28 ms·

Tesla won’t give drivers their own crash data without a court order

402 points by danso 8y ago

adrianN 8y ago
Can we make a law that all data collected by devices that I bought belongs to me? Yes, that includes everything the websites I visit send back to the mothership.
- pgeorgi 8y ago
  You mean GDPR?
  - adrianN 8y ago
    No, I mean all data, not just PII. If a Nest measures the temperature in my house I want to own those data points.
    - JBReefer 8y ago
      I get your point but I think arguing information about the state of your home is PII would be fairly straightforward.
      - pc86 8y ago
        Then pick any non-PII data point you like.
        anywhichway 8y ago
        That doesn't really work because if it isn't PII, then they don't know who it belongs to (not having even your name is a field, or else it would be PII) and can't verify it belongs to you before giving it to you. Like visiting websites while not logged into anything in generating tons of data, but it can't be easily linked back to you. It would be possible to link some of it back to session IDs or other things you could be linked back to your device, but that doesn't show it was you using the device, so they may be releasing data belonging to someone else using your device to you. And that is before we get into possibilities like cookie hijacking or other methods of falsely tying your device to that generated data.
        rando444 8y ago
        You're bringing up a separate argument. One worth having, but not in this thread. The argument here is that the company knows who the data belongs to, and the person above is saying that they shouldn't be able to abstract "you" away from the data and claim it as their own property.. especially because, as we know, most anonymization techniques have serious flaws that in fact do allow individuals to be identified after close scrutinization.
    - ams6110 8y ago
      Then, and I'm being serious: don't put a Nest in your house. You know what these things are, and you know what the company who makes them does.
      - criddell 8y ago
        Nest shouldn't have any rights to that data any more than Microsoft should have rights to novels written in Word.
      - adrianN 8y ago
        I don't have a Nest, but it becomes increasingly difficult to buy things that don't produce data. I think we should adapt our laws before everything you can buy is "smart".
    - lucb1e 8y ago
      It's often data about you, in which case it's linked to you in which case it falls under GDPR. This crash data is definitely about you, as general driving data would be. Your home's temperature won't be, so GDPR indeed won't apply there, but GDPR is a good first step. (I mean, EU already had it since 1995, but in USA it would be a good first step.) I agree that your proposal would be a good extension. Or at least that it should be the default, and you'd need to sign for being okay with not owning the data. Or that those devices contain warning stickers.
      - rjmunro 8y ago
        If the nest information is tied to your address (which is clearly personal), doesn't that make it personal information?
        lucb1e 8y ago
        If they can retrieve whose house it was, then yes. But if they send it to the mothership and aggregate or anonymize it, then not. For example if they show you your house's temperature history, I assume it falls under GDPR because it's tied to your account so it's included with data about you.
    - rmc 8y ago
      The temperature of your house at certain times can be used to figure out when you were at home, what rooms you were in, when you went to bed, if you're just at home alone, or someone else was at home when you were there too. Sounds like PII!
- dfxm12 8y ago
  If that law gets passed, you'll no longer "own" the device you bought that collects that data, but will be granted a license to use it.
  - adrianN 8y ago
    I'm sure clever lawyers can come up with a definition of "own" that excludes such trickery.
    - delbel 8y ago
      it would be funny to write license agreements for money. They don't actually "own" the money you "gave" them, you just grant them a license to use your money. Just reciprocate the license. Just put the EULA sticker on all your big bills and they are forced to whatever you want, right?
  - Retric 8y ago
    Laws are flexible, it's easy enough to cover that loophole.
  - teddyh 8y ago
    When computers were new, IBM would not sell computers to customers, but rent them out. Since most people nowadays seem to pay for cell phones, tablets, etc. in monthly installments and “need” to get a new model as soon as the one they have is fully paid off, I’m sure a jump to leasing/renting devices is a very small one in practice.
    - noer 8y ago
      You already are renting/paying a monthly use license fee if you "buy" a phone from your carrier with a monthly payment and the ability to upgrade after x months. I did this by accident when I "bought" an iPhone a few years ago and was told I couldn't keep it after I water damaged it and got a replacement. I started buying devices outright after that.
      - 8y ago
- kodablah 8y ago
  The question is, if it belongs to me, can I voluntarily give it up even under the known condition I can't ask for it back? I mean, it belongs to me right? That's where these laws often run afoul. You can have more freedom with consequences, or less freedom with restrictions.
  - bambax 8y ago
    Data isn't "property", it should be an unalienable right, like an author's moral rights over his work: it's yours but you can't sell it or otherwise dispose of it.
    - jrs95 8y ago
      Isn't authors selling the rights to their work basically how the entire book industry works?
      - adrianN 8y ago
        Selling the rights to publish your book is different from giving up all the rights you have over your book. The latter is something that (IANAL...) you can't do in many jurisdictions.
      - dsr_ 8y ago
        That's the copying right, not the moral right. The moral right is the right to be identified as the creator and the right to maintain the integrity of the work in subsequent copying.
        kbenson 8y ago
        So, they can't sell that, as the GP is proposing, or they generally just don't under the current economic system? Because I'm pretty sure Dean Koontz does a variation of this, where he outlines the story but someone else actually writes the book, and it's published under his name.
        8y ago
- yumraj 8y ago
  I'd like to go one step further and want the power to delete it, or be deleted, when I want. If I'm allowed to take the 5th to not incriminate myself and not reveal my memory (data in my head), I should be similarly allowed to delete my data when it is my data in my device. It'd be an interesting case to take to the Supreme Court.
  - FireBeyond 8y ago
    I think they would view that as destruction of evidence. The next step in your scenario is "that security camera has data on me, I want it deleted".
    - kofejnik 8y ago
      I believe GDPR does cover the security camera scenario, there was a comment here about a week ago from someone who successfully petitioned the German police to delete all footage of him at some protest
      - Skye 8y ago
        https://ico.org.uk/your-data-matters/cctv/ https://ico.org.uk/your-data-matters/cctv/ at least in the UK, you can request people who have CCTV footage of you, and also note that people have to delete CCTV when they no longer need it (how long that should be is arguable), so people have to delete CCTV without being prompted to. and this is not new with the GDPR, it's from the old law, from 1998, I think.
    - yumraj 8y ago
      Not really, especially if the cameras are 3rd party owned. My comment was explicitly about my own devices, with the argument being that they are an extension of my brain/memory as opposed to evidence in the traditional sense. The link provided by wang_li applies and it seems such questions have come up in the past in front of courts, and honestly I won't be surprised if they come up again.
  - wang_li 8y ago
- jimmaswell 8y ago
  There's no real justification for anyone having that right. The device manufacturer/website owner/etc does the work of creating the data, yet you think it's yours?
  - kofejnik 8y ago
    No, it's my device that creates the data, so it is mine. Otherwise, does the typewriter manufacturer own the stories you type?
    - cblades 8y ago
      I don't think that analogy holds up. Maybe: does the typewriter manufacturer own meta data such as letter frequency, average work length, etc that their product calculates based on your usage?
      - kofejnik 8y ago
        No, of course not. Once money exchanged hands, it's not their product, it's mine, as is _all_ of its output, including logs, etc. Otherwise, I'd call it 'spyware'.
        jimmaswell 8y ago
        This already isn't the case in many instances where you don't actually "own" the thing, you just have a license to use it.
    - insulanus 8y ago
      I agree that you should own the data that was created because of your interaction with the device, but I do not agree that the reason is that you own the device. Here's an example: You go to the library (or a privately owned web cafe), and write your stories there. It doesn't matter that you don't own the device. It's still your data.
