A Fight Over the Right to Repair Cars Turns Ugly

Yet another attack on the rights of Americans to own their own information. Just because you purchased a new tool/auto does not mean others can purchase the rights to collect data or use the information from your purchase.
HK>

In the wake of a voter-approved law, Subaru and Kia dealers in Massachusetts have disabled systems that allow remote starts and send maintenance alerts.

Photograph: Reza Estakhrian/Getty Images

Chie Ferrelli loved her Subaru SUV, which she bought in 2020 because it made her feel safe. So when it was time for her husband, Marc, to purchase his own new car last summer, they returned to the Subaru dealer near their home in southeast Massachusetts. But there was a catch, one that made the couple mad: Marc’s sedan wouldn’t have access to the company's telematics system and the app that went along with it. No remote engine start in the freezing New England winter; no emergency assistance; no automated messages when the tire pressure was low or the oil needed changing. The worst part was that if the Ferrellis lived just a mile away, in Rhode Island, they would have the features. They bought the car. But thinking back, Marc says, if he had known about the issue before stepping into the dealership he “probably would have gone with Toyota.”

Subaru disabled the telematics system and associated features on new cars registered in Massachusetts last year as part of a spat over a right-to-repair ballot measure approved, overwhelmingly, by the state’s voters in 2020. The measure, which has been held up in the courts, required automakers to give car owners and independent mechanics more access to data about the car’s internal systems.

But the “open data platform” envisioned by the law doesn’t exist yet, and automakers have filed suit to prevent the initiative from taking effect. So first Subaru and then Kia turned off their telematics systems on their newest cars in Massachusetts, irking drivers like the Ferrellis. “This was not to comply with the law—compliance with the law at this time is impossible—but rather to avoid violating it,” Dominick Infante, a spokesperson for Subaru, wrote in a statement. Kia did not respond to a request for comment.

The dispute is the latest chapter in long-running disagreements between the state and automakers over the right to repair, or consumers’ ability to fix their own cars or control who does it for them. In 2012, Massachusetts voters passed a similar ballot measure that, for the first time, required automakers to use nonproprietary onboard diagnostics ports on every vehicle.

“Don’t you have any friends in Rhode Island whose address you can use?”

Massachusetts Subaru dealer to Marc Ferrelli

A year later, the initiative formed the basis of a nationwide agreement. Automakers guaranteed that car owners and mechanics would have access to the same kinds of tools, software, and information that they give to their own franchised car dealers. As a result, today anyone can buy a tool that will plug into a car’s port, accessing diagnostic codes that clue them in to what’s wrong. Mechanics are able to purchase tools and subscriptions to manuals that guide them through repairs.

So for years, the right-to-repair movement has held up the automotive industry as the rare place where things were going right. Independent mechanics remain competitive: 70 percent of auto repairs happen at independent shops, according to the US trade association that represents them. Backyard tinkerers abound.

But new vehicles are now computers on wheels, gathering an estimated 25 gigabytes per hour of driving data—the equivalent of five HD movies. Automakers say that lots of this information isn’t useful to them and is discarded. But some—a vehicle’s location, how specific components are operating at a given moment—is anonymized and sent to the manufacturers; sensitive, personally identifying information like vehicle identification numbers are handled, automakers say, according to strict privacy principles.


These days, much of the data is transmitted wirelessly. So independent mechanics and right-to-repair proponents worry that automakers will stop sending vital repair information to the diagnostic ports. That would hamper the independents and lock customers into relationships with dealerships. Independent mechanics fear that automakers could potentially “block what they want” when an independent repairer tries to access a car’s technified guts, Glenn Wilder, the owner of an auto and tire repair shop in Scituate, Massachusetts, told lawmakers in 2020.

The fight could have national implications for not only the automotive industry but any gadget that transmits data to its manufacturer after a customer has paid money and walked away from the sales desk. “I think of it as ‘right to repair 2.0,’” says Kyle Wiens, a longtime right-to-repair advocate and the founder of iFixit, a website that offers tools and repair guides. “The auto world is farther along than the rest of the world is,” Wiens says. Independents “already have access to information and parts. Now they’re talking about data streams. But that doesn't make the fight any less important.”

