gamebred26

iTrader: (19)

yeah i guess i was more pissed and so were my boys about not being told this was being done.

most are aware of it now.

but before if you didn't ask they would not tell you they are doing it.

it's ok i have helped a few people now get in to their ecus...anyway.

Jumperalex

Actually, I'm paying for whatever we agree tha I'm paying for. Or said another way, I would never pay for a tune where I did not have universal access to the code. Said yet another way, if a tuner does not explain this restriction to me, and have me sign an agreement stating such, then I 100% have the right to universal access to the code. I'm talking legal AND moral right.

Unlike your music example, I am paying a tuner a fee-for-service. Last time I checked I didn't pay Rhianna to write and perform a song just for me, though I would if I could afford it And even then copyright law would give her only certain rights to control what was done with that song UNLESS our contract explicitly gave her more/less rights. Just consider the difference in rights between self-produced artists, full "Record Deal" artists, and whatever you call those people are on staff that write music/jingles for commercials, TV shows, etc ... you know the people who's names you've NEVER heard of.

This is ignoring the fact that a tune's [car not song] status as a creative work worthy of copyright is not established in law. And that is vice a trade secret which is only protected so long as YOU protect it. Once it's out it's out, and only a patent can protect it. Good luck patenting every single tune for every single car, or even the method (method patents are bull**** but that is my opinion) which I would contend you are unlikely to be able to prove there wasn't prior art for the method of tuning a car.

So ... while I agree it is scumball to completely troll for other tuner's stuff, it 1) is not illegal and 2) can easily be defended against by continuing to provide something to the market that is fresh, new and/or superior. In that respect, this punk *** ***** dyno guy can steal all the maps he wants, but if he still generally sucks, he's never REALLY going to steal business from a real tuner worthy of my money.

Dennis F

iTrader: (22)

What you have to remember is your tune is based off of Mitsubishi code already made, so therefore a tuner is a thief just as much as the scumbag at the dyno place.

It is not like you made all the code yourself, you just freshened up Mitsu's code.

Doesn't sound so nice does it?

Any cockstrap that locks an ECU should be shot, mamed and beaten with a glass *****.

If you had an electrician out to your house to update your electric panel, does he have rights because he did the work even though the customer pays for the house, materials and labor for the update?

Music is a whole different can of worms, it is copywrited. Tuning is just something a handfull of peaople can do and offer a service to make a few extra bucks.

Don't get me wrong, I have dealt with a few of them and one of them locked my ECU. I wanted it unlocked but the big mouth only told me I could have it unlocked if I returned it to stock, but I would not be recieving any money back.

Nice guy I tell ya.

My ECU, my money, my car and my tune.

RazorLab

iTrader: (8)

I've had this happen. Car popped a head gasket. Owner came in saying the tune did it. I pulled the tune. The maps where no longer the same as when they left the shop when it was tuned by me.

Oops. Nice try.

I've learned that the Tuner is always the first scapegoat. Be it a new part that doesn't perform, a failure, or something else. It sucks unfortunately.

Jumperalex

Actually there is no thievery involved. We, and our tuners, are 100% in our rights to have access to the code for a car we purchased.

Despite initial attempts by the auto industry to claim IP over the code and restrict our ability to access it, they lost the battle because they were running afoul of the Magnuson-Moss Warranty Act (http://www.ftc.gov/bcp/conline/pubs/.../warranty.shtm and http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magnuson-Moss_Warranty_Act) because it smelled a little too much like tieing

Insisting that the code was theirs and theirs alone meant you pretty much had no choice but to use a dealer for service ... that is illegal per the MMW Act unless the service, or parts (like oil filters and oil) are provided free of charge.

Independant mechanics are left completely out of the loop if the code is locked away from them. That in turn would mean customers lose the choice to use a competing non-dealer mechanic.

So now not only are you allowed to have and modify the code (at your warranty peril of course) but the auto makers had to publish at least some minimum specs (not enough IMO) to allow independant mechanics to work on the cars and thus keep from running afoul of the FTC.

And yes cockstraps should be flogged >;-)


From the FTC site,
While not directly pointing towards the code/ecu issue it is the basis / logic for not allowing the auto makers to lock us into using them because they are the only ones who can effectively read the ECU.

Mattjin

Can you describe the difference between paying to use Rihanna's music in your own privacy (which is what you do when you buy or download her music), or a tuner who you pay to write you custom tuning. Is there a difference? It is all code that you use that was written by another. There are a million musicians out there putting out crap songs, but so too are there tuners who do the same. What if it were only a few hundred dollars to have her write a custom song for you, do you think she would want to protect her income with a passworded CD (or something) so you didnt hand it out to all of your friends? Music isnt a different can of worms. It is as close to this industry as you can get. I am not talking legal, I am talking literally and morally. Electrician... I am not saying the tuner has rights to the car. I am saying the tuner has rights to his knowledge and his written form of it. DennisF, your car, your ECU, your tune, NOT YOUR KNOWLEDGE OR CODE. Choose more carefully in future and you should have asked in the first place. You are not just paying for a service. You are paying for a lasting item of code. You can use it forever, you just shouldnt change it or share it.