  - staplers 8y ago
    If I kill someone with a hammer, is that the hammer company's liability? If not, then creation of an object (once sold) does not warrant ownership of said product and accompanying data.
- gm-conspiracy 8y ago
  So, if you have a DSLR camera on a tripod set to a timer, and you do not actually take the picture, you have no claim to copyright of that image, even though the device you owned created it?
  - Analemma_ 8y ago
    The court system is not, in fact, a dumb automaton that is bamboozled by questions like this.
    - delbel 8y ago
      ... Yet. I read this in a cynical 90's AT&T commercial "You Will..."
  - FireBeyond 8y ago
    Wasn't this a copyright claim against Wikipedia, where an ape picked up a camera and took a selfie, and Wikipedia et al decided that meant the camera owner had no copyright claim over the image?
    - gm-conspiracy 8y ago
      yes.
  - Dylan16807 8y ago
    Timed photo definitely has copyright. Continuous surveillance footage is an open question. But the post you're replying to wasn't about copyright at all.
danso 8y ago
I imagine this policy would have to be different for those in the UK, right? I thought I had read that the Data Protection Act (of 1998) forced companies to send data in situations they would not for other countries: https://www.gov.uk/respond-data-protection-request https://www.gov.uk/respond-data-protection-request > Under data protection law, anyone can ask if your organisation holds personal information about them - you must respond to their request as soon as possible, and within one month at most.
- CiaranMcNulty 8y ago
  Crash data is not necessarily Personally Identifiable Information
  - Someone1234 8y ago
    You added the word "Identifiable." The DPA isn't limited to just that.
  - thierryzoller 8y ago
    PII is a term coined in the US
  - Hupriene 8y ago
    police reports of accidents are public record, you should be able to pretty easily go from crash data to personal identity based on public records. Sounds like PII to me.
- ascorbic 8y ago
  Yes, and the whole of the EU. The Data Protection Act is in the process of being replaced with a new Act that incorporates the GDPR into UK law. The GDPR expands that right further.
crb002 8y ago
No big deal just serve a subpoena on their registered agent.
thierryzoller 8y ago
Interested to see how this would play out in Europe under the GDPR. Data should be personal data and hence each data subject has full rights to access it.
- tankenmate 8y ago
  Not only that the GDPR requires that organisations provide the data in a standardised format that is easy to use / export.
berdon 8y ago
What use would this type of data be to the average consumer? Outside of the obvious question of ownership and argument of who owns the data - isn't this otherwise very similar to being in a plane crash and demanding the black box data? Surely the data, itself, isn't very helpful compared to the analysis of the data? Note: My question is in no way trying to argue against the consumer owning the data. I'm just wondering how this kind of data could be useful without access to the means to analyze it. Edit: Not sure why all the down votes. I explicitly tried to indicate I was asking a question about the data value and avoiding the ownership question. I, personally, think the data should be the device owner's property. But my opinion on ownership and my question wasn't related to the ownership.
- danso 8y ago
  In the cases mentioned, it's not the "average consumer", but the owners who get into crashes and who presumably have a great incentive to figure out what's needed to analyze the data. It's not as if there's only one objective way to analyze the data.
  - berdon 8y ago
    There is only one objective way to analyze data if all it is in a bunch of meaningless numbers without context. That was what my question was about: if the data dump from tesla consists of arrays of numbers for state data for some ML algorithm, how would anyone other than Tesla analyze that?
  - Maybestring 8y ago
    If the incentive is to support a law suit, then getting the discovery order was something they were going to need to do anyway.
- kalms 8y ago
  You don't usually own the plane that crashed. Unless if you're Elon Musk of course.
  - berdon 8y ago
spaceisballer 8y ago
Serious question, Can you get data from any other car manufacturer? I know ICE cars collect information but do you have access to it?
- foepys 8y ago
  At least the local data can be accessed with OBD interfaces [1] most of the time. I don't know about stuff like theft prevention where the GPS location of the car is being constantly transmitted over GSM/UMTS/LTE, though. 1: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/On-board_diagnostics https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/On-board_diagnostics
- Maybestring 8y ago
  Typically, the manufacturer's diagnostic tool can download data from the fast stop recorder. An accident investigator should be able to access it for you.
- ams6110 8y ago
  You can get a connector and software and access pretty much anything on a laptop plugged in to the diagnostic port. Of course that software isn't free, and it's generally sold to repair shops so don't know how easy it would be for a consumer to buy.
- PebblesRox 8y ago
  We use Metromile for our insurance and the tracker we plug in has access to that info which they make available in a simplified form in their app.
emodendroket 8y ago
It seems like Tesla's on the fast-track to an Uber-tier reputation.
- aerovistae 8y ago
  Yeah, if any imperfect company is instantly equated with a pure evil company, then sure. Seems fair. But, then again, I can see how you'd think Tesla was pure evil too if you buy into all the endless nonsense published about them without doing any research.
  - emodendroket 8y ago
    What is it you think is "nonsense" or inaccurate?
    - aerovistae 8y ago
      Not going to get sucked into this. If you have to ask, it implies you already believe that all of the dozens of articles published daily have total merit, in which case nothing I'm going to say will convince you because your position is pretty well set in concrete.
      - emodendroket 8y ago
        If I'm not already convinced Tesla is being unfairly attacked, I'm not amenable to changing my position? I find that line hard to understand.
        aerovistae 8y ago
        True, perhaps you are amenable to it. But 95% of people encountered online already have their minds made up one way or the other pretty firmly, and I don't care to take the chance you're a unicorn. Which begs the question, why do I comment in these discussions at all? I do not know.
caio1982 8y ago
Danso, by no means I wanted to "stalk" you but I noticed you posted at least 5 negative/harsh articles about Tesla last month, which is fine to me as HN has a lot of Musk fanboys to counterbalance, anyways, I was wondering if you have any customer story to share about Tesla that affected you, i.e. did you own one and it was a bad car or did you lost money investing in them? I am genuinely interested in that background so if it may read offensive to you please let me know so maybe I can rephrase it! PS: I would like to buy a Tesla myself but I can't because of where I live, so I can only read people's account about them
- pseudometa 8y ago
  Doing it perhaps for the click-bait karma? Edit: I'm one of those people that believe in what Elon is doing and while I don't consider myself a fan-boy, I get plenty frustrated by all of the biased negativity I somehow feel the need to inject some balance by saying something. That may come across as only ever defending, but the amount of negative fluff articles is astonishing.
  - danso 8y ago
    OK, you've accused me of submitting "click-bait karma" and "negative fluff articles". Care to elaborate on why you think the article under discussion is not legitimate?
    - pseudometa 8y ago
      It singles out Tesla and provides no broader context. Specifically there is no mention of the policies of other car companies. It is like saying that Kumo tires have been in 5 million car accidents. Sounds bad for Kumo, but there is no context to other types of tires. Will BMW or Lexus provide vehicle data after a crash? Will Google provide Android Auto data upon request?
      - danso 8y ago
        OK, so it's incumbent on you to show where other companies have used data in the way that Tesla has done in response to accidents. Here's a Guardian article from last year that made a related allegation about Tesla and user data: https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2017/apr/03/the-customer-is-always-wrong-tesla-lets-out-self-driving-car-data-when-it-suits https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2017/apr/03/the-custo... > The Guardian could not find a single case in which Tesla had sought the permission of a customer who had been involved in an accident before sharing detailed information from the customer’s car with the press when its self-driving software was called into question. Tesla declined to provide any such examples and disputed the description of its automation software, called Autopilot, as “self-driving”. I've Googled around but haven't been able to find instances of other companies releasing data in the wake of an incident, or being criticized by owners for not releasing data, though obviously the average car does not have the data systems that are standard on Tesla. When Facebook gets criticized in an article for exposing/sharing user data, do you ignore the article if it doesn't have a complete rundown of how every other tech company may or may not abuse user data?
