If you have an inalienable right to repair/rebuild/modify your Tesla do you also have the right to do the same to your future level 5, fully-autonomous self driving car?
Absolutely you do. I expect there to be a certain amount of certification and oversight in safety critical systems - perhaps similar to how the FAA regulates repair and maintenance for general aviation.
Software is covered around copyright law, which is different than right to repair. I'm fine not owning the software my Tesla runs, nor having access to the source code, but I agree that legislation should require Tesla provide tooling that allows for diagnostics and canbus control for repairs (such as for issuing commands to the powertrain and ancillary systems).
If there is a right to repair all of this does not matter. Tesla has - or should have - the obligation to sell the parts, and probably to also inform of the risks.
A bad repair is not on tesla, it's on the mechanic doing the work.
Imagine the completely hypothetical situation where your self driving car was malfunctioning due to an OTA update. As the owner of the car, would you say you have a right to go into the software and now modify it?
All I’m saying is that there should absolutely be some limit to what you have a right to repair, independent of your ownership.
With regards to cars, the right to have an independent shop perform routine maintenance and repair without violating warranty does need to be preserved. As to modify, well I would think that should vacate any warranty and possibly liability as it is now beyond the manufacturers control. This will mean preventing manufacturers from creating costly interfaces to retrieve status codes from cars and their self driving systems.
The issue with modifying self driving algorithm's is that will be so complex as to be nearly impossible to modification and since they are so tightly linked to the safe operation of the vehicle I can expect we will see legislation to prevent it. However such legislation should not preclude being able to view it.
* disclaimer to right of repair comments, I work for major after market supplier to consumers and business in the automotive sector
Sorry, but as someone who knows little about U.S politics and lobbying there, I don't understand how you are putting Tesla and "the right to repair" in a single sentence. What will you do if the electronics in Tesla fails? What will you do if the motor fails? Battery? You won't be able to fix that on your own.
Teslas can be only repaired in a professional shop, whereas Toyotas can be fixed by a moderately skilled individual in a private garage. You can order all the parts for Toyota online and do everything from engine rebuild to any kind of maintenance.
The right to repair (and mod) has been a part of contemporary car culture for around a century (at least in the US), and it's also why there is a huge aftermarket for it. If anything, I think Tesla is currently the only automaker who would disapprove.
Pretty sure, you loose the right to repair when you are leasing something, as all lease agreements for vehicles I've seen have direct stipulations on the requirements, and penalties of performing and not performing maintenance and repair to their vehicle.
I fully support right to repair YOUR PROPERTY, but I also support as part of that, that if the car is owned by Tesla, they have the right to dictate maintenance requirements, and have a say so in who, and what they feel is a valid fix.
I don't see how right to repair would, or should force a change here?
Right to repair would make it easier for third parties to perform repairs if they have access to schematics that manufacturers have. One could argue the cost would be significantly lower if Tesla provided schematics to third parties (whether for free or a paid system).
There is not as much to have fail in an electric car, but that shouldn't mean I lose the right to repair a vehicle I own. Rebuilding batteries isn't new to me, nor is compiling software.
Why should Tesla be allowed to brick every electric car that gets in a fender bender, or refuse to sell parts for cars once the vehicle is out of warranty? A lack of enforcement of the right to repair has driven repair costs on Tesla's vehicles sky high, causing their vehicles to have notably more expensive insurance premiums.
Massachusetts passed Right to Repair as a ballot measure (which Tesla basically flaunts by making manuals extremely expensive to rent). But note that right to repair does not automatically equate with "easy to repair without special tools and knowledge."
There's an element of right to repair in here alongside just one more example on the pile for why most of us self-hosting nuts drone on and on about it.
I really hope lawmakers someday figure out they really do need to make "it must fail to a useable state" law. It should not be a concern that if Tesla goes out of business I won't be able to drive to work.
I have not seen any right-to-repair legislation that would do that. They typically require companies to share repair parts/tools/documents.
I would be against a right-to-repair bill that amounted to creative handcuