Did you recently take on (or consider) a loan of 84 months or longer on a car purchase?
A reporter would like to speak with you about your experience; please reach out to PR@Edmunds.com by 7/25 for details.
A reporter would like to speak with you about your experience; please reach out to PR@Edmunds.com by 7/25 for details.
Options
Comments
Based on the record, the Register recommended granting an exemption. The
Register concluded that reproducing and altering the computer programs on ECUs for
purposes of facilitating diagnosis, repair and modification of vehicles may constitute a
noninfringing activity as a matter of fair use and/or under the exception set forth in
section 117 of the Copyright Act, which permits the owner of a copy of a computer
program to make certain copies and adaptations of the program. The Register also
concluded that owners of vehicles and agricultural machinery are adversely impacted as a
result of TPMs that protect the copyrighted computer programs on the ECUs that control
the functioning of their vehicles. The Register further found that while two of the
statutory factors weighed in favor of the exemption (availability for use of copyrighted
works and impact on criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching, scholarship or
research), and two of the factors were neutral (availability for use for nonprofit archival,
preservation and educational purposes and the effect on the market for or value of
copyrighted works), the fifth factor—under which commenting parties and federal
agencies raised serious safety and environmental concerns—tended to weigh against an
exemption.
Overall, the Register concluded that while from a copyright perspective
proponents had made the case for an exemption, based on the record, the exemption
needed to be carefully tailored to address a number of concerns. Accordingly, the
recommended exemption excludes computer programs in ECUs that are chiefly designed
to operate vehicle entertainment and telematics systems due to insufficient evidence
demonstrating a need to access such ECUs, and out of concern that such circumvention
might enable unauthorized access to creative or proprietary content. The exemption also
43
excludes circumvention “on behalf of” vehicle owners, as a broader exception allowing
third parties to engage in circumvention activities on behalf of others is in tension with
the anti-trafficking provisions of section 1201(a)(2) and (b). Moreover, by passing the
Unlocking Act—which amended section 1201 to allow unlocking of cellphones and other
devices to be carried out by third parties “at the direction of” device owners—Congress
indicated its view that extending the reach of an exemption to cover third-party actors
requires a legislative amendment. The exemption also expressly excludes acts of
circumvention that would violate any other law, including regulations promulgated by
DOT or EPA. Finally, in light of the significant concerns raised by DOT and EPA, the
recommended exemption will become operative twelve months from the effective date of
the new regulation to provide these and other potentially interested agencies an
opportunity to consider and prepare for the lifting of the DMCA prohibition.
Acknowledging the views of the NTIA, the Register determined that a twelve-month
delay was the shortest period that would reasonably permit other agencies to consider
appropriate action.
The tweaking to zap the DRM on music and video exception - something tells me that that's not going to fly in the real world either. If you can see or hear it, you can steal it. Can't wait until the MPAA starts sleeping in your dashboard.
Apple wants to kill a bill that could make it easier for you to fix your iPhone (Washington Post)
Certainly any intelligent person can be taught to fix quite a few things on their modern cars, but the question which nobody seems to address is----do they want to spend their time doing that?