pseudometa 8y ago
Isn't this true of any car company? BMW, Mercedes, and Lexus aren't going to hand over vehicle data. You can't just ask Google for your Android Auto data.
- deleted 8y ago
  [deleted]
- FireBeyond 8y ago
  But as a bonus, they're not likely to be so "proactive" about handing over your vehicle data or findings to the media to help manage their publicity process, either...
- EpicEng 8y ago
  Those companies aren't in the news blaming drivers for crashes which occur while using their "autopilot" tech. So you may be right, but context matters. Maybe someday it will be them in the hot seat, but today, it's Tesla.
  - ams6110 8y ago
    As I recall, when Toyota was dealing with accidents involving electronic throttles and "unintended acceleration" they did publicly claim that the accidents were a case of drivers stepping on the throttle instead of the brake. (Note, this was separate from the real problem of floor mats interfering with the pedals, for which there was a recall). The NHTSA apparently agreed. Because proof that the ETCS-i caused the reported UAs was not found does not mean it could not occur. However, the testing and analysis described in this report did not find that TMC ETCS-i electronics are a likely cause of large throttle openings as described in the VOQs Acronyms and details in the report: https://one.nhtsa.gov/About-NHTSA/Press-Releases/ci.NHTSA%E2%80%93NASA-Study-of-Unintended-Acceleration-in-Toyota-Vehicles.print# https://one.nhtsa.gov/About-NHTSA/Press-Releases/ci.NHTSA%E2...
toss1 8y ago
Since there is clearly an interface to obtain the data, used at least by third-party vendor 'Crash Data Group', it seems it'd be possible to develop an external logger to plug in while driving. Such data loggers are commonly used in racecars, using either their own sensors, or in stock versions, also tied into the OBDII ports. It looks at everyghing from driver inputs, to engine performance, 6-axis G loads, etc. Seems it'd be pretty nice to get the data anyway to help manage your own driving (or check the habits of someone borrowing your car, like your kid), and in case of an incident, your own log of the events so you don't have to pester/subpoena Tesla.
vinceguidry 8y ago
Oh boy, I was so excited to get a Tesla when the time finally came, but if they're still pulling this crap when that happens, guess I'm getting a Benz instead.
- toomuchtodo 8y ago
  Try to get the data out of your GM or Ford airbag flash storage device (any vehicle with a data logger paired to the airbag subsystem, which is most cars on the road) and see how similar the process is. More “journalistic” nonsense. I agree they have a lot of legitimate issues (cash flow, scaling, retention, working conditions, process maturity, overpromising) to deal with, but can’t journalists focus on those instead of clickbait? Sidenote: if you take issue with this, sponsor a federal law to fix the problem through your legislator
  - vinceguidry 8y ago
    Tesla's a new company, either they're holding themselves to a higher standard than the establishment or they aren't. If they're not then I'm going with the establishment. I can overlook a great great great many things in service of the cause of disrupting the auto industry. But this? Asking me to take personal responsibility with no legal recourse? This is the line they can't ask me to cross. If this is fake news, fine, it'll come out. If it's not, then sorry Tesla, can't do it.
    - toomuchtodo 8y ago
      That’s for each consumer to decide of course. I bought my Model S fully knowing what I was getting into. I consider them holding themselves to a higher standard, but as in politics, you can’t find someone who agrees with you 100% in office. Have to compromise, and this isn’t a hill I care to die on. As I stated above, it’s a public policy issue, not Tesla specific. > if you take issue with this, sponsor a federal law to fix the problem through your legislator
      - vinceguidry 8y ago
robrenaud 8y ago
This is a bunch of PR nonsense. > When asked why Tesla has an apparent policy requiring drivers who want their own data to file for a subpoena, a spokesperson framed it as a privacy issue. > “We handle all customer data in accordance with our Owner’s Manual and privacy policy, which clearly outlines the type of data we collect and the lengths that we go to protect a customers’ privacy in the process,” Tesla said via email, referencing back to a statement on the Tesla website about the company’s data collection practices. You can pay a third party $1000 to access the data, or Telsa will publicly shame your driving if they think you are in the wrong during a crash, but they really need to fight you to protect your privacy from yourself?
- arghwhat 8y ago
  Ah, how wonderful that the GDPR is now in place, making this as easy as issuing a subject access request.
  - craftyguy 8y ago
    Only if you are in the EU. Many Tesla drivers aren't.
    - gameswithgo 8y ago
      just drive over to the EU. Is there a supercharge in the atlantic yet?
      - ccozan 8y ago
        Maybe the next big thing will be an electric boat with floating chargers powered by an solar array.
    - nemoniac 8y ago
      The GDPR also holds for European Tesla drivers outside the EU.
      - 8y ago
pwagland 8y ago
So this is something that has always kind of bugged me about Tesla. If you have an accident, they are more than happy to drop the crash data "proving" that you were at fault, look at the recent stories about running into a road barrier and the back of a firetruck for recent examples of this. And, of course, they don't ask you first if they can release it. However, if you want the data, you can't have it… you have to go to court to get it.
- jopsen 8y ago
  GDPR doesn't sound so bad now, does it? :)
  - pwagland 8y ago
    Well, I'm (living as an) European, so I actually support GDPR anyway. But yes, I always wondered exactly what grounds they used to publish some of this data.
    - Negitivefrags 8y ago
      I'm curious why you think that being European implies you also support GDPR.
  - kodablah 8y ago
    You have succinctly, albeit unintentionally, summed up why the GDPR is often seen as bad. The way I read it "the end goal is good and/or some part of it is good, so it is all good, right?" Requiring transparency requirements of companies like Tesla is laudable without a bunch of baggage and large sweeping changes. Unfortunately people often can't see the difference between intent and implementation and assume you are for both or against both.
  - gonational 8y ago
    No. You know what sounds nice? Having the choice to not buy a Tesla. I don’t need Government™ to tell me what kind of contracts I can agree to.
MisterTea 8y ago
Can we please go back to selling physical things instead of EULAs? If I bought the car it's mine along with all the data I generate while inside of MY vehicle. This is why I will not buy newer computer filled vehicles; they don't belong to you anymore.
- TeMPOraL 8y ago
  Welcome to the next stage of the economy - now that we've created products for almost all daily needs, it's time to turn them into services. sigh. I'm with you and 'adrianN on this. I hate this direction and wish we could turn it back somewhat, or at least cover for the negative aspects of servicization of products. Regulation might be a necessary tool for that.
  - MisterTea 8y ago
    It's starting to become maddening when you look around you and realize that in a few short years everything is shifting to SaaS. The part that really bothers me is it feels degrading in the sense that you are not allowed to control your own property anymore. This is when technology becomes oppressive.
    - gm-conspiracy 8y ago
      The hegemony is coming. There will be a not insignificant portion that is unwilling to embrace this.
- insulanus 8y ago
  Actually, I think we need a new, stronger rule. You must have guaranteed strong controls (the ability to review it, at the very least) over all data generated by virtue of your existence as a free agent. In the future, everything will have sensors in it. If we leave things as they are now, your Samsung refrigerator will be reporting back what you eat, and when. A good place to sell that data is to grocery stores and General Mills. That's great if you want your doctor to know that information, or if you need an alibi; "your honor, I was eating yoghurt at the time". Oh wait - bad example, because you own the refrigerator. My point was that in the future, when you go outside, everything will have recording devices in it. So, the public spaces and government rituals you are subjected to need to be dealt with, as well. Property rights no longer suffice for these situations.
gwbas1c 8y ago
Accelerator pedal immediately went from 0% to 100%? Really? Even I don't press my brake like that when parking.
- MiguelHudnandez 8y ago
