GM owns your cars software, don't fiddle!

[GMPX]

Please have a read of this link...
http://www.dieselarmy.com/news/gm-testifies-that-they-own-your-cars-software-do-not-touch-it/

Chad (the author of the article) has pretty much covered every point why this is dumb, of course the big point missed by the suit and tie guys at GM is would you buy a GM car (or any manufacturer for that matter) that makes it a breach of copyright to tune it? Would sure make the local drag strip look funny when 20 Camaro's line up all running the exact same times.
I 100% agree with their 'software' being protected, if GM's spark controls contain code that is better than any other manufacturer (including aftermarket ECM's) then they have every right to stop that being copied, I'm just not sure how you copyright table values.

I decided to make this into a poll, pretty sure I know the outcome already.

[Mitco39]

http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-jPaFMIWelaM/UH2icGa5DjI/AAAAAAAAFAQ/PdVxMmRRoQg/s320/113685686_iDontWantToLiveOnThisPlanetAnymoreLandsc ape_answer_2_xlarge.png

[Chevy366]

This is the most insane thing I ever read. I saw it the other day and thought "how stupid", GM just loves to shoot themselves in the foot.

I call it the "Micro$oft syndrome", it all started when Micro$oft made it a point to address software rights and ownership, not that the concept wasn't around before then, it is just that Micro$oft being such a large and powerful player seemed to etch it into stone for all to follow.

Ownership is a state of mind it would seem, not a tangible achievement.

Perhaps EFILive will be forced to write a complete OS that is flashable to the controller and remove GM's OS completely, just a thought.

[GMPX]

Perhaps EFILive will be forced to write a complete OS that is flashable to the controller and remove GM's OS completely, just a thought.
That is pretty much impossible without knowing the intricacies of the hardware (which of course isn't available) and you probably couldn't legally copy the CAN messages to make it work in a GM car, so if it came to that then we will just not buy GM vehicles any more and all take jobs working in a beach side bar in Sint Maarten.

[joecar]

Lawyers may be able to find ways around it...

I thought that copyright/patent was "infringed" only if money was being made by doing so (but I know I'm wrong)...

( of course, I'm only an engineer and not a lawyer )

[joecar]

Yeah, we should all take hotel management courses and go work in the island resorts :cheers:

[Tre-Cool]

As much as I knew I shouldn't tinker with my daily driver, I specifically purchased it because I knew efilive/hpt supported the ecu in the Cruze so that if I wanted to tinker I could.

I lasted about 3 days with it before I pulled the tune out, but I was logging it before hand. haha.

So in short, would I buy a car that I knew I couldn't tinker with, then no I wont buy from that brand.

[GMPX]

So in short, would I buy a car that I knew I couldn't tinker with, then no I wont buy from that brand.
I am the same, admittedly we purchase based on new ECM types we might need to work on, there is plenty of non GM cars that are tempting but tuning is either too hard (pull ECM apart) or non existent so they are off the list for me.

[Tre-Cool]

well with holden dropping out of local v8 options soon, the Hyundai range could be the next best thing? but I think they run mostly bosch type ecu's.

[Road]

I am guessing GM is stating we don't own our "software" is because we didn't "build" it we just bought it. Well if that is the case then I don't see how GM owns it either! Regardless of the "owner" of the software and as technology moves forward things like cars driving them selves and crash prevention features for liability reasons I see the need for manufactures ability to lock down the software.
Yes I would buy another GM product when this happens.
Come race day mine is still going to faster than yours!
Mike

[joecar]

Given the nature of software, I don't believe the OEM can prevent mishaps by locking down the software...

the OEM does have ulterior motives (possibly influenced by by EPA/CARB requirements/mandates);

locking out hotrodding/hacking efforts is of no consequence... if something is not right then the "software" won't work with the rest of the vehicle (due to both the complexity or the software, and the sanity-interlocks designed into it)... in fact the OEM's own software bugs will continue to be the OEM's worst enemy, not someone hacking the CAN/modules for the purpose running modified mechanical parts.

