3 ms·

Question: Could ford one day be denied access? I know there is a physical adapter, but could a certain mercurial billionaire one day decide to restrict access v

Question: Could ford one day be denied access? I know there is a physical adapter, but could a certain mercurial billionaire one day decide to restrict access via software?

baron816 3y ago
Hopefully they structured the contract so that no vehicles sold under it could lose access even if the contract is not renewed for new vehicles.
- blibble 3y ago
  I thought the evidence was Musk considers adherence to signed contracts as something only his counterparty needs to comply with
  - basiccalendar74 3y ago
    Twitter board disagrees
justrealist 3y ago
I'm sure Ford's agreement with Tesla ensures continuity of service, with a lot of heads-up if Tesla wants to terminate.
bdcravens 3y ago
They block access to current Tesla owners for different reasons, so of course. https://www.carscoops.com/2023/09/tesla-owner-loses-supercharging-privileges-after-insurance-company-mistakenly-lists-car-as-totaled/ https://www.carscoops.com/2023/09/tesla-owner-loses-supercha...
- ggreer 3y ago
  That's not "no reason". The insurance company incorrectly listed the car as totaled and the DMV issued a salvage title for it. Tesla doesn't want chargers or vehicles to be damaged or destroyed, so they have a policy of disabling supercharging on cars with salvage titles. That Tesla didn't fix the issue until a news crew contacted them is an indictment of Tesla's customer support, not some sort of fickleness where they gleefully disable supercharging for random cars. Edit: The parent comment originally said "They block access to current Tesla owners for no reason."
  - deleted 3y ago
    [deleted]
_ea1k 3y ago
Ultimately that depends on how the contract is structured. It is technically possible for them to remove third party access. Having said that, I think this actually solves some problems for them in the long run. I doubt they'd have any interest in limiting access.
- sandworm101 3y ago
  I would prefer agnostic hardware, a scheme that would not allow anyone to cut off access. Car companies long ago abandoned similar attempts to limit gas for particular vehicles, the one remaining limit being the nozzle standard so diesel doesn't get pumps into non-diesel cars, but even there there is a bypass. The concept of DRM to "gas up" my electric car just rubs me the wrong way. I hesitate to trust that Ford and Tesla will always remain friends.
  - _ea1k 3y ago
    I'm not sure what you mean by that. A gas station owner is certainly free to onyl service certain brands and control access in any way that they choose. Customers would simply be free to take their business elsewhere. In practice, station owners would rarely (if ever) choose such an option. Similarly, these NACS equipped vehicles can use any open NACS station, or any open CCS station via an adapter. There is nothing in the standard that limits charge station providers to only Tesla. Any charge station (whether CCS or NACS) could implement restrictions in any way that they see fit. The most common cases of this are CCS stations at dealers, where they often restrict it to their company's vehicles. It is unlikely that a public charge company would want to cut themselves off from revenue by severely limiting who could use their site.
    - NewJazz 3y ago
      It is a lot easier to restrict charging because of how payments work.
      - _ea1k 3y ago
        Meh, Costco controls fueling based on member status. Lots of company depot fueling stations exist, with various methods of access control. Access control isn't that hard, if the provider wants it.
kccqzy 3y ago
Technically, of course. Contractually, I am pretty certain the Ford lawyers had thought about it when they negotiated the contract.
rs999gti 3y ago
It depends on the contract. Everyone thought Android and Car Play were a standard for cars, but nope GM went their own way with it.
- Tagbert 3y ago
  not really a contract issue. GM was not under any obligation to Apple to continue to use their service. GM seems to not care about it's customer's desires in this issue, either.

Question: Could ford one day be denied access? I know there is a physical adapter, but could a certain mercurial billionaire one day decide to restrict access via software?

baron816 3y ago

Hopefully they structured the contract so that no vehicles sold under it could lose access even if the contract is not renewed for new vehicles.

blibble 3y ago
I thought the evidence was Musk considers adherence to signed contracts as something only his counterparty needs to comply with
- basiccalendar74 3y ago
  Twitter board disagrees

justrealist 3y ago

I'm sure Ford's agreement with Tesla ensures continuity of service, with a lot of heads-up if Tesla wants to terminate.

bdcravens 3y ago

They block access to current Tesla owners for different reasons, so of course. https://www.carscoops.com/2023/09/tesla-owner-loses-supercharging-privileges-after-insurance-company-mistakenly-lists-car-as-totaled/ https://www.carscoops.com/2023/09/tesla-owner-loses-supercha...

ggreer 3y ago
That's not "no reason". The insurance company incorrectly listed the car as totaled and the DMV issued a salvage title for it. Tesla doesn't want chargers or vehicles to be damaged or destroyed, so they have a policy of disabling supercharging on cars with salvage titles. That Tesla didn't fix the issue until a news crew contacted them is an indictment of Tesla's customer support, not some sort of fickleness where they gleefully disable supercharging for random cars. Edit: The parent comment originally said "They block access to current Tesla owners for no reason."
- deleted 3y ago
  [deleted]

_ea1k 3y ago

Ultimately that depends on how the contract is structured. It is technically possible for them to remove third party access. Having said that, I think this actually solves some problems for them in the long run. I doubt they'd have any interest in limiting access.

sandworm101 3y ago
I would prefer agnostic hardware, a scheme that would not allow anyone to cut off access. Car companies long ago abandoned similar attempts to limit gas for particular vehicles, the one remaining limit being the nozzle standard so diesel doesn't get pumps into non-diesel cars, but even there there is a bypass. The concept of DRM to "gas up" my electric car just rubs me the wrong way. I hesitate to trust that Ford and Tesla will always remain friends.
- _ea1k 3y ago
  I'm not sure what you mean by that. A gas station owner is certainly free to onyl service certain brands and control access in any way that they choose. Customers would simply be free to take their business elsewhere. In practice, station owners would rarely (if ever) choose such an option. Similarly, these NACS equipped vehicles can use any open NACS station, or any open CCS station via an adapter. There is nothing in the standard that limits charge station providers to only Tesla. Any charge station (whether CCS or NACS) could implement restrictions in any way that they see fit. The most common cases of this are CCS stations at dealers, where they often restrict it to their company's vehicles. It is unlikely that a public charge company would want to cut themselves off from revenue by severely limiting who could use their site.
  - NewJazz 3y ago
    It is a lot easier to restrict charging because of how payments work.
    - _ea1k 3y ago
      Meh, Costco controls fueling based on member status. Lots of company depot fueling stations exist, with various methods of access control. Access control isn't that hard, if the provider wants it.

kccqzy 3y ago

Technically, of course. Contractually, I am pretty certain the Ford lawyers had thought about it when they negotiated the contract.

rs999gti 3y ago

It depends on the contract. Everyone thought Android and Car Play were a standard for cars, but nope GM went their own way with it.

Tagbert 3y ago
not really a contract issue. GM was not under any obligation to Apple to continue to use their service. GM seems to not care about it's customer's desires in this issue, either.