  Sure seems like they are hiding something. It should be impossible to make a pressure sensor read 100% instantly. It would normally take 1/3 of a second and you would see the value increase gradually. Will autopilot even let you floor the accelerator with a car right in front of you?
  - freerobby 8y ago
    > Will autopilot even let you floor the accelerator with a car right in front of you? Yes. Autopilot does not override any user input. This is a major reason why L2 system failure will always be the responsibility of the driver.
- freerobby 8y ago
  > Even I don't press my brake like that when parking. You might if you thought it was the brake and the car was accelerating.
  - gm-conspiracy 8y ago
    Nope. Unless they have really shitty logging intervals, which would also be a problem.
    - freerobby 8y ago
      People do this all the time. Look at what Toyota went through -- drivers were claiming "sudden acceleration" but in reality they were slamming on the accelerator. https://www.caranddriver.com/features/its-all-your-fault-the-dot-renders-its-verdict-on-toyotas-unintended-acceleration-scare-feature https://www.caranddriver.com/features/its-all-your-fault-the...
- deleted 8y ago
beauzero 8y ago
Stupid question but don't insurance companies require access to this data? Seems odd.
- lightedman 8y ago
  The NHTSA explicitly requires car makers to make this data public, so Tesla is flat-out wrong and needs to be heavily fined for breaking the regulation multiple times over.
gcheong 8y ago
Just a point of clarification as I was confused reading the description. The $1000 to access data isn't on an event by event basis. It's for the cables to connect to the EDR so presumably once you have them you can access all the data in the EDR at any time. http://www.crashdatagroup.com/tesla-edr-kit/ http://www.crashdatagroup.com/tesla-edr-kit/
- slededit 8y ago
  They can get the data remotely from a smashed car on the side of the road to slander the driver. But somehow if you want it, a $1000 cable is totally necessary.
  - gm-conspiracy 8y ago
    Is it really that difficult to use a hacked femtocell and MitM the Tesla's telemetrics? And remember this story: https://arstechnica.com/cars/2016/03/man-hacks-tesla-firmware-finds-new-model-has-car-remotely-downgraded/ https://arstechnica.com/cars/2016/03/man-hacks-tesla-firmwar...
    - Matheus28 8y ago
      Communication with the mothership is done through a VPN. The only way to listen in is to have root access to the cid (that computer in the middle with the large screen).
decacorn1 8y ago
Toxic decision on Tesla’s part. Yet another fire needing to be put out that never should have started in the first place. They’re really making things more difficult for themselves.
- bo1024 8y ago
  This isn't really a single decision, it's an attitude baked into Tesla's philosophy. You don't own the car; you just decide where to drive it. Tesla owns your car in every meaningful way (except liability apparently).
kerng 8y ago
For European customers that's a non-issue thanks to GDPR.
ASalazarMX 8y ago
What's the deal with the recent flood of anti-Tesla news? Does someone want to buy Tesla stock, or is Tesla just no longer cool?
- toomuchtodo 8y ago
  This article [+] explains it pretty succinctly, with as little bias as possible (TL;DR Tesla is the most shorted stock in the US, while also endangering entrenched interests). [+] https://www.dailykos.com/stories/2018/5/29/1767826/-The-War-on-Tesla-Musk-and-the-Fight-for-the-Future https://www.dailykos.com/stories/2018/5/29/1767826/-The-War-... EDIT: below content moved up to this comment from danso reply in order to be more concise as well as to keep signal to post ratio high: I do my best to provide non-biased sources/citations, as well as provide arguments without any intellectual disingenuity. If you can find something that is inaccurate or subjective, please point it out. It's fairly obvious that the data used by Reveal was manipulated in their sensational Tesla piece, and I'm happy to continue to aggregate additional sources that bear that out. You left out the next six paragraphs that explain why there is no basis in fact for what Reveal wrote.
  - danso 8y ago
    > Step up Reveal, an “independent journalism organization” to start “reporting” on Tesla. Quotation marks are normally considered to denote sarcasm, and boy do I ever mean it. Sounds like an article committed to defending Tesla. Not that there's anything wrong with that, but "with as little bias as possible" is debatable.
    - deleted 8y ago
      [deleted]
    - chc 8y ago
      I don't see how you take the writer saying "These people are reporting outright falsehoods and their falsehoods appear to closely match the talking points of a PR campaign" as an indication that they're committed to defending Tesla. If those facts are true, that seems like the sort of thing an unbiased analysis would explain.
mysticfluff 8y ago
A few months ago my valet backed my brand new X into a wall in the garage. I asked Tesla for the data to help use this for insurance. At no point was Tesla possibly at fault, but they still told me that in order to get the data I would need a subpoena.
- thebluehawk 8y ago
  I mean, that seems like a pretty open and shut case for insurance... What is the purpose of needing the additional data from Tesla?
danso 8y ago
I have an anecdote, somewhat in defense of Tesla: a few years ago I was the victim of an armed robbery. One of the things I lost was my iPod touch, which was logged into a few media services, including Netflix. A few days later, logging into my Netflix account, I noticed that my "Recently played/Continue watching" list had some things I had never watched (including the show "Prison Break"). I called Netflix customer support and asked if I could get location/IP logs. The Netflix support person was very sympathetic but said that it was not company policy to release that info. I didn't ask for the issue to be elevated, or ask about a subpoena (I assume Netflix would respond to a subpoena). But IMO, the difference between my situation with Netflix, and Tesla is: 1. Netflix does not seem to have a practice of divulging my user data in a public forum. 2. The circumstances for my data request were unusual -- it's not as if every time a Netflix-equipped device gets stolen, Netflix is expected to respond, or even be aware of it. But presumably, Tesla has a data process ready in the event of every kind of accident, no matter the actual cause or circumstances. In other words, what I was asking from Netflix was refused because they don't have a standard operating procedure for responding to info about IP/location requests. If such a thing were needed, it's not hard to imagine Netflix making it a service, just as FB and Google data takeouts include login location history. But Tesla does have standard procedure for retrieving, storing, and transmitting vehicle logs, including divulging the data publicly without being compelled by the government. Which is why users seem to have a greater expectation that Tesla should be able to send them their own data.
- vkou 8y ago
  Under GDPR, Netflix would probably have to divulge this data.
dsfyu404ed 8y ago
>But Tesla also took time to publish a blog post characterizing Cordaro as someone who did not take care of his Model S. >"The suspension ball joint experienced very abnormal rust,” Tesla said of his car, adding that Cordaro “lives down such a long dirt road that it required two tow trucks to retrieve the car.” The car, Tesla also added, was “caked in dirt." I'll be one of the first people to tell you that Pennsylvanians are a bunch of loud mouth complainers who don't really have it as bad as they say when it comes to vehicle rust. However, the idea that a low volume, relatively new (there are no 20yo Teslas let alone Teslas that have spend those 20yr in salt states) car company, primarily located in California (!!!), that primarily recruits in California (!!!), is going to be able to determine "normal corrosion" looks like is laughable. Even established car companies can't accurately and consistently predict corrosion 10yr out. Tesla doesn't even have a big enough data-set to make that prediction, let alone the expertise.
- saalweachter 8y ago
  When I bought a used truck out of PA I was alarmed by the quantity of rust on the frame, with chunks flaking off here and there. My mechanic assures me it's holding up fine, with below-average rust for its age.
exabrial 8y ago
It would appear that US law states that the owner of the vehicle owns the Event Data. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Event_data_recorder https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Event_data_recorder
- lightedman 8y ago
  No. From your link: "NHTSA also required that all manufacturers make their EDR data publicly available." It is public information.
heisenbit 8y ago
For Europeans the GDPR may come to rescue. This is data that is highly personal and thus getting a copy of it or having the right to get it erased should be possible.
radley 8y ago
1) Does Tesla enforce an arbitration clause with their customers? Most (shady?) companies do this these days. 2) If so, can the customer actually get a court order in arbitration?
macinjosh 8y ago
I am curious if GDPR has any impact on customer's rights to this data?
funwie 8y ago
What if this request was under GDPR jurisdiction?