[Road]

Going to be a very debatable topic.

[GMPX]

well with holden dropping out of local v8 options soon, the Hyundai range could be the next best thing? but I think they run mostly bosch type ecu's.

New career before resorting to that :rotflmao:

[Tre-Cool]

New career before resorting to that :rotflmao:


come on now, they at least have a 5lt v8 and a couple of turbo 4 banger motors. I must admit they have knocked up the quality of sports cars in the last few years.

313kw 5lt aint shabby.
http://www.motoring.com.au/reviews/2014/large-passenger/hyundai/genesis/hyundai-genesis-50-2015-review-46176

[kangsta]

come on now, they at least have a 5lt v8 and a couple of turbo 4 banger motors. I must admit they have knocked up the quality of sports cars in the last few years.

313kw 5lt aint shabby.
http://www.motoring.com.au/reviews/2014/large-passenger/hyundai/genesis/hyundai-genesis-50-2015-review-46176

I think it was more to do with the Bosch ECU.... das is nict gut..

[GMPX]

I know they are trying and are much better than the old Excel with nail polish paint colours, but high US $50K probably translates to nearly double over here, I doubt anyone will pay $100K for a Hyundai.
They are a nice looking car though, I mistake them for an XF Jaguar when I see them.

[Chevy366]

That is pretty much impossible without knowing the intricacies of the hardware (which of course isn't available) and you probably couldn't legally copy the CAN messages to make it work in a GM car, so if it came to that then we will just not buy GM vehicles any more and all take jobs working in a beach side bar in Sint Maarten.
That sucks. Goodbye GM, I certainly won't buy another one.
Now that beach side bar idea sounds good, pull up a stool, get a pitcher full with mugs and warm up the dart board.

Or a standalone controller like Fast. We don't need no stinking CAN bus. :D

[GMPX]

Or a standalone controller like Fast. We don't need no stinking CAN bus. :D
Unfortunately if you want every other module in the car to work then you do need the ECM telling them what is going on. Like modern radios in cars, you are stuck with what they offer because the screen used for the radio also has climate control, sat nav etc, pull that out for something else and half the cars functions are gone.

[Chevy366]

Unfortunately if you want every other module in the car to work then you do need the ECM telling them what is going on. Like modern radios in cars, you are stuck with what they offer because the screen used for the radio also has climate control, sat nav etc, pull that out for something else and half the cars functions are gone.
A friend had a piggyback controller on his diesel truck, he just unplugged the the PCM and plugged in the piggyback unit into the PCM, then the piggyback controller took over operations from the PCM. PCM never knew it wasn't controlling the truck, all other functions worked fine.

They do that a lot with motorcycles too, you unplug the injectors and use a piggyback controller to adjust the pulse width modulation to obtain rich/lean mixture, ECU never knows.

[Road]

Don't forget about the reduced engine power that Gm implemented on the Z06 stingray to meet EPA. GM openly admitted that owners would have to use aftermarket programming to eliminate the reduce power!!

[DURAtotheMAX]

A friend had a piggyback controller on his diesel truck, he just unplugged the the PCM and plugged in the piggyback unit into the PCM, then the piggyback controller took over operations from the PCM. PCM never knew it wasn't controlling the truck, all other functions worked fine.

They do that a lot with motorcycles too, you unplug the injectors and use a piggyback controller to adjust the pulse width modulation to obtain rich/lean mixture, ECU never knows.

Current and future ECM designs can/will be fast enough and smart enough to detect the presence of such boxes...at its simplest, the ECM could simply calculate the acceleration rate and if the truck is accelerating too quickly to be plausible (IE, the engine is making over stock horsepower), it will know something is up.

Harness/piggyback controllers are not the answer, unfortunately.

Ben

[GMPX]

I once knew a guy at John Deere, he worked on the diagnostics side of the ECM and one of their projects was working on code to detect sensor fooling boxes yet be able to monitor normal and abnormal real sensor operation.

