Right to repair congressional bills + updates OTA/FDRS = source code to owners?

[mwtechy]

I'm curious what members of the forum believe the new push for right to repair in congress would mean to MME owners. Certainly FDRS would become free? While I haven't read the new proposed bills, if the older HR 1449 is any example it would suggest that MME, tesla, and similar would require far more than just access to calls to mothership data such as OTA or simply all the info our cars are sending to ford (again not lawyer). I personally would prefer some kind of software developer kit even if the majority of IP is behind encrypted binaries or something. It's clear that in order to fix this car you need access to the code running it. Does anyone believe right to repair will force auto makers to provide owners or others to write their own firmware for modules?

As a side note, if I was curious to learn more about such development regardless if it's assembly or something higher level where would I start looking? Are these OTA encrypted until they are installed in each module or has anyone been able to um..."peak under the hood" yet for real without needing a blessing from ford?

https://shoppress.dormanproducts.com/right-to-repair-act-congress-freedom-automobiles/
https://www.reuters.com/world/us/us...ght-repair-bills-spur-competition-2022-02-03/
https://www.congress.gov/bill/112th-congress/house-bill/1449/text

Sponsored

 

[Blue highway]

“Providing access” does not mean FDRS will be free in my view. Nor will a mongoose cable, 12v power supply or flash drive be free.

 

[SnBGC]

I'm curious what members of the forum believe the new push for right to repair in congress would mean to MME owners. Certainly FDRS would become free? While I haven't read the new proposed bills, if the older HR 1449 is any example it would suggest that MME, tesla, and similar would require far more than just access to calls to mothership data such as OTA or simply all the info our cars are sending to ford (again not lawyer). I personally would prefer some kind of software developer kit even if the majority of IP is behind encrypted binaries or something. It's clear that in order to fix this car you need access to the code running it. Does anyone believe right to repair will force auto makers to provide owners or others to write their own firmware for modules?

As a side note, if I was curious to learn more about such development regardless if it's assembly or something higher level where would I start looking? Are these OTA encrypted until they are installed in each module or has anyone been able to um..."peak under the hood" yet for real without needing a blessing from ford?

https://shoppress.dormanproducts.com/right-to-repair-act-congress-freedom-automobiles/
https://www.reuters.com/world/us/us...ght-repair-bills-spur-competition-2022-02-03/
https://www.congress.gov/bill/112th-congress/house-bill/1449/text

Interesting question.
I don't know all the exact details.....but in the case of the Super Duty trucks, the software calibrations are available as editable files. How that is.....I am not sure but I do know that clever people are able to download the original calibration for your specific truck and then edit it to allow for hardware modifications such as larger injectors, higher boost levels, axle changes etc.

Perhaps this exists because chassis cab trucks end up going to a 3rd party upfitter and they need to integrate their bodies to the modules on the chassis? Right now we are converting an F-550 insulated articulating bucket and an F-750 digger derrick to ePTO and we have access to the software so we can connect to the module network on the truck. If Ford is doing that for the HD trucks then maybe they will do the same for passenger vehicles?

I am nearly certain the eTransit is almost exactly the same as the MME Select. I know Ford has the calibrations available for the eTransit cut-a-way because I saw it on the list when I was looking for our stuff. Again, I am not a programmer so I really don't know what the available downloads are and their capabilities but I do know our body builder can make use of them and set some parameters. For example, we can inhibit the drive mode if the ePTO is active or if the aerial boom isn't properly stowed. We can also use the ePTO to condition the cab of the vehicle. And we can have a hybrid system so if the ePTO runs low on charge then we can switch over to engine driven PTO and even recharge the HVB when the engine is running.

Stuff like that is happening now....so it is reasonable to think it might be available for you guys at some point. The hot rodding spirit lives still....just in a different form.

 

[Mach-Lee]

My interpretation is manufacturers need to provide the same tools to the DIY consumer as their dealers in order to service the vehicles. It does not mean they have to be free.

The growing use of telemetrics is a concern for some because it means there might be data sent to the dealer that isn't available to the consumer with a scan tool. So far I haven't really seen this be the case with Ford. As long as there is parity between information the dealer receives and what consumers can receive, I don't think there's an issue.

For a long time, Ford has been one of the best manufacturers for DIY mechanics because they make everything available at reasonable prices, unlike some brands. That's one reason I'm pretty loyal to Ford. I can get any part or tool I need to fix my vehicles.

 

[Logal727]

Ford has already been pretty good as far as customers repairing their own vehicles

 

[Chuck]

Right to repair doesn't mean right to repair FOR FREE. And there will certainly be no chance of them sharing source code for any of the software. API access would be interesting but they'd have to be careful not to expose anything that could in any way allow the person to create something that could cause an accident. This would include distracting noises or flashing displays.

 

[mwtechy]

Right to repair doesn't mean right to repair FOR FREE. And there will certainly be no chance of them sharing source code for any of the software. API access would be interesting but they'd have to be careful not to expose anything that could in any way allow the person to create something that could cause an accident. This would include distracting noises or flashing displays.

Hey if I think 500 popup ads from the 90s makes my car more retro that's on me.

Seriously though, if so many things can be fixed with a software update then so many things can also become broken from a software update. If ford refuses to fix it, if ford requires a subscription to fix it, if for prevents anyone else from looking at the source code to fix it...that kinda goes against a right to repair don't you think?

Sponsored