402 points by danso 8y ago

Can we make a law that all data collected by devices that I bought belongs to me? Yes, that includes everything the websites I visit send back to the mothership.

pgeorgi 8y ago
You mean GDPR?
- adrianN 8y ago
  No, I mean all data, not just PII. If a Nest measures the temperature in my house I want to own those data points.
  - JBReefer 8y ago
    I get your point but I think arguing information about the state of your home is PII would be fairly straightforward.
    - pc86 8y ago
      Then pick any non-PII data point you like.
      - anywhichway 8y ago
        That doesn't really work because if it isn't PII, then they don't know who it belongs to (not having even your name is a field, or else it would be PII) and can't verify it belongs to you before giving it to you. Like visiting websites while not logged into anything in generating tons of data, but it can't be easily linked back to you. It would be possible to link some of it back to session IDs or other things you could be linked back to your device, but that doesn't show it was you using the device, so they may be releasing data belonging to someone else using your device to you. And that is before we get into possibilities like cookie hijacking or other methods of falsely tying your device to that generated data.
        rando444 8y ago
        You're bringing up a separate argument. One worth having, but not in this thread. The argument here is that the company knows who the data belongs to, and the person above is saying that they shouldn't be able to abstract "you" away from the data and claim it as their own property.. especially because, as we know, most anonymization techniques have serious flaws that in fact do allow individuals to be identified after close scrutinization.
  - ams6110 8y ago
    Then, and I'm being serious: don't put a Nest in your house. You know what these things are, and you know what the company who makes them does.
    - criddell 8y ago
      Nest shouldn't have any rights to that data any more than Microsoft should have rights to novels written in Word.
    - adrianN 8y ago
      I don't have a Nest, but it becomes increasingly difficult to buy things that don't produce data. I think we should adapt our laws before everything you can buy is "smart".
  - lucb1e 8y ago
    It's often data about you, in which case it's linked to you in which case it falls under GDPR. This crash data is definitely about you, as general driving data would be. Your home's temperature won't be, so GDPR indeed won't apply there, but GDPR is a good first step. (I mean, EU already had it since 1995, but in USA it would be a good first step.) I agree that your proposal would be a good extension. Or at least that it should be the default, and you'd need to sign for being okay with not owning the data. Or that those devices contain warning stickers.
    - rjmunro 8y ago
      If the nest information is tied to your address (which is clearly personal), doesn't that make it personal information?
      - lucb1e 8y ago
        If they can retrieve whose house it was, then yes. But if they send it to the mothership and aggregate or anonymize it, then not. For example if they show you your house's temperature history, I assume it falls under GDPR because it's tied to your account so it's included with data about you.
  - rmc 8y ago
    The temperature of your house at certain times can be used to figure out when you were at home, what rooms you were in, when you went to bed, if you're just at home alone, or someone else was at home when you were there too. Sounds like PII!
dfxm12 8y ago
If that law gets passed, you'll no longer "own" the device you bought that collects that data, but will be granted a license to use it.
- adrianN 8y ago
  I'm sure clever lawyers can come up with a definition of "own" that excludes such trickery.
  - delbel 8y ago
    it would be funny to write license agreements for money. They don't actually "own" the money you "gave" them, you just grant them a license to use your money. Just reciprocate the license. Just put the EULA sticker on all your big bills and they are forced to whatever you want, right?
- Retric 8y ago
  Laws are flexible, it's easy enough to cover that loophole.
- teddyh 8y ago
  When computers were new, IBM would not sell computers to customers, but rent them out. Since most people nowadays seem to pay for cell phones, tablets, etc. in monthly installments and “need” to get a new model as soon as the one they have is fully paid off, I’m sure a jump to leasing/renting devices is a very small one in practice.
  - noer 8y ago
    You already are renting/paying a monthly use license fee if you "buy" a phone from your carrier with a monthly payment and the ability to upgrade after x months. I did this by accident when I "bought" an iPhone a few years ago and was told I couldn't keep it after I water damaged it and got a replacement. I started buying devices outright after that.
    - 8y ago
kodablah 8y ago
The question is, if it belongs to me, can I voluntarily give it up even under the known condition I can't ask for it back? I mean, it belongs to me right? That's where these laws often run afoul. You can have more freedom with consequences, or less freedom with restrictions.
- bambax 8y ago
  Data isn't "property", it should be an unalienable right, like an author's moral rights over his work: it's yours but you can't sell it or otherwise dispose of it.
  - jrs95 8y ago
    Isn't authors selling the rights to their work basically how the entire book industry works?
    - adrianN 8y ago
      Selling the rights to publish your book is different from giving up all the rights you have over your book. The latter is something that (IANAL...) you can't do in many jurisdictions.
    - dsr_ 8y ago
      That's the copying right, not the moral right. The moral right is the right to be identified as the creator and the right to maintain the integrity of the work in subsequent copying.
      - kbenson 8y ago
        So, they can't sell that, as the GP is proposing, or they generally just don't under the current economic system? Because I'm pretty sure Dean Koontz does a variation of this, where he outlines the story but someone else actually writes the book, and it's published under his name.
        8y ago
yumraj 8y ago
I'd like to go one step further and want the power to delete it, or be deleted, when I want. If I'm allowed to take the 5th to not incriminate myself and not reveal my memory (data in my head), I should be similarly allowed to delete my data when it is my data in my device. It'd be an interesting case to take to the Supreme Court.
- FireBeyond 8y ago
  I think they would view that as destruction of evidence. The next step in your scenario is "that security camera has data on me, I want it deleted".
  - kofejnik 8y ago
    I believe GDPR does cover the security camera scenario, there was a comment here about a week ago from someone who successfully petitioned the German police to delete all footage of him at some protest
    - Skye 8y ago
      https://ico.org.uk/your-data-matters/cctv/ https://ico.org.uk/your-data-matters/cctv/ at least in the UK, you can request people who have CCTV footage of you, and also note that people have to delete CCTV when they no longer need it (how long that should be is arguable), so people have to delete CCTV without being prompted to. and this is not new with the GDPR, it's from the old law, from 1998, I think.
  - yumraj 8y ago
    Not really, especially if the cameras are 3rd party owned. My comment was explicitly about my own devices, with the argument being that they are an extension of my brain/memory as opposed to evidence in the traditional sense. The link provided by wang_li applies and it seems such questions have come up in the past in front of courts, and honestly I won't be surprised if they come up again.
- wang_li 8y ago
jimmaswell 8y ago
There's no real justification for anyone having that right. The device manufacturer/website owner/etc does the work of creating the data, yet you think it's yours?
- kofejnik 8y ago
  No, it's my device that creates the data, so it is mine. Otherwise, does the typewriter manufacturer own the stories you type?
  - cblades 8y ago
    I don't think that analogy holds up. Maybe: does the typewriter manufacturer own meta data such as letter frequency, average work length, etc that their product calculates based on your usage?
    - kofejnik 8y ago
      No, of course not. Once money exchanged hands, it's not their product, it's mine, as is _all_ of its output, including logs, etc. Otherwise, I'd call it 'spyware'.
      - jimmaswell 8y ago
        This already isn't the case in many instances where you don't actually "own" the thing, you just have a license to use it.
  - insulanus 8y ago
    I agree that you should own the data that was created because of your interaction with the device, but I do not agree that the reason is that you own the device. Here's an example: You go to the library (or a privately owned web cafe), and write your stories there. It doesn't matter that you don't own the device. It's still your data.
- staplers 8y ago
  If I kill someone with a hammer, is that the hammer company's liability? If not, then creation of an object (once sold) does not warrant ownership of said product and accompanying data.
gm-conspiracy 8y ago
So, if you have a DSLR camera on a tripod set to a timer, and you do not actually take the picture, you have no claim to copyright of that image, even though the device you owned created it?
- Analemma_ 8y ago
  The court system is not, in fact, a dumb automaton that is bamboozled by questions like this.
  - delbel 8y ago
    ... Yet. I read this in a cynical 90's AT&T commercial "You Will..."
- FireBeyond 8y ago
  Wasn't this a copyright claim against Wikipedia, where an ape picked up a camera and took a selfie, and Wikipedia et al decided that meant the camera owner had no copyright claim over the image?
  - gm-conspiracy 8y ago
    yes.
- Dylan16807 8y ago
  Timed photo definitely has copyright. Continuous surveillance footage is an open question. But the post you're replying to wasn't about copyright at all.

danso 8y ago

I imagine this policy would have to be different for those in the UK, right? I thought I had read that the Data Protection Act (of 1998) forced companies to send data in situations they would not for other countries: https://www.gov.uk/respond-data-protection-request https://www.gov.uk/respond-data-protection-request > Under data protection law, anyone can ask if your organisation holds personal information about them - you must respond to their request as soon as possible, and within one month at most.

CiaranMcNulty 8y ago
Crash data is not necessarily Personally Identifiable Information
- Someone1234 8y ago
  You added the word "Identifiable." The DPA isn't limited to just that.
- thierryzoller 8y ago
  PII is a term coined in the US
- Hupriene 8y ago
  police reports of accidents are public record, you should be able to pretty easily go from crash data to personal identity based on public records. Sounds like PII to me.
ascorbic 8y ago
Yes, and the whole of the EU. The Data Protection Act is in the process of being replaced with a new Act that incorporates the GDPR into UK law. The GDPR expands that right further.

crb002 8y ago

No big deal just serve a subpoena on their registered agent.

thierryzoller 8y ago

Interested to see how this would play out in Europe under the GDPR. Data should be personal data and hence each data subject has full rights to access it.

tankenmate 8y ago
Not only that the GDPR requires that organisations provide the data in a standardised format that is easy to use / export.

berdon 8y ago

What use would this type of data be to the average consumer? Outside of the obvious question of ownership and argument of who owns the data - isn't this otherwise very similar to being in a plane crash and demanding the black box data? Surely the data, itself, isn't very helpful compared to the analysis of the data? Note: My question is in no way trying to argue against the consumer owning the data. I'm just wondering how this kind of data could be useful without access to the means to analyze it. Edit: Not sure why all the down votes. I explicitly tried to indicate I was asking a question about the data value and avoiding the ownership question. I, personally, think the data should be the device owner's property. But my opinion on ownership and my question wasn't related to the ownership.

danso 8y ago
In the cases mentioned, it's not the "average consumer", but the owners who get into crashes and who presumably have a great incentive to figure out what's needed to analyze the data. It's not as if there's only one objective way to analyze the data.
- berdon 8y ago
  There is only one objective way to analyze data if all it is in a bunch of meaningless numbers without context. That was what my question was about: if the data dump from tesla consists of arrays of numbers for state data for some ML algorithm, how would anyone other than Tesla analyze that?
- Maybestring 8y ago
  If the incentive is to support a law suit, then getting the discovery order was something they were going to need to do anyway.
kalms 8y ago
You don't usually own the plane that crashed. Unless if you're Elon Musk of course.
- berdon 8y ago

spaceisballer 8y ago

Serious question, Can you get data from any other car manufacturer? I know ICE cars collect information but do you have access to it?

foepys 8y ago
At least the local data can be accessed with OBD interfaces [1] most of the time. I don't know about stuff like theft prevention where the GPS location of the car is being constantly transmitted over GSM/UMTS/LTE, though. 1: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/On-board_diagnostics https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/On-board_diagnostics
Maybestring 8y ago
Typically, the manufacturer's diagnostic tool can download data from the fast stop recorder. An accident investigator should be able to access it for you.
ams6110 8y ago
You can get a connector and software and access pretty much anything on a laptop plugged in to the diagnostic port. Of course that software isn't free, and it's generally sold to repair shops so don't know how easy it would be for a consumer to buy.
PebblesRox 8y ago
We use Metromile for our insurance and the tracker we plug in has access to that info which they make available in a simplified form in their app.

emodendroket 8y ago

It seems like Tesla's on the fast-track to an Uber-tier reputation.

aerovistae 8y ago
Yeah, if any imperfect company is instantly equated with a pure evil company, then sure. Seems fair. But, then again, I can see how you'd think Tesla was pure evil too if you buy into all the endless nonsense published about them without doing any research.
- emodendroket 8y ago
  What is it you think is "nonsense" or inaccurate?
  - aerovistae 8y ago
    Not going to get sucked into this. If you have to ask, it implies you already believe that all of the dozens of articles published daily have total merit, in which case nothing I'm going to say will convince you because your position is pretty well set in concrete.
    - emodendroket 8y ago
      If I'm not already convinced Tesla is being unfairly attacked, I'm not amenable to changing my position? I find that line hard to understand.
      - aerovistae 8y ago
        True, perhaps you are amenable to it. But 95% of people encountered online already have their minds made up one way or the other pretty firmly, and I don't care to take the chance you're a unicorn. Which begs the question, why do I comment in these discussions at all? I do not know.

caio1982 8y ago

Danso, by no means I wanted to "stalk" you but I noticed you posted at least 5 negative/harsh articles about Tesla last month, which is fine to me as HN has a lot of Musk fanboys to counterbalance, anyways, I was wondering if you have any customer story to share about Tesla that affected you, i.e. did you own one and it was a bad car or did you lost money investing in them? I am genuinely interested in that background so if it may read offensive to you please let me know so maybe I can rephrase it! PS: I would like to buy a Tesla myself but I can't because of where I live, so I can only read people's account about them

pseudometa 8y ago
Doing it perhaps for the click-bait karma? Edit: I'm one of those people that believe in what Elon is doing and while I don't consider myself a fan-boy, I get plenty frustrated by all of the biased negativity I somehow feel the need to inject some balance by saying something. That may come across as only ever defending, but the amount of negative fluff articles is astonishing.
- danso 8y ago
  OK, you've accused me of submitting "click-bait karma" and "negative fluff articles". Care to elaborate on why you think the article under discussion is not legitimate?
  - pseudometa 8y ago
    It singles out Tesla and provides no broader context. Specifically there is no mention of the policies of other car companies. It is like saying that Kumo tires have been in 5 million car accidents. Sounds bad for Kumo, but there is no context to other types of tires. Will BMW or Lexus provide vehicle data after a crash? Will Google provide Android Auto data upon request?
    - danso 8y ago
      OK, so it's incumbent on you to show where other companies have used data in the way that Tesla has done in response to accidents. Here's a Guardian article from last year that made a related allegation about Tesla and user data: https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2017/apr/03/the-customer-is-always-wrong-tesla-lets-out-self-driving-car-data-when-it-suits https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2017/apr/03/the-custo... > The Guardian could not find a single case in which Tesla had sought the permission of a customer who had been involved in an accident before sharing detailed information from the customer’s car with the press when its self-driving software was called into question. Tesla declined to provide any such examples and disputed the description of its automation software, called Autopilot, as “self-driving”. I've Googled around but haven't been able to find instances of other companies releasing data in the wake of an incident, or being criticized by owners for not releasing data, though obviously the average car does not have the data systems that are standard on Tesla. When Facebook gets criticized in an article for exposing/sharing user data, do you ignore the article if it doesn't have a complete rundown of how every other tech company may or may not abuse user data?

pseudometa 8y ago

Isn't this true of any car company? BMW, Mercedes, and Lexus aren't going to hand over vehicle data. You can't just ask Google for your Android Auto data.