[Chevy366]

Current and future ECM designs can/will be fast enough and smart enough to detect the presence of such boxes...at its simplest, the ECM could simply calculate the acceleration rate and if the truck is accelerating too quickly to be plausible (IE, the engine is making over stock horsepower), it will know something is up.

Harness/piggyback controllers are not the answer, unfortunately.

Ben That's a lot of trouble to go to to stop someone from altering their vehicle. Once the warranty period is gone it is the owners responsibility to preform repairs it would be hard to sell the point that one could not do repairs to their own vehicle. I suppose repair parts will be car maker compliant to not detract/add to the system and work with the system kind like a plug-and-play for computers?
I have to ask ole wise one, what is then? Enlighten us.


I once knew a guy at John Deere, he worked on the diagnostics side of the ECM and one of their projects was working on code to detect sensor fooling boxes yet be able to monitor normal and abnormal real sensor operation.
That would take a lot of processing power to monitor all the data would it not? Do you know if he was successful or not?
I am just throwing out possible solutions to the dilemma.

[GMPX]

That would take a lot of processing power to monitor all the data would it not? Do you know if he was successful or not?
I am just throwing out possible solutions to the dilemma.
I don't know, it was at least 8 years ago that I last spoke to them, I would say so because these days processing power is not an issue with the modern CPU's they are using, particularly on big Diesels where they aren't turning big RPM's so the ECM has a lot of time to do things between injection events.

[Highlander]

I am with you Ross.

It is one of the main reasons I really do not care for any German car.... I've seen "their software" and its really REALLY SERIOUSLY Crude.

[greasess]

Years ago there was talk in the US of only dealers being able to even open the hood of your car. There were petition sheets at almost every parts store and the bill was shot down. Don't think GM and the rest of them wouldn't love that. You think dealerships are priced high now? Just wait until something like this goes into effect.

[DURAtotheMAX]

Years ago there was talk in the US of only dealers being able to even open the hood of your car. There were petition sheets at almost every parts store and the bill was shot down. Don't think GM and the rest of them wouldn't love that. You think dealerships are priced high now? Just wait until something like this goes into effect.

Why would "GM love that"?

DOES EVERYONE NOT REALIZE THAT ALL CAR DEALERS ARE INDEPENDENTLY OWNED AND OPERATED FRANCHISES!?!?!!??!

Im gonna bang my head against a wall if I have to explain that one more time. People associating dealers' profits' on repairs and maintenance with "LINING GM's POCKET!!"...or if I hear one more person say "OMG GM IS OUT TO ROB EVERYONE WITH $100/hr SHOP RATES!!!!"

[greasess]

Put your flames out. Either way it would cost us more money in the end.

[Chevy366]

GM would love it if dealer repairs only. Why would GM love that you couldn't modify your car/truck? Do you think GM likes you to be able to tune your truck? Warranty repairs!

Man GM would suck every penny you have and not give one rats butt about it, yet you defend GM, weird.

[joecar]

Yes, GM will suck as much money as they could, directly or indirectly, regardless of dealer franchises, and prohibiting DIY helps GM's agenda.

[s10mods]

I'll just keep my old GM that can be tuned. I hate that everything in your vehicle knows what every other thing is doing all the time. I'll stick with my LS1B and E38's controllers.

[joecar]

I'll just keep my old GM that can be tuned. I hate that everything in your vehicle knows what every other thing is doing all the time. I'll stick with my LS1B and E38's controllers.+1.

[dfarr67]

With emissions not a concern- its amazing how much more fun my Honda mt6 is to drive, GM can keep their products.

[Chevy366]

We are going Restomod with as little electronics as possible. Maybe a FAST system at most. Like the old stuff, with new touches.

[dfarr67]

Check out DynamicEFI

[C10Racer]

GM Didn't own the base calibrations for Quadrajets, why would EFI coding be any different? :laugh:

[staytuned]

GM owns the original software. If you purchase an unchanged program or software update by or from GM, that is totally legal,if you alter that yourself then flash over anything in an ECU, then that becomes yours. If you sell that, it would be illegal at that point. This is what the DMCA states, which is a copyright act.
right act.

