also, it's getting to the point where in a couple of years, even if you're buying a used car, you're probably going to have to deal with this type of key. All the major manufacturers use them now, and have for several years. Both our cars are nearly 10 years old- it's not a new thing.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
I disagree, intellectual property is designed exactly to allow evil people to enrich themselves at public expense.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
It wasn't always that way. Copyright was intended to protect "science" and "useful arts." That included maps and charts not literature, music, and paintings.
The problem with having a government granted monopoly is that your entire existence is outside the realm of reality and economics. You don't have to compete, because the government granted you a monopoly. You simply ask for the monopoly to be extended to eliminate your competition. You don't have to work harder to earn more money, you simply have the government tax radio stations and blank CDs and give the money to you. When the government gives you a free ride, no one even thinks about getting out and pushing.
So you're right, IP as currently implemented "is designed exactly to allow evil people to enrich themselves at public expense."
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Imagine...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Imagine...
DMNTD: Absolutely. The "Black" market is the only "free" market left. All other markets are "regulated" by the most vicious, graft-ridden gangsters in town -- "Your Country".
I support no bills, because I support no government. I expect NO employees of civil government to "protect" (or "serve") my local mechanic. If she can't fix it, I ain't buyin'.
Samarami
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
I'm thinking the real design is 'control' - not 'innovation'.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
You have a choice
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: You have a choice
You free-marketeers are so freaking funny. Yep, the magical market will solve everything. If corporate america is trying to screw you over, simply spend your money somewhere else. If someone is trying to break into your house to steal your TV, simply buy a new house in a safer neighborhood. And if your 6 year old daughter is being raped, simply buy her a high quality chastity belt. Yep, the market can solve all of our troubles. There's simply no point in even having a government, is there?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: You have a choice
As a potential Anarchist, I'd say no.
Under Anarchy if someone become too greedy, just bust a cap in his ass, problem solved.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: You have a choice
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: You have a choice
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: You have a choice
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: You have a choice
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: You have a choice
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: You have a choice
Well, Ima. At least you were able to get ONE thing in perspective. I totally agree with your last sentence. It shows a BEGINNING of wisdom.
Samarami
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: You have a choice
You should be ashamed of yourself for allowing your mind to rot in such stupidity.
While I agree with the premise that manufacturers should not be allowed to lock their computers so the average joe mechanic cannot access them, that doesn't mean that free markets are bad.
In fact, the idea that they can lock up the computer is very anti-free market. If someone can make a fix on a vehicle cheaper, it should be done, and I hope they make bukoos of money undercutting the manufacturer. Maybe they will lower prices to be more competitve in response, like any free marketeer would?
And remember, if you are so against this, consider who you voted for. Democrats have a majority in Congress, and a President in the White House. Hmmm... thought they were for the little people? Guess not...
What the sheeple need to recognize, is that its not about the Republican'ts and the Demogogues. It's about two incredibly corrupt political bodies that dominate American politics. They all need to go out.
If America had a true free market, as it should by design, health insurance would be cheaper, and more competitive across state lines, and we would not have had the mortgage crisis that imploded the real estate, banking, stock, and job markets that we have experienced over the past year or so.
It's time for the sheeple to wake up and start electing leaders, instead of con artists. And that goes for the left, and the right. Wake up people.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: You have a choice
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: You have a choice
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Patents were designed to protect ideas so that you have the first chance to profit from the idea before others. The idea does not belong to you, rather the you have the first right to benefit from it. This was, originally, conceived to aid in innovation, not litigation.
Copyrights were designed to protect works so that the person who created it can protect himself, and maintain his credit in the creation of the work and the first right to copy it. Copyright also gives the copyright holder rights to grant rights to others for copy and distribution.
Patents, copyrights, and trademarks were designed to protect original ideas and those who came up with them, not to punish everyone else. It's so sad to see it twisted and used for greed rather than innovation.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Copyrights do not protect ideas, but specific fixed expressions. For example, the idea of a TV show about an innocent person running from the law each week was done in Renegade, The Hulk, the Pretender, and of course the Fugitive. Copyright never protected the idea, only the fixed expressions thereof.
Trademark is a consumer protection issue. Trademark should not even be lumped in IP at all because its purpose is entirely different. The purpose of trademark is not to protect Coke. Its purpose is to protect consumers from being confused by inferior third party products. So that when you buy a "Coke" product marked as such, you know you're actually buying a product made by Coke Inc., and not some rip off.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Here we go again
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Here we go again
But this is the reason I buy older used vehicles (Aside from the fact that I do not see the point in spending a lot of money on a value depreciating asset. If a $2400 vehicle lasts me two years, that's $100 a month. Where can I find financing for that?!)
I always scout out any of my relatives vehicle purchases before recommending for or against the purchase... Can I get at all the maintenance items without special dealer tools. (Spark plugs, fluids, filters, etc.) and will it require me to remove engine mounts to get at belts and crap or drill holes in the firewall to get at the spark plugs...