I already mentioned that all reflashers are stealing OEM code. It is why I mentioned tuners starting from scratch as well. If the reflash-only tuners think they know alot, give them a blank slate and see if they can produce the results. Its not easy and its not quick for novices to do well.

You have to remember that not all tuners are good and not all are crap. As with any industry you need to choose carefully. Find the tuner who has experience, reputation, and a large happy customer base. If you choose an ebay/forum/email tuner and later have problems then you have nobody to blame but yourself. If you get a crap tune, go back and get it fixed. Simple. All good tuner will back their work. Also if you are paying for a good tune you should never need to go in and look at the map. You might want to, but that may be part of a good tuners conditions that you dont go in and look.

It is the customer that needs to do their homework and ask the questions. If tuner is good, then it is also in the customers best interest to help protect the tuners business too. Hand out their work and soon their business fails. No more good tuner for the future. So to prevent any issues just be sure to open your mouth and ask the tuner BEFORE any work is done whether it will be locked, and if it is locked ask exactly and clearly why and what are the conditions that go with it.

Razor, I see it more than you want to know about. Reflashing is only a very small part of my work, with most being custom work starting from scratch with various ECU systems. Here in Sydney I would take a guess at around 30 to 40 dynoes and maybe double that in tuners trying to open a shop. Now if I know how to setup a common car very well, and nearby a new guy starts up and is offering dirt-cheap tunes and doing a crap job, wouldn't you think it is in my interest to prevent any of my knowledge getting into his hands? Hypothetical BTW. Other tuners hear me, but the customers on here don't see it that way. But it is the customers that go in and change things and then will come back and complain when something isnt running properly. Its not EcuFlash related but we had a customer do something similar a week ago. Came in with problems then we find they undid the mods to his custom distributor, put in the wrong plugs, and generally screwed with everything. We got a phone call saying the car is running like crap, fix it!!! You are correct, the tuner is ALWAYS the scapegoat because it is the part of the car where most customers dont understand and cant see what is going on, so it must be the tuners fault.

Anway, again I will repeat. I prefer not to lock out my ECU's, but there are certain conditions where I will think about it. I am not saying it is right or wrong, but just for people to understand both sides of the coin. But I can see that it is pointless for me to try and be neutral because 99.9% of people on this forum are customers and a good percentage have been burned.

Jumperalex

2004: http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/nation...arheads15.html

2005: http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2005/...in668503.shtml

2007: http://209.85.215.104/search?q=cache...H-08-05-07.pdf

http://www.righttorepair.org/

and this is why no one, to my knowledge, has been sued or shut down by the automakers for pulling and modding the code. They aren't THAT stupid. Shocking that they "get it" way better than the RIAA/MPAA/MAFIA

Jumperalex

Matt, the difference is that I didn't pay her to write it. When I purchased that disc (I'm gonna choke on this as I write it) I supposedly entered into a license agreement (not even with her but her producer/distributor, whomever) that I can use if for private non-commercial blah blah blah use. No where was I granted, in return for my consideration, the right to do whatever I want with her "code" of music. I never paid for that music to actually be written.

When I pay a tuner i can assure you that *I* would never pay them to tune my car with the understanding that I didn't have the right to do whatever I wanted with that resulting code. And without a contract stating that I can't do anything I want it would come down to a deciding if that was an actual case of intellectual property. I've never heard of legal cases on stuff like this which means its open. But there is enough other stuff that would lead me to guess that the scales would tilt towards the car owner and not the tuner.

Interestingly, reuse of Rihanna's "code" IS allowed in some instances under fair-use, although last I checked court cases on sampling have, IMO, leaned to far towards the original IP owner and away from what is considered fair-use and derivative work. But I'm hardly the only one with an opinion on that one

But in the context of the tuners "stealing" the OEM code, I've addressed that. It is not theft for mechanics to get at that code to diagnose and repair, and being able to modify it to fix a problem[cough] P0300 [cough] is quickly being seen as not only allowed but possibly mandatory. For emissions related info the auto makers have all but been forced to publish info. I know when I bought my car I did not sign anything that said I was only licensing the code in the ECU. So my taking it to a tuner to modify

FYI, the algorithms are closer to IP and the music example, than the tables of settings. Modifying those tables would be even less like music. If there was anyone who *might* have a legit legal and moral claim over the algorithms it would be modifiers like Tephra, but again he would have to prove that it was actually novel and creative. Being first is not what is required for IP / patent protection, being creative / novel is. Sometimes the only thing you get for your hard efforts is the competitive benefit of being first, you don't always deserve legal protection from competition.

