7 ms·

Unfortunately I believe that even if the suit was successful, we would just see more purchases become 'perpetual licenses', skirting the updated law. IIRC, Tesl

Unfortunately I believe that even if the suit was successful, we would just see more purchases become 'perpetual licenses', skirting the updated law. IIRC, Tesla was very heavily against letting anyone tinker and went to some extremes to stop it. It wouldn't surprise me in the least to see them make buyers sign a EULA in the future when you go to 'purchase' a vehicle.

Kristine1975 10y ago
"Just" pass a law that makes these EULA's null and void.
zekevermillion 10y ago
I can imagine tinkering with a Tesla could cause some heartburn for Elon. There are safety issues, which are real. What happens when some maniac changes the software to make autopilot into full self driving, then plows into a minivan on its way to Little League practice? Also interesting, recently heard about a guy who can reprogram some diesel trucks to get better performance (probably at the expense of NOX emissions, like what happened with VW). Still thought it was pretty cool that the truck was not locked down to prevent tinkering in this manner. NOTE: I am talking about what the company's perspective may be, not my own view of the risks.
- jliptzin 10y ago
  Someone determined enough to rework autopilot to work everywhere is not going to be stopped by the terms of a EULA.
  - ZoF 10y ago
    Had the same thought, that would be quite the feat.
    - themartorana 10y ago
      But that logic is kept far away from legal decision making.
  - zekevermillion 10y ago
    It might be easier than you would think. It's possible Tesla (or other vehicles with self-driving features) have latent capabilities already in their software, which just need to be switched on. A hacker playing around in his garage might feasibly jailbreak the car and flip this switch. Whereas I would agree with you to the extent that writing self-driving software that uses all the various data inputs and maps to pilot the vehicle, from scratch, is not something very many people are even capable of doing.
- gthtjtkt 10y ago
  > What happens when some maniac changes the software to make autopilot into full self driving, then plows into a minivan on its way to Little League practice? We can't let these hypothetical worst-case scenarios be an excuse to stifle innovation. What happens if we let people modify their microwaves and a terrorist uses his to give kids cancer!?!? What if we let people tinker with their toasters and somebody uses one to electrocute a pool full of kids!?!? Please, think of the children!
  - alexbock 10y ago
    > What happens if we let people modify their microwaves and a terrorist uses his to give kids cancer!?!? I know this was said in jest, but given the (generally unfounded) fears some people have about microwaves and cellphones I want to point out that exposure to unshielded microwave radiation isn't going to cause cancer (at least not any more than anything else that heats you up could somehow cause cancer) because microwave radiation is non-ionizing; you would need at least ultraviolet light for that (and UV-C or X-rays would be most effective). The biggest danger with strong microwave radiation would be boiling your eyeballs as they lack the cooling most of your body has but contain significant amounts of water.
    - gthtjtkt 10y ago
      Good to know, now I'll have something to say to my mom the next time tells me to back away from the microwave while it's on...
    - snissn 10y ago
      have you looked into 5G signals? I was recently reading about how they plan to make them in the 50GHz range, which to me seems potentially dangerous
      - alexbock 10y ago
        50 GHz is still significantly less energetic than visible light, which is in the hundreds of terahertz. The sun bombards us with a lot of visible light, but you have to get into the blue/violet/ultraviolet region before it's energetic enough (high enough frequency) to cause damage. Barring some strange and previously unknown special biological interaction with a particular radio frequency, radio signals which have lower frequencies and lower intensities than visible light from the sun are not going to cause cancer any more than exposure to red or green light would cause cancer.
- venomsnake 10y ago