“I think that they could create a platform that would meet some of the requirements of what the legislation is calling for, but I wouldn't want it in my own car.”

Josh Siegel, assistant engineering professor, Michigan State

Automakers say opening the car’s mechanical data to anyone would be dangerous—and a violation of federal law. In November 2020, just after voters approved the ballot measure, a trade group that represents most major automakers sued Massachusetts in federal court. The group, the Alliance for Automotive Innovation, argued that the federal government, not states, should control who gets access to cars’ telematics systems. The group also said that it would be irresponsible and dangerous to create the open data platform that the law required, especially by 2022. The Massachusetts Right to Repair Committee, representing more than 1,600 Massachusetts repair shops, says the automakers had ample time to prepare. Last summer, the Biden administration directed the Federal Trade Commission to write rules making it easier for consumers to access their own data and repair tools; advocates hope the rules will apply to vehicles.

Josh Siegel, an assistant professor of engineering at Michigan State University who studies connected-car security, says the automakers might be right, and the system envisioned by the law may not be technically doable. Siegel says the ballot measure may have been “well intentioned,” but it wasn’t written “with a full understanding of the complexity of automotive telematics systems.” Those systems give access not just to data about what’s broken and why but also to the driver-assistance systems that enable emergency braking and elements of the drive-by-wire system that helps drivers control their cars. Asking the automakers to pull together a safe and open telematics system in just a few months wasn’t realistic, Siegel says.

“I think that they could create a platform that would meet some of the requirements of what the legislation is calling for,” he says, “but I wouldn't want it in my own car.”

The Alliance for Automotive Innovation declined to comment, citing the lawsuit. But in a 2020 hearing, a representative for the group argued that independent repair shops wanted access to car data not just to make repairs but also to advertise and sell to customers.


Dealerships are caught in the middle. It’s an especially unfortunate time to be there, given the chip shortage that has curtailed vehicle production—and sales. “Shame on the manufacturers for not stepping up and being part of the conversation,” says Bob O’Koniewski, executive vice president of the Massachusetts State Automobile Dealers Association. But he’s angry at the independent repair industry, too, accusing it of “a money grab.” His group has written a pair of bills, currently under consideration in the Massachusetts legislature, that would give automakers until 2025 to comply with the open-data-platform law.

For Siegel, the controversy points to a bigger and woolier question about whether consumers understand just how much data is flowing from their vehicles and where it goes. There’s money to be made from a car’s GPS location, temperature data, biometric info, and data on key parts. A few years ago, Siegel and his colleagues estimated that the US connected-car data market could be worth up to $92 billion, with everyone from manufacturers and parts suppliers to dealers and insurers racing for a share. “The most important thing is to show people their own breadcrumbs,” Siegel says.

For Marc Ferrelli, the Massachusetts Subaru owner, the lesson is clear. “Sucks to be us,” he says. Just before he bought the car, he says, the dealer asked him, “Don’t you have any friends in Rhode Island whose address you can use?”

Updated, 2-3-22, 6pm ET: An earlier version of this article incorrectly spelled Marc Ferrelli's first name Mark.

HK Note: Ag equipment producers (John Deer)has denied the right for owners to purchase information on their million dollar machines that will enable them to repair their purchase.

 

I’m buying a new car soon. I won’t mention the make because I’m pretty sure this is taking place across of them. When you pick up the car, the salesman will show you this sweet app that let’s you do remote start, unlock doors, etc. You also get a couple free oil changes. From what I understand, there’s a lot of pressure to install before you leave the dealer lot.
The darker side of this is what you agree to by installing the app. The user agreement is over 400 pages long. It allows the automaker to use the data how they see fit, and sell it to any of their partners. The obvious use case is to sell this to insurance companies. Not so obvious could be denial of warranty claims, etc, law enforcement or others.
I did some searching on the web for people who decline to install the app. Looks like the ‘hesitant to install’ people like me are outnumbered 100-1.
The way I see it, if they are offering a couple hundred bucks for my data, they are selling it off over and over again to “partners. “
The most common comment I saw was “your phone is already collecting it anyways, so just take the money…”

 

Just look at the problems farmers are having in regards to repairs to their farm equipment and who does the repairs.