[cmitchell17]

Is there any updates on this? I can't find where any rulings were made. I know with all the do gooders demanding self driving cars and security and people suing people and Teslas killing people and all that its a very sad day for learning about these things and tinkering and modifying. Its also really hard to figure out what manufactures are running what controllers, I always thought GM was the most tuning friendly so I always supported them, but now it appears I made the wrong decision. My friend has a z4 that got struck by lightening and he had to replace a lot of the modules and I was so surprised by how much support and ability he has to easily modify and reflash especially with BCM and chassis functioning, which appears with GM stuff we have zero support for only ECM powertrain stuff.


I just want to make sure I'm not supporting GM if they are going to be doing stuff like this and support a manufacture who has more open controllers. I understand they are probably under pressure from regulators and they seem to also have a strong driverless car agenda which obviously requires locking down. Its funny how much GM puts into their aftermarket performance division with crate motors and aftermarket "performance" parts that obviously required revised calibrations, then they say no tuning allowed.

[GMPX]

I just want to make sure I'm not supporting GM if they are going to be doing stuff like this and support a manufacture who has more open controllers. I understand they are probably under pressure from regulators and they seem to also have a strong driverless car agenda which obviously requires locking down. Its funny how much GM puts into their aftermarket performance division with crate motors and aftermarket "performance" parts that obviously required revised calibrations, then they say no tuning allowed.
I don't think any OEM's want their controllers messed with, it is just with the push for automated driving (not sure who is pushing it but it's happening) they have to secure them really tight. GM is very much about automated driving in the future that is why it would appear for the moment they are out in the lead as far as locking out tuners.

[Snipesy]

They're currently redoing their entire system. What it'll look like I'm not sure.

Likely segregated CAN-FD busses (plural). Gateway module will stand between OBD2 and the other busses and will be connected by a single line. The gateway will only allow the absolute min. If they don't ditch SWCAN it'll be secluded to the gateway as well.

Most likely they are going to roll Ethernet. That will probably be a second connector hiding behind the trim or something. They may also run the wires to the obd2 but I somewhat doubt it.


And that's not even getting into if they'll do something silly like randomzing check engine codes to be VIN specific and you need a dealer tool to get them. Let alone doing a flash.


Only saving grace was some recently passed EU laws but the EU hasn't been taken seriously lately.

[GMPX]

That sounds like what a certain EV company has done, OBD-II port with CAN (which isn't a true OBD-II connector even) only has the minimum info via a gateway to keep the regulators happy, the rest is locked down and uses Ethernet.

[Snipesy]

That sounds like what a certain EV company has done, OBD-II port with CAN (which isn't a true OBD-II connector even) only has the minimum info via a gateway to keep the regulators happy, the rest is locked down and uses Ethernet.

Ridiculous how they haven't gotten fined for literally not having an obd2 connector... It's just some stupid little socket smoshed in the corner. Supposeably some actually are hooked up but the one I looked at had power.... And that's it.

It's not even about tuning anymore. Any independent shop is just screwed if this is how things are going. Won't matter how many thousands you spend on that nice snap on scanner.

[GMPX]

Of course we all know what John Deere (https://www.wired.com/story/john-deere-farmers-right-to-repair/) has done with regards to right to repair, that is the way it is all heading.

[cmitchell17]

That sounds like what a certain EV company has done, OBD-II port with CAN (which isn't a true OBD-II connector even) only has the minimum info via a gateway to keep the regulators happy, the rest is locked down and uses Ethernet.Why do you need a ODB port in an EV? It's zero emissions and they don't need maintiance or break? That was trying to be sarcastic but sadly it's true... I think?

Sent from my Pixel 3 using Tapatalk

[GMPX]

Why do you need a ODB port in an EV? It's zero emissions and they don't need maintiance or break? That was trying to be sarcastic but sadly it's true... I think?
Valid point and probably why they don't need to fit one.