  If a Maniac has made unauthorized modifications - Maniac gets sued and does jail time. Tesla is fault free. You shouldn't be able to sue a tool manufacturer for misuse of a tool. If you cannot sue Mercedes for a case when a driver with after market tuning kills someone in a crash, why should Tesla be liable?
- belorn 10y ago
  What happens if I tinker with a regular car and put a nitrous oxide engine? The safety issues, which are real, could allow someone to plow into minivan on its way to Little League practice. It could explode. It could cause a massive fire. It could go way faster than the speed limit, bypass the limits of the breaks, and go against any number of laws. So... does this mean I could sue Ford if someone modified a Ford car with a nitrous oxide booster? Could Ford sue the modifier for ruining the reputation of Ford when they crashed a modified Ford car? Will the state sue Ford for allowing such modifications, commonly used in street races? Can there be a civil suit against ford for anyone harmed by such modification? To me, all those questions has a clear answer, and that answer is No. It also has a historical proof, as there hasn't been any lawsuits against Ford for failing to prevent such modifications. If the owner of a car modify their own car, then that person is fully responsible of any consequences of that action.
  - zekevermillion 10y ago
    I would argue self-driving car software is different. If license terms permit modification, and a modified version is running in a car that causes damage, then there will be an argument as to whether the modifications caused the wreck, or whether it was the underlying software and thus the manufacturer who is responsible. Tesla, quite rationally, would not want to give users a permissive license, given this obvious liability problem. Even if, nod nod wink wink, they might approve of owners playing around with it.
    - mtgx 10y ago
      How about using the same tactic many smartphone makers use: "We're allowing you to unlock your bootloader, but if you do, you're voiding your warranty." Similarly car makers could say as soon as the user unlocks the car's systems for modification, the company is no longer responsible for any accident that might happen. It seems like a rather good compromise to me.
      - sneak 10y ago
        The car company is already not responsible for any accident that might happen. The operator of the vehicle is responsible for safe operation, period.
- XorNot 10y ago
  Safety policy should be enforced by safety laws. Not unrelated IP laws.
Svenskunganka 10y ago
But if this suit is successful, it would mean that Section 1201 violates your First Amendment rights which in turn means that EULA also violates your First Amendment rights.
- richardwhiuk 10y ago
  No. The First Amendment limits what the government can do to restrict your right to free speech. The DMCA, and Section 1201, is the Government limiting the power of freedom of speech, and so the First Amendment is applicable. By signing a EULA, you are accepting a limitation of your freedom of speech and (along with other factors - e.g. money) gaining some compromise instead (a car). That's not First Amendment territory in the same way that moderation of an online forum isn't. The First Amendment prevents laws being made, not contracts being signed. It means it's not illegal, not that it isn't a breach of contract. (IANAL - Obligatory XKCD https://xkcd.com/1357/ https://xkcd.com/1357/)
  - Svenskunganka 10y ago
    Ah, thank you for clarifying! I'm not a US citizen so I don't know much about the US-specific rights and laws.
- runjake 10y ago
  The First Amendment guarantees rights to citizens in the eyes of the US federal government. The EULA is an agreement between a citizen and a corporation, and thus the First Amendment does not apply.
- onetwotree 10y ago
  Under American contract law you can sign away any of your constitutional rights. Be careful what you put your magic squiggles on.
  - jedberg 10y ago
    Sort of. We can't make a contract to do something that would otherwise be illegal. A very simple example is that I cannot put into a rental lease that I can evict a tenant in 5 days. That would be in conflict with the law that says I must go through a 30 day process. Even if I put it in a contract and you sign it, you can still sue me for not going through the 30 day process.