deleted 8y ago
[deleted]
FireBeyond 8y ago
But as a bonus, they're not likely to be so "proactive" about handing over your vehicle data or findings to the media to help manage their publicity process, either...
EpicEng 8y ago
Those companies aren't in the news blaming drivers for crashes which occur while using their "autopilot" tech. So you may be right, but context matters. Maybe someday it will be them in the hot seat, but today, it's Tesla.
- ams6110 8y ago
  As I recall, when Toyota was dealing with accidents involving electronic throttles and "unintended acceleration" they did publicly claim that the accidents were a case of drivers stepping on the throttle instead of the brake. (Note, this was separate from the real problem of floor mats interfering with the pedals, for which there was a recall). The NHTSA apparently agreed. Because proof that the ETCS-i caused the reported UAs was not found does not mean it could not occur. However, the testing and analysis described in this report did not find that TMC ETCS-i electronics are a likely cause of large throttle openings as described in the VOQs Acronyms and details in the report: https://one.nhtsa.gov/About-NHTSA/Press-Releases/ci.NHTSA%E2%80%93NASA-Study-of-Unintended-Acceleration-in-Toyota-Vehicles.print# https://one.nhtsa.gov/About-NHTSA/Press-Releases/ci.NHTSA%E2...

toss1 8y ago

Since there is clearly an interface to obtain the data, used at least by third-party vendor 'Crash Data Group', it seems it'd be possible to develop an external logger to plug in while driving. Such data loggers are commonly used in racecars, using either their own sensors, or in stock versions, also tied into the OBDII ports. It looks at everyghing from driver inputs, to engine performance, 6-axis G loads, etc. Seems it'd be pretty nice to get the data anyway to help manage your own driving (or check the habits of someone borrowing your car, like your kid), and in case of an incident, your own log of the events so you don't have to pester/subpoena Tesla.

vinceguidry 8y ago

Oh boy, I was so excited to get a Tesla when the time finally came, but if they're still pulling this crap when that happens, guess I'm getting a Benz instead.

toomuchtodo 8y ago
Try to get the data out of your GM or Ford airbag flash storage device (any vehicle with a data logger paired to the airbag subsystem, which is most cars on the road) and see how similar the process is. More “journalistic” nonsense. I agree they have a lot of legitimate issues (cash flow, scaling, retention, working conditions, process maturity, overpromising) to deal with, but can’t journalists focus on those instead of clickbait? Sidenote: if you take issue with this, sponsor a federal law to fix the problem through your legislator
- vinceguidry 8y ago
  Tesla's a new company, either they're holding themselves to a higher standard than the establishment or they aren't. If they're not then I'm going with the establishment. I can overlook a great great great many things in service of the cause of disrupting the auto industry. But this? Asking me to take personal responsibility with no legal recourse? This is the line they can't ask me to cross. If this is fake news, fine, it'll come out. If it's not, then sorry Tesla, can't do it.
  - toomuchtodo 8y ago
    That’s for each consumer to decide of course. I bought my Model S fully knowing what I was getting into. I consider them holding themselves to a higher standard, but as in politics, you can’t find someone who agrees with you 100% in office. Have to compromise, and this isn’t a hill I care to die on. As I stated above, it’s a public policy issue, not Tesla specific. > if you take issue with this, sponsor a federal law to fix the problem through your legislator
    - vinceguidry 8y ago

robrenaud 8y ago

This is a bunch of PR nonsense. > When asked why Tesla has an apparent policy requiring drivers who want their own data to file for a subpoena, a spokesperson framed it as a privacy issue. > “We handle all customer data in accordance with our Owner’s Manual and privacy policy, which clearly outlines the type of data we collect and the lengths that we go to protect a customers’ privacy in the process,” Tesla said via email, referencing back to a statement on the Tesla website about the company’s data collection practices. You can pay a third party $1000 to access the data, or Telsa will publicly shame your driving if they think you are in the wrong during a crash, but they really need to fight you to protect your privacy from yourself?

arghwhat 8y ago
Ah, how wonderful that the GDPR is now in place, making this as easy as issuing a subject access request.
- craftyguy 8y ago
  Only if you are in the EU. Many Tesla drivers aren't.
  - gameswithgo 8y ago
    just drive over to the EU. Is there a supercharge in the atlantic yet?
    - ccozan 8y ago
      Maybe the next big thing will be an electric boat with floating chargers powered by an solar array.
  - nemoniac 8y ago
    The GDPR also holds for European Tesla drivers outside the EU.
    - 8y ago

pwagland 8y ago

So this is something that has always kind of bugged me about Tesla. If you have an accident, they are more than happy to drop the crash data "proving" that you were at fault, look at the recent stories about running into a road barrier and the back of a firetruck for recent examples of this. And, of course, they don't ask you first if they can release it. However, if you want the data, you can't have it… you have to go to court to get it.

jopsen 8y ago
GDPR doesn't sound so bad now, does it? :)
- pwagland 8y ago
  Well, I'm (living as an) European, so I actually support GDPR anyway. But yes, I always wondered exactly what grounds they used to publish some of this data.
  - Negitivefrags 8y ago
    I'm curious why you think that being European implies you also support GDPR.
- kodablah 8y ago
  You have succinctly, albeit unintentionally, summed up why the GDPR is often seen as bad. The way I read it "the end goal is good and/or some part of it is good, so it is all good, right?" Requiring transparency requirements of companies like Tesla is laudable without a bunch of baggage and large sweeping changes. Unfortunately people often can't see the difference between intent and implementation and assume you are for both or against both.
- gonational 8y ago
  No. You know what sounds nice? Having the choice to not buy a Tesla. I don’t need Government™ to tell me what kind of contracts I can agree to.

MisterTea 8y ago

Can we please go back to selling physical things instead of EULAs? If I bought the car it's mine along with all the data I generate while inside of MY vehicle. This is why I will not buy newer computer filled vehicles; they don't belong to you anymore.

TeMPOraL 8y ago
Welcome to the next stage of the economy - now that we've created products for almost all daily needs, it's time to turn them into services. sigh. I'm with you and 'adrianN on this. I hate this direction and wish we could turn it back somewhat, or at least cover for the negative aspects of servicization of products. Regulation might be a necessary tool for that.
- MisterTea 8y ago
  It's starting to become maddening when you look around you and realize that in a few short years everything is shifting to SaaS. The part that really bothers me is it feels degrading in the sense that you are not allowed to control your own property anymore. This is when technology becomes oppressive.
  - gm-conspiracy 8y ago
    The hegemony is coming. There will be a not insignificant portion that is unwilling to embrace this.
insulanus 8y ago
Actually, I think we need a new, stronger rule. You must have guaranteed strong controls (the ability to review it, at the very least) over all data generated by virtue of your existence as a free agent. In the future, everything will have sensors in it. If we leave things as they are now, your Samsung refrigerator will be reporting back what you eat, and when. A good place to sell that data is to grocery stores and General Mills. That's great if you want your doctor to know that information, or if you need an alibi; "your honor, I was eating yoghurt at the time". Oh wait - bad example, because you own the refrigerator. My point was that in the future, when you go outside, everything will have recording devices in it. So, the public spaces and government rituals you are subjected to need to be dealt with, as well. Property rights no longer suffice for these situations.

gwbas1c 8y ago

Accelerator pedal immediately went from 0% to 100%? Really? Even I don't press my brake like that when parking.