 

Senate Introduces Bill To Allow Farmers To Fix Their Own Equipment - Slashdot

 

YUP! This all got started by John Deere and Ferrari, and was followed by many other manufactures, basically locking everyone out and forcing you to use "Factory Approved" tech's with specialized tools made ONLY for those machines! I have dealt with this for years, Kassbohere, Caterpillar, TigerCat, John Deere, and Volvo, all went to this type of repair and maint, and it is exasperating! My Cat has had all that B.S disabled so I can do everything I want, make any modifications I wish, and there is NOTHING they can say or do about it, and they are required to provide support and access to the systems as long as the machines are still in production! The PistenBully's I have been running all required factory service and repairs when they first came out with the new models ( Caterpillar powered, double the issues), something that was next to impossible in the remote mountains, so they were forced to relent and allow access. What makes it nice is the software is accessible through company supplied tools, so things are far easier now then before! I sure wish all these companies would deal with this like Cat and Kassbohere did, sure takes the stress out of things! I'm happy with my Cat Skidder, and that Cat did away with all the priority stuff, something several of by buddies with TigerCats are struggling with, and the John Deere guys are always pulling their hair out over!

 

Yup faced that years ago with Ford/New Holland in just trying to get Tech Manuals.
Dealer said no way, so, having just boomed the tractor down I suggested we go un- load it.
Suddenly he found a set of manuals and we parted company.

 

When the Cat dealer delivered my Skidder, the delivery driver handed me a pretty good sized box filled with all the tech manuals and a hand held scanner, as well as a few specific hand tools, no extra charge! What was really sweet was the full factory parts manuals covering the entire machine, sure makes sourcing parts and accessories super simple! I have had nothing but good experiences dealing with Caterpillar, they always seem to go the extra mile with me whether it's servicing engines or equipment, or even hot rodding my 3408 engine and transmission, as long as I pay, they are happy to do what ever I ask of them! They ever gave me a brand new Cat brand winter weight parka and bib overalls the last time I did business with them! The dealers seem to all be on board with this as well!

For the record, I have never had any issue with Cummins ether, always willing to work with me, and fully support any needs I may have!

 

Just remember, very few people have any clue what has happened behind their back.

 

One of the many reasons that I drive older cars, the biggest reason is that I like to drive older cars! Once you have found a car(s) that you like... KEEP IT! It's cheaper to restore a car than it is to buy a new one. Older cars are low tech and easier and cheaper to work on...no computers, no chips, etc. I also like older farm tractors, especially John Deere and some of the older Fords, like the 8N.

 

The California Air Resources Board is right now developing on-board diagnostic (OBD) regulations for off-highway equipment engines and motorcycles too. CARB has announced those may be released in 2024 with required implementation to phase in starting in 2027. Along with those come service information rules (SIR) that can have some heavy per day fines for non-compliance. The SIR rules are fairly close to much of the right to repair legislation. I’ve dealt with the CARB OBD folks and those guys are smart, very little gets by them and they can be brutal. They live to find defects in a manufacturer’s OBD compliance.

Deere and some others are going to be for a real awakening in a few years. The consulting firm I work for has done tons of OBD compliance and certification work and there will be some interesting things happening in various product lines in a few years. Kind of like in 2007 when various car companies had to drop some diesel offerings, such as the Jeep Liberty, because they couldn’t meet the regs. Meeting OBD regs and proving it can be as hard and costly, if not more, as meeting emission regs.

AT

 

I have a '97 Jeep Wangler. Looks like sh^t with the paint blistered from the sun. But it runs and it's fun to drive. It has computer fuel injection but it's not so complicated that you can't figure out what's wrong. The codes can be pulled up without a reader and the list is on the internet. I downloaded copies also.

Bought a new diesel pickup a couple years ago but kept the Jeep. Hard to find a 4WD on that level these days

 

I would be interested to know if newer cars with selectable off road driving ranges are designed to address this issue?