There are bad designs from all manufacturers, foreign and domestic and there are bad designs dating all the way back to the 80's... This isn't a new issue.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Example: Making toast
Forget about prior art for a moment, lets pretend this is something new. So in this example, what is patentable?
Buttered bread is patentable.
Toast is patentable.
A device that applies butter to the bread is patentable.
A device that toasts the buttered bread is patentable.
What is not patentable?
Applying butter to bread.
Toasting buttered bread.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
A patent typically provides the right to exclude others from making, using, selling, offering for sale, or importing the patented invention for the term of the patent. I think it is you who needs to do some more reading.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Crustless Sandwiches
I think my childhood friends mother would take issue with that. He always had
to have is sandwiches without the crust. This was in the mid 60's. I claim prior art.
The patent office has gone off of it's original mission. It now caters to corporations at all costs and they get paid handsomely for it in the fee's charged.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Rapair
When I was in the business, one of the jobs I did was to prep new cars. I caught Hell for actually wanting to fix the things that were wrong with the car before putting it on the lot! We took delivery of cars that were probably unsafe to drive. But, Hey, no problem, put it on the lot!
There are good, honest mechanics in business but its really hit or miss finding them. Often a long-time mom-and-pop shop is the way to go. I definitely recommend avoiding the dealerships at all costs! Some of the worst repairs I've ever had came at the hands of the dealership.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Rapair
Nullop, you can say the very same thing about almost every service industry in the marketplace. How about the medical establishment? If I can't fix it it's probably because I don't know much about it (or don't have the special tooling).
You are right: there ARE good, honest mechanics with excellent reputations for expertise and fairness.
Don't get the ULTIMATE crooks involved with some "bill" or another. Leave government the hell alone and look yourself up some honest folks to deal with.
Samarami
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Rapair
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
New Car costs etc
K.I.S.S.
Just recently the head of Toyota was scolded and dropped for failing this mantra so hopefully we will get some better cars soon... (From NYT article)
"At the headquarters in Japan, Katsuaki Watanabe was replaced as president by Akio Toyoda, grandson of the company’s founder, but not before being publicly run through by Shoichiro Toyoda, the company’s 84-year-old honorary chairman. Before a stunned audience of 400 executives, Mr. Toyoda asked Mr. Watanabe, “How many times have you made a mistake?” and said that Toyota’s addiction to big, pricey cars and trucks reminded him of, well, G.M. and Chrysler.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: New Car costs etc
The extent of the damage may not be that severe with as you said with the expensive parts it is easy to wrack up high repair costs even though it may be just a lot of cosmetic damage. Insurance companies were hard pressed to total a vehicle just a few years ago but now we see a lot more being totaled in the shop where I work. We used to see estimates worth 100 hours repair time now we are surprised when we see them for 60 hours.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: New Car costs etc
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
What about Apple?
It's not and both should be illegal. This Bill should not be soley focused on automobiles. If a person buys something, they own it and should have every right to have it fixed without any hinderence from the manufacturer - UNLESS they manufacturuer is providing the repair services FREE OF CHARGE...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: What about Apple?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: What about Apple?
I don't think there is any way to legislate "hindrance of repair." There would be too many conflicting opinions of what that entails. Is using a torx screw rather than a phillips "hindrance"? There are some good reasons to use torx over phillips, though drivers are harder to find. I'd rather see a law requiring companies to supply their repair service manuals to customers at only duplication cost, and publish communication protocols required to repair their device, so other companies can build and sell those service tools without reverse engineering.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
the pros, the cons, and the uninformed masses
Why ask the car companies to do that, if other companies are not required to do the same thing?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: the pros, the cons, and the uninformed masses
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: the pros, the cons, and the uninformed masses
All the code used to run a graphics card? Open source.
All the code in an OS BIOS? open source.
All the code to run a router, or any other piece of network gear? 100% open source, even the bios code for those too.
Basically, as software always has to run on something (it is useless just as a pile of print outs), all software should be open source and free.
Yeah, good idea.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: the pros, the cons, and the uninformed masses
Of course, it would be necessary to mandate the sharing of all know-how, show-how R&D results, business plans, etc. Otherwise, the original creator would have a leg up on the competition, and as we all know that is a bad thing if the goal is to encourge and facilitate copyring (my bad, I meant innovation).
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: the pros, the cons, and the uninformed masses
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: the pros, the cons, and the uninformed masses
Yeah, good idea.