And yes I'm talking legal and moral too. Music is not the same as tables which is not the same as algorithms that are NOT novel, new, or creative works. And beyond that if I paid Rhianna to write me a song, and our contract said I owned the IP ... then yes she has no claim against me if I decide to give that music to all of my friends or even sell it to them. That is how most house musicians work ... fee for service. Or think about software, you write code under contract for a company, THEY own it unless your contract says otherwise. They can modify and sell it if they like. They own it, just like I own my tune, but I don't own Rhianna's music. The military is notorious for being STUPID and not writing contracts where they own the code. Next thing you know we're getting screwed by our own stupidity by being locked into a single vendor who then gouges us because there is no competition for upgrades / maintenance. Drives me CRAZY. but I digress and I'm repeating myself now

EDIT: replace everywhere that I said "fee for service" with "work for hire" because ... I'm a dumbass. No wonder I couldn't find a good link discussing fee for service that described what I was talking about ...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Work_for_hire

http://www.copyright.gov/circs/circ9.html

For a definition of "works" http://www.copyright.gov/circs/circ1.pdf

And yes Matt I know you are Downunder, but I'm not so I'm talking from my POV hehe

Jumperalex

PS, I do understand the DESIRE and the LOGIC for a tuner to want to lock their code for both competitive and id10t-customer reasons. But it is still a losing battle, if you release the code into the world, people WILL get it and they WILL break whatever lock you put on it, just ask the music and movie industry how well their DRM is working. The time you spend fighting a losing battle is time you aren't spending innovating and generally providing a service that customers want to pay for. Easy to say from this side of the counter I know, but it is what it is [shrug].

Dennis F

iTrader: (22)

Mattjin, I think we have a slight misunderstanding.

It is NOT ok for you to lock an ECU you did not buy or pay for, for a customer.

I do think it would be ****ty for someone to pass that tune around. I think they should also be punched in the ******* for it.

At the same time, anyone who locked my ECU, that is mine, I make payments on it every month (the car, ECU is a necessity) should be punched in the ******* as well. Just because they can go in with their tools and adjust accordingly to make things linear, does not give them any right what so ever to lock another person out.

I paid for a service, one I leave with therefore it is mine, all mine. No longer is it yours because there is no copy write on it or a patten. You have no say in it once I leave, at all.

At the same time as a customer, I should be smart enough to honor your work and not freelance it. That is just an ethics thing.

JohnBradley

iTrader: (30)

The Music analogy is not matched to what we are doing, so lets change it up a little:

Rhianna (for whatever reason she is being used) writes a song and it gets covered or sampled. She gets money called royalties because it is copyrighted. Person B (the jackass) has no intellectual rights to the song but can be allowed to use it provided they pay a fee. They dont pay a fee they get sued, which her lawyers are all about since they get paid a couple ways on the deal.

Her copyright is like a tuner locking the ROM. If all parties are made aware that this is happening its no different than the warning at the beginning of a DVD, VHS, whatever, or the inside of a label. Its out there that they dont want it copied, burned, distributed in any fashion.

If it happens anyway (even though you own the CD) its still violating that copyright or agreement. I dont think that everyone that locks a ROM is cockbag. Most software can unlock it, and if it has a ROM ID that has been changed the immobiliser is still there so you can always start over.

I think its funny that no one has complained about ECUtek or COBB making it impossible to either read the tune or flash over a ROM, yet a shop based tuner doing it seems to deserve a life sentence with hard labor.

nj1266

iTrader: (6)

That is a very bad analogy. The tuner DID NOT create the rom. Mitsu created it. It is not the tuner's intellectual property to begin with. The singer, on the otherhand, created the song from scratch, so that make it her IP.

You or I, simply add value to an already existing rom. Maybe, that value belongs to the tuner, but the base rom is NOT yours to begin with. It either belongs to Mitsu or to the owner of the car who purchased it from Mitsu.

JohnBradley

iTrader: (30)

I stand corrected on the analogy, but my point is that the tune IS my intellectual property.

For instance where would the world of MIVEC be if I had been a cockbag and never shared or anyone for that matter? Or Tephra hadn't shared the patched ROM's? We did work and could have locked everyone out fairly if we had wanted because mitsu provided a tool (like a piano) but we made the music.

Its academic at this point for me to discuss it since I dont believe in locking it anyway, but its also not "moral" to decry those that do as long as they are upfront about it. What do you think about ECUtek and COBB?

Jumperalex

The real problem is that modifying the tables in a car's ecu is NOTHING like writing a song and all comparisons fail. I don't deny that it takes knowledge, time, patience, and skill. there is nothing wrong with me, the owner of that car, ecu, and the tuning that I paid for doing whatever I want with it.

The emotional side of me gets the idea that it seems unethical to share that tune with all my friends. Yet intellectually I am amused by the irony of following, "I own it and can do what I want with it," by the notion that exercising that right is somehow wrong or unethical.

Jumperalex

I apprecite the work you guys have done for the community but "where would the world be if you had never shared?" ... chances are someone else would have come along and done it. And while no one else knows about it, locking-out can be effective, and so long as your customer knows it, an acceptable business practice. But once the cat IS out of the bag, you waste your time and rick becoming irrelavant. And of course NOT telling your customers about your lockout is, as I think we've mostly all agreed on, is a real bull**** and frankly borderline illegal activity since you prevent me from getting service at a competing mechanic (because you didn't tell me ahead of time).

ECUtek and COBB ... well I'm voting with my wallet so that should answer your quesiton. Of course if you caught from another thread that Im' a bit of an old school DSMer then you know I'm the cheapest mammajamma alive But I would also NEVER buy into a system that locked me in. Hence no i-**** for me either