 

Bottom line is if the vehicle is licensed to operate on roads it must comply with the OBD regs and most countries now have some version of OBD requirements. Several states and countries, particularly Europe, require vehicle inspections to renew vehicle registration and that includes the OBD system have no faults, calibration ID and verification codes properly match the data base and the OBD system gives a clean bill of health for the vehicle. (Hence why the OBD system is certified)

Off highway equipment hasn’t required registration so states like California, Massachusetts, etc. hadn’t figured out how to force off highway stuff out of service until fixes are made if an OBD system finds an issue. That has been a key crux for not requiring OBD so far.

Off highway operation also creates some significant technical challenges. For example, misfire detection is required and most cars watch instantaneous crank speeds and can see a dip if a cylinder misfires. However, resonances in the driveline (transmission, drive shafts, axles and tires) is very critcal when tuning the detection algorithms. Operate on a very rough road and it transmits all kinds of torque impulses back through the drivetrain into the engine and can fool misfire algorithms. There are requirements to detect fuel injector wear and failures that don’t cause misfire but cause too much fuel or too little fuel to be injected thus adversely affecting emissions. Most algorithms require some coasting where fueling is cut, the vehicle keeps the engine turning over (called motoring the engine) and they have quick injections during that period and watch changes in fuel rail pressures to calulate how much fuel each injector squirts in response to specific commands. Farm tractors, earth moving stuff, generators, most hydraulic operated equipment, etc. have few to no motoring cycles during normal operation so a bunch of research is required to find new ways to measure injection quantities and timing to meet the regulations.

For cars and trucks there are provisions for temporarily disabling some diagnostics during PTO operation, rough road conditions, etc so operating off highway isn’t too much of a problem but full time off highway can sometimes become a bit of a problem.

Did that answer your question?

AT

 

A Fight Over the Right to Repair Cars Turns Ugly
No
If memory serves some NE States, Main maybe, does require registration of off road vehicles and if a vehicle has a selection control that says "rough roads/off road" it would be considered an off road vehicle Toyota and Nissan both have this function and could be monitored for same.

 

However, "collectable" cars are not held to the same emission standards as newer vehicles, but it has to be somewhat "restored" and not a rust bucket that you drive only in snow/ice. You have to carry special "old car" insurance and you are limited in the number of miles you can drive per year, but since the first thing to go on many older vehicles is the odometer...

 

Yup, got a Mil Truck that is Licensed for 5 years at a time.

 

Maybe we aren’t on the same page as to what off highway vehicles are vs on highway certified vehicles that can be/are also operated off highway in addition to on highway.

Fundamentally, a jeep, bronco, 4x4 pickup, 6x6 deuce and a half, an SUV, even a concrete mixer or large mobile crane, etc. are all going to be subject to the on highway regulations. They are designed to operate extensively on-highway, at regular highway speeds and have FMVSS compliant lighting, seat belts, airbags etc. These all have to meet the OBD regulations. Can they also operate off highway? Sure, maybe very extensively, but that doesn’t change the OBD and emission requirements.

Off highway equipment in the eyes of the gov are going to be things like farm tractors, bull dozers, back hoes, generator sets, irrigation pumps, combines, etc. While they might be operated on highways for short durations between work sites, they generally don’t/can’t operate at high road speeds and only a very small portion of their annual operation is on a public road. These currently do not have to meet any OBD regs and are generally not smog tested either.

There are emissions regulations but if 100 hours in something breaks that still allows the engine to run fine but emissions went way up, it may never be noticed. And even if it is noticed, if there is no adverse affect on it performing, owners have no motivation to get it fixed. Recent EPA Tier 4 compliant engines in a big farm tractor typically have exhaust after treatment systems and if these crap out the engine generally still runs fine. If the NOx output of the vehicle/equipment is now above the reg limits, who would know and the owner has no reason to get it fixed; it still does work just fine. These are the things that currently have no OBD regulations.

Are we a bit closer?

AT

 

Yes but my concerns are about public control of movement. In short our Gov will stop at nothing to fully control movement of every vehicle and person and they will use any excuse to accomplish their purpose.

 

Oh don't worry. With GPS and the upcoming kill switch. They will have all the control they need. Just need a bit of geo-fencing added to the map control and ... we are there.