MiguelHudnandez 8y ago
Sure seems like they are hiding something. It should be impossible to make a pressure sensor read 100% instantly. It would normally take 1/3 of a second and you would see the value increase gradually. Will autopilot even let you floor the accelerator with a car right in front of you?
- freerobby 8y ago
  > Will autopilot even let you floor the accelerator with a car right in front of you? Yes. Autopilot does not override any user input. This is a major reason why L2 system failure will always be the responsibility of the driver.
freerobby 8y ago
> Even I don't press my brake like that when parking. You might if you thought it was the brake and the car was accelerating.
- gm-conspiracy 8y ago
  Nope. Unless they have really shitty logging intervals, which would also be a problem.
  - freerobby 8y ago
    People do this all the time. Look at what Toyota went through -- drivers were claiming "sudden acceleration" but in reality they were slamming on the accelerator. https://www.caranddriver.com/features/its-all-your-fault-the-dot-renders-its-verdict-on-toyotas-unintended-acceleration-scare-feature https://www.caranddriver.com/features/its-all-your-fault-the...
deleted 8y ago

beauzero 8y ago

Stupid question but don't insurance companies require access to this data? Seems odd.

lightedman 8y ago
The NHTSA explicitly requires car makers to make this data public, so Tesla is flat-out wrong and needs to be heavily fined for breaking the regulation multiple times over.

gcheong 8y ago

Just a point of clarification as I was confused reading the description. The $1000 to access data isn't on an event by event basis. It's for the cables to connect to the EDR so presumably once you have them you can access all the data in the EDR at any time. http://www.crashdatagroup.com/tesla-edr-kit/ http://www.crashdatagroup.com/tesla-edr-kit/

slededit 8y ago
They can get the data remotely from a smashed car on the side of the road to slander the driver. But somehow if you want it, a $1000 cable is totally necessary.
- gm-conspiracy 8y ago
  Is it really that difficult to use a hacked femtocell and MitM the Tesla's telemetrics? And remember this story: https://arstechnica.com/cars/2016/03/man-hacks-tesla-firmware-finds-new-model-has-car-remotely-downgraded/ https://arstechnica.com/cars/2016/03/man-hacks-tesla-firmwar...
  - Matheus28 8y ago
    Communication with the mothership is done through a VPN. The only way to listen in is to have root access to the cid (that computer in the middle with the large screen).

decacorn1 8y ago

Toxic decision on Tesla’s part. Yet another fire needing to be put out that never should have started in the first place. They’re really making things more difficult for themselves.

bo1024 8y ago
This isn't really a single decision, it's an attitude baked into Tesla's philosophy. You don't own the car; you just decide where to drive it. Tesla owns your car in every meaningful way (except liability apparently).

kerng 8y ago

For European customers that's a non-issue thanks to GDPR.

ASalazarMX 8y ago

What's the deal with the recent flood of anti-Tesla news? Does someone want to buy Tesla stock, or is Tesla just no longer cool?

toomuchtodo 8y ago
This article [+] explains it pretty succinctly, with as little bias as possible (TL;DR Tesla is the most shorted stock in the US, while also endangering entrenched interests). [+] https://www.dailykos.com/stories/2018/5/29/1767826/-The-War-on-Tesla-Musk-and-the-Fight-for-the-Future https://www.dailykos.com/stories/2018/5/29/1767826/-The-War-... EDIT: below content moved up to this comment from danso reply in order to be more concise as well as to keep signal to post ratio high: I do my best to provide non-biased sources/citations, as well as provide arguments without any intellectual disingenuity. If you can find something that is inaccurate or subjective, please point it out. It's fairly obvious that the data used by Reveal was manipulated in their sensational Tesla piece, and I'm happy to continue to aggregate additional sources that bear that out. You left out the next six paragraphs that explain why there is no basis in fact for what Reveal wrote.
- danso 8y ago
  > Step up Reveal, an “independent journalism organization” to start “reporting” on Tesla. Quotation marks are normally considered to denote sarcasm, and boy do I ever mean it. Sounds like an article committed to defending Tesla. Not that there's anything wrong with that, but "with as little bias as possible" is debatable.
  - deleted 8y ago
    [deleted]
  - chc 8y ago
    I don't see how you take the writer saying "These people are reporting outright falsehoods and their falsehoods appear to closely match the talking points of a PR campaign" as an indication that they're committed to defending Tesla. If those facts are true, that seems like the sort of thing an unbiased analysis would explain.

mysticfluff 8y ago

A few months ago my valet backed my brand new X into a wall in the garage. I asked Tesla for the data to help use this for insurance. At no point was Tesla possibly at fault, but they still told me that in order to get the data I would need a subpoena.

thebluehawk 8y ago
I mean, that seems like a pretty open and shut case for insurance... What is the purpose of needing the additional data from Tesla?

danso 8y ago

I have an anecdote, somewhat in defense of Tesla: a few years ago I was the victim of an armed robbery. One of the things I lost was my iPod touch, which was logged into a few media services, including Netflix. A few days later, logging into my Netflix account, I noticed that my "Recently played/Continue watching" list had some things I had never watched (including the show "Prison Break"). I called Netflix customer support and asked if I could get location/IP logs. The Netflix support person was very sympathetic but said that it was not company policy to release that info. I didn't ask for the issue to be elevated, or ask about a subpoena (I assume Netflix would respond to a subpoena). But IMO, the difference between my situation with Netflix, and Tesla is: 1. Netflix does not seem to have a practice of divulging my user data in a public forum. 2. The circumstances for my data request were unusual -- it's not as if every time a Netflix-equipped device gets stolen, Netflix is expected to respond, or even be aware of it. But presumably, Tesla has a data process ready in the event of every kind of accident, no matter the actual cause or circumstances. In other words, what I was asking from Netflix was refused because they don't have a standard operating procedure for responding to info about IP/location requests. If such a thing were needed, it's not hard to imagine Netflix making it a service, just as FB and Google data takeouts include login location history. But Tesla does have standard procedure for retrieving, storing, and transmitting vehicle logs, including divulging the data publicly without being compelled by the government. Which is why users seem to have a greater expectation that Tesla should be able to send them their own data.

vkou 8y ago
Under GDPR, Netflix would probably have to divulge this data.

dsfyu404ed 8y ago

>But Tesla also took time to publish a blog post characterizing Cordaro as someone who did not take care of his Model S. >"The suspension ball joint experienced very abnormal rust,” Tesla said of his car, adding that Cordaro “lives down such a long dirt road that it required two tow trucks to retrieve the car.” The car, Tesla also added, was “caked in dirt." I'll be one of the first people to tell you that Pennsylvanians are a bunch of loud mouth complainers who don't really have it as bad as they say when it comes to vehicle rust. However, the idea that a low volume, relatively new (there are no 20yo Teslas let alone Teslas that have spend those 20yr in salt states) car company, primarily located in California (!!!), that primarily recruits in California (!!!), is going to be able to determine "normal corrosion" looks like is laughable. Even established car companies can't accurately and consistently predict corrosion 10yr out. Tesla doesn't even have a big enough data-set to make that prediction, let alone the expertise.

saalweachter 8y ago
When I bought a used truck out of PA I was alarmed by the quantity of rust on the frame, with chunks flaking off here and there. My mechanic assures me it's holding up fine, with below-average rust for its age.

exabrial 8y ago

It would appear that US law states that the owner of the vehicle owns the Event Data. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Event_data_recorder https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Event_data_recorder

lightedman 8y ago
No. From your link: "NHTSA also required that all manufacturers make their EDR data publicly available." It is public information.

heisenbit 8y ago

For Europeans the GDPR may come to rescue. This is data that is highly personal and thus getting a copy of it or having the right to get it erased should be possible.

radley 8y ago

1) Does Tesla enforce an arbitration clause with their customers? Most (shady?) companies do this these days. 2) If so, can the customer actually get a court order in arbitration?

macinjosh 8y ago

I am curious if GDPR has any impact on customer's rights to this data?

funwie 8y ago

What if this request was under GDPR jurisdiction?