Kristine1975 10y ago

"Just" pass a law that makes these EULA's null and void.

zekevermillion 10y ago

I can imagine tinkering with a Tesla could cause some heartburn for Elon. There are safety issues, which are real. What happens when some maniac changes the software to make autopilot into full self driving, then plows into a minivan on its way to Little League practice? Also interesting, recently heard about a guy who can reprogram some diesel trucks to get better performance (probably at the expense of NOX emissions, like what happened with VW). Still thought it was pretty cool that the truck was not locked down to prevent tinkering in this manner. NOTE: I am talking about what the company's perspective may be, not my own view of the risks.

jliptzin 10y ago
Someone determined enough to rework autopilot to work everywhere is not going to be stopped by the terms of a EULA.
- ZoF 10y ago
  Had the same thought, that would be quite the feat.
  - themartorana 10y ago
    But that logic is kept far away from legal decision making.
- zekevermillion 10y ago
  It might be easier than you would think. It's possible Tesla (or other vehicles with self-driving features) have latent capabilities already in their software, which just need to be switched on. A hacker playing around in his garage might feasibly jailbreak the car and flip this switch. Whereas I would agree with you to the extent that writing self-driving software that uses all the various data inputs and maps to pilot the vehicle, from scratch, is not something very many people are even capable of doing.
gthtjtkt 10y ago
> What happens when some maniac changes the software to make autopilot into full self driving, then plows into a minivan on its way to Little League practice? We can't let these hypothetical worst-case scenarios be an excuse to stifle innovation. What happens if we let people modify their microwaves and a terrorist uses his to give kids cancer!?!? What if we let people tinker with their toasters and somebody uses one to electrocute a pool full of kids!?!? Please, think of the children!
- alexbock 10y ago
  > What happens if we let people modify their microwaves and a terrorist uses his to give kids cancer!?!? I know this was said in jest, but given the (generally unfounded) fears some people have about microwaves and cellphones I want to point out that exposure to unshielded microwave radiation isn't going to cause cancer (at least not any more than anything else that heats you up could somehow cause cancer) because microwave radiation is non-ionizing; you would need at least ultraviolet light for that (and UV-C or X-rays would be most effective). The biggest danger with strong microwave radiation would be boiling your eyeballs as they lack the cooling most of your body has but contain significant amounts of water.
  - gthtjtkt 10y ago
    Good to know, now I'll have something to say to my mom the next time tells me to back away from the microwave while it's on...
  - snissn 10y ago
    have you looked into 5G signals? I was recently reading about how they plan to make them in the 50GHz range, which to me seems potentially dangerous
    - alexbock 10y ago
      50 GHz is still significantly less energetic than visible light, which is in the hundreds of terahertz. The sun bombards us with a lot of visible light, but you have to get into the blue/violet/ultraviolet region before it's energetic enough (high enough frequency) to cause damage. Barring some strange and previously unknown special biological interaction with a particular radio frequency, radio signals which have lower frequencies and lower intensities than visible light from the sun are not going to cause cancer any more than exposure to red or green light would cause cancer.
venomsnake 10y ago
If a Maniac has made unauthorized modifications - Maniac gets sued and does jail time. Tesla is fault free. You shouldn't be able to sue a tool manufacturer for misuse of a tool. If you cannot sue Mercedes for a case when a driver with after market tuning kills someone in a crash, why should Tesla be liable?
belorn 10y ago
What happens if I tinker with a regular car and put a nitrous oxide engine? The safety issues, which are real, could allow someone to plow into minivan on its way to Little League practice. It could explode. It could cause a massive fire. It could go way faster than the speed limit, bypass the limits of the breaks, and go against any number of laws. So... does this mean I could sue Ford if someone modified a Ford car with a nitrous oxide booster? Could Ford sue the modifier for ruining the reputation of Ford when they crashed a modified Ford car? Will the state sue Ford for allowing such modifications, commonly used in street races? Can there be a civil suit against ford for anyone harmed by such modification? To me, all those questions has a clear answer, and that answer is No. It also has a historical proof, as there hasn't been any lawsuits against Ford for failing to prevent such modifications. If the owner of a car modify their own car, then that person is fully responsible of any consequences of that action.
- zekevermillion 10y ago
  I would argue self-driving car software is different. If license terms permit modification, and a modified version is running in a car that causes damage, then there will be an argument as to whether the modifications caused the wreck, or whether it was the underlying software and thus the manufacturer who is responsible. Tesla, quite rationally, would not want to give users a permissive license, given this obvious liability problem. Even if, nod nod wink wink, they might approve of owners playing around with it.
  - mtgx 10y ago
    How about using the same tactic many smartphone makers use: "We're allowing you to unlock your bootloader, but if you do, you're voiding your warranty." Similarly car makers could say as soon as the user unlocks the car's systems for modification, the company is no longer responsible for any accident that might happen. It seems like a rather good compromise to me.
    - sneak 10y ago
      The car company is already not responsible for any accident that might happen. The operator of the vehicle is responsible for safe operation, period.
XorNot 10y ago
Safety policy should be enforced by safety laws. Not unrelated IP laws.

Svenskunganka 10y ago

But if this suit is successful, it would mean that Section 1201 violates your First Amendment rights which in turn means that EULA also violates your First Amendment rights.

richardwhiuk 10y ago
No. The First Amendment limits what the government can do to restrict your right to free speech. The DMCA, and Section 1201, is the Government limiting the power of freedom of speech, and so the First Amendment is applicable. By signing a EULA, you are accepting a limitation of your freedom of speech and (along with other factors - e.g. money) gaining some compromise instead (a car). That's not First Amendment territory in the same way that moderation of an online forum isn't. The First Amendment prevents laws being made, not contracts being signed. It means it's not illegal, not that it isn't a breach of contract. (IANAL - Obligatory XKCD https://xkcd.com/1357/ https://xkcd.com/1357/)
- Svenskunganka 10y ago
  Ah, thank you for clarifying! I'm not a US citizen so I don't know much about the US-specific rights and laws.
runjake 10y ago
The First Amendment guarantees rights to citizens in the eyes of the US federal government. The EULA is an agreement between a citizen and a corporation, and thus the First Amendment does not apply.
onetwotree 10y ago
Under American contract law you can sign away any of your constitutional rights. Be careful what you put your magic squiggles on.
- jedberg 10y ago
  Sort of. We can't make a contract to do something that would otherwise be illegal. A very simple example is that I cannot put into a rental lease that I can evict a tenant in 5 days. That would be in conflict with the law that says I must go through a 30 day process. Even if I put it in a contract and you sign it, you can still sue me for not going through the 30 day process.