4 ms·

That is pretty shady of Ford. They were one of the few American car companies I kind of respected. Not anymore. > Autel violated the anti-circumvention provisi

That is pretty shady of Ford. They were one of the few American car companies I kind of respected. Not anymore. > Autel violated the anti-circumvention provisions of the Digital Millennium Copyright Act by writing a program to defeat the "encryption technology and obfuscation" that Ford used to make the file difficult to read. This sounds a lot like Sega Enterprises Ltd. v. Accolade, Inc. Check out https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sega_v._Accolade https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sega_v._Accolade

anjbe 12y ago
It is like Sega v. Accolade, in the sense that it’s clear abuse of IP law to limit competition. But there are two major differences: Although there were accusations of unauthorized copying in Sega v. Accolade, the major issue was that Sega forced the console to display their trademark upon successfully loading a game, and then claimed that Accolade was committing trademark infringement by making a game that could successfully boot. Additionally, the DMCA didn’t exist back then, so violating copy protection wasn’t actually against the law on its own. There have actually been several copyright cases with good results (Sega v. Accolade, Galoob v. Nintendo, Sony v. Bleem, Sony v. Connectix, Lexmark v. Static Control), but so many cases that have ended in a negative result (Blizzard v. Jung, Universal v. Reimerdes, Macrovision v. Sima) did so largely due to the DMCA. This is why, although I hope Ford loses this case, I hope even more for active effort to fix the DMCA through Congress, not the judiciary.
- _nullandnull_ 12y ago
  Thank you for the response. I have not heard of some of those cases. I'm looking forward to reading up on those.
PythonicAlpha 12y ago
Yes, Henry Ford also was one of the big business man in history, that realized that also his well-being was depending of the well-being of his workers. But since that time, the shareholder value has taken over the government. (Edit: Tried to correct my bad English, sorry!)
- danielweber 12y ago
  that realized that also his well-being was depending of the well-being of his workers Ford was incredibly nosy into workers' lives. If you wanted the infamous "five dollars a day," you had to let management make sure you were living decently at home, including the wife staying at home if she had a husband. But since this time, the shareholder value has taken over the government. I'm not quite sure, but I think this is saying that Ford got taken over by the government following bankruptcy. But Ford (unlike GM and Chrysler) did not go bankrupt.
  - dmoy 12y ago
    I interpreted that as corporate governance, not US government.
    - deleted 12y ago
      [deleted]
      - whatusername 12y ago
        Maybe "Zeitgeist" would be a reasonable fit?
  - robkix 12y ago
    In this case "the government" refers to the upper management of Ford, or at least that's how I read your parents post. To reword: > But since this time, the shareholder value has taken over the government. But since that time, Ford management only cares about maximizing shareholder value.
    - deleted 12y ago
      [deleted]
  - asgard1024 12y ago
    > Ford was incredibly nosy into workers' lives. Not sure about Ford, but it's the same thing with Tomas Bata, famous Czech shoemaking enterpreneur and contemporary of Ford. He is also still lauded as a progressive by some, and he was for his era (he built homes for his workers, paid them well, etc.); however, judging from the today's moral standards, we would consider him very elitist and also nosy. For instance, he put part of employee's savings into his own bank.
SyncTheory13 12y ago
Same here - I just purchased my first brand-new car from a dealership, and never thought it'd be a Ford. I've really come to respect them in the last year and they have actually become a close second in my top list under Tesla... But this really hurts. I hope they realize how bad this looks in modern times.

anjbe 12y ago

It is like Sega v. Accolade, in the sense that it’s clear abuse of IP law to limit competition. But there are two major differences: Although there were accusations of unauthorized copying in Sega v. Accolade, the major issue was that Sega forced the console to display their trademark upon successfully loading a game, and then claimed that Accolade was committing trademark infringement by making a game that could successfully boot. Additionally, the DMCA didn’t exist back then, so violating copy protection wasn’t actually against the law on its own. There have actually been several copyright cases with good results (Sega v. Accolade, Galoob v. Nintendo, Sony v. Bleem, Sony v. Connectix, Lexmark v. Static Control), but so many cases that have ended in a negative result (Blizzard v. Jung, Universal v. Reimerdes, Macrovision v. Sima) did so largely due to the DMCA. This is why, although I hope Ford loses this case, I hope even more for active effort to fix the DMCA through Congress, not the judiciary.

_nullandnull_ 12y ago
Thank you for the response. I have not heard of some of those cases. I'm looking forward to reading up on those.

PythonicAlpha 12y ago

Yes, Henry Ford also was one of the big business man in history, that realized that also his well-being was depending of the well-being of his workers. But since that time, the shareholder value has taken over the government. (Edit: Tried to correct my bad English, sorry!)

danielweber 12y ago
that realized that also his well-being was depending of the well-being of his workers Ford was incredibly nosy into workers' lives. If you wanted the infamous "five dollars a day," you had to let management make sure you were living decently at home, including the wife staying at home if she had a husband. But since this time, the shareholder value has taken over the government. I'm not quite sure, but I think this is saying that Ford got taken over by the government following bankruptcy. But Ford (unlike GM and Chrysler) did not go bankrupt.
- dmoy 12y ago
  I interpreted that as corporate governance, not US government.
  - deleted 12y ago
    [deleted]
    - whatusername 12y ago
      Maybe "Zeitgeist" would be a reasonable fit?
- robkix 12y ago
  In this case "the government" refers to the upper management of Ford, or at least that's how I read your parents post. To reword: > But since this time, the shareholder value has taken over the government. But since that time, Ford management only cares about maximizing shareholder value.
  - deleted 12y ago
    [deleted]
- asgard1024 12y ago
  > Ford was incredibly nosy into workers' lives. Not sure about Ford, but it's the same thing with Tomas Bata, famous Czech shoemaking enterpreneur and contemporary of Ford. He is also still lauded as a progressive by some, and he was for his era (he built homes for his workers, paid them well, etc.); however, judging from the today's moral standards, we would consider him very elitist and also nosy. For instance, he put part of employee's savings into his own bank.

SyncTheory13 12y ago

Same here - I just purchased my first brand-new car from a dealership, and never thought it'd be a Ford. I've really come to respect them in the last year and they have actually become a close second in my top list under Tesla... But this really hurts. I hope they realize how bad this looks in modern times.