You said it.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: the pros, the cons, and the uninformed masses
That aside, from what I gathered from the bill doesn't require car makers to reveal their source code, but not obfuscate the diagnosis information and such. Completely different. In all the software you listed, none of the hardware makers do that. Error codes and such are all pretty well documented and open. Interoperability. That's a good thing. The auto makers could have avoided all this if they simply wrote their code in a way that didn't purposely lock everyone out from even interpreting the output.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: the pros, the cons, and the uninformed masses
should they be regulated ?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
"How Automakers.. Force You To Pay More For Repairs"
" };> "
Look what happened to DVD/CD encryption, GSM, and WEP. The more you lock it away, the harder you make it for the common citizen will be the undoing of your scheme. Your security will not last long..... Human nature demands a good challenge now and again.. ;D
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Solution!
Take the openzipt project that takes a $40 dollars hardware used to send emails and turns it into a smarphone(skype) gaining root.
Is fine for wardriving as it has wifi and run linux and have Doom :)
How long until carshops start partnering with geeks?
Then the question will be how long until car makers will sue someone for unlocking the system?
Two such projects.
http://freediag.sourceforge.net/
http://www.obdtester.com/pyobd
You don't need to copy the software that the companies gives you, people can make their on and in the interest of safety car makers should make specifications info free for everybody.
Or else people should start installing new processor in the car they buy that will give them the freedom from those bad bad people.
Else buy
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: You have a choice
Since in the anarchy in which the monolithic corporation exists it does not, in fact, send stormtroopers to kill critics' entire bloodlines, it's likely that in the anarchy in which the monolithic corporation does not exist (which is what most people mean when they talk about anarchy favorably), it won't be killing critics' bloodlines.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Is this irrational?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Choice
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Choice
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Choice
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
How Automakers Abuse Intellectual Property Laws To Force You To Pay More For Repairs
Other types businesses have to pay for software.
The cost of the software would have to be the issue.
mark grauer
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
GM vehicle key replacement
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
The problem is judicial error
Copyright law is for things that communicate to humans -- expressive works. Historically, "expressive" has been interpreted rather broadly (there was a big fight about player piano rolls, for example, about 100 years ago), but IMHO the train came off the rails somewhere in the 19890s, when functional object code embedded in physical objects (e.g. programming in smart toasters) started being treated as copyrightable. It plainly breaks the intent of copyright.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
this is not the only industry doing this
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
This is why for many things I prefer to BIMS ( Build it Myself)
My point is this whenever possible get a second opinion, and whenever possible read reviews from multiple sources. Older technology usually won't violate any IP laws, and I have seen several older cars where parts could be found with minimal ease and little to no cost.
On another note has anyone noticed that things like cell phones get flimsier and flimsier??? Yes having a thin cell phone is nice, but since my first cell phone 3 & 1/2 years ago I have never had a phone go more than 8 months without having something on it break (i.e. the slider, the screen stops working, the main board on the phone cracks after dropping it once when the phone's casing wasn't even scratched).
In the end it will come back to bite the companies in the ass, when they realize that everyone will be buying from the guy who sells it cheaper and sells more because of it, as long as it is reliable, easier to use, and costs less to maintain and repair.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
DRM Erodes Competition, Private Property Rights, and Privacy
"What private citizens have a right to do with their private property, if that property depends in any way on a computer program, would have been affected by Bill C-61. The bill would have taken away each Canadian's right, for example, to take his or her car to anyone but officially-sanctioned mechanics for diagnosis or repair, if the independent garage they go to would need to circumvent any type of computer program lock put in place around a component computer program by the original equipment manufacturer precisely to restrict competition from other suppliers and from independent garages. Such a power would render useless other initiatives in the public interest, such as the "Right to Repair Bill"(Bill C-273 http://www.righttorepair.ca ) Thus Bill C-61 would have provided legal protection to anti-competitive practices if those practices are implemented via computer programs. This would have fundamentally changed the legal environment across the entire economy. To continue the example, at present it is perfectly legal for any mechanic to take apart and modify any car's components in order to proceed with any diagnosis, repair or modification, even if this requires circumventing a digital lock attached to the product so that he can gain access to its internal operations. Bill C-61's exclusive delegation of power to original equipment manufactures would strengthen anti-competitive practices, particularly in market segments with one or a small number of dominant vendors. A good overview of this issue is provided by Bruce Perens, former executive of Hewlett-Packard: "Is DRM Just a Consumer Rights Issue?" http://technocrat.net/d/2006/6/6/4149
Enforcement of the rules described in Bill C-61 would have also required intrusive questions about what people do with their private property, and thus would raise the fundamental issue of privacy itself. Indeed the Privacy Commissioner of Canada said on his blog on 23 June 2008: "The privacy commissioners of Canada, Ontario and British Columbia have also said they have privacy concerns over digital rights management — the media companies use to monitor and control access to copyrighted material." http://blog.youthprivacy.ca/index.php/2008/06/23/have-you-been-following-the-copyright-debate/
Read more:
http://www.ic.gc.ca/eic/site/008.nsf/eng/00450.html
http://www.ic.gc.ca/eic/site/008.nsf/eng/02612.html
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
The Answer
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
WoW....
[ link to this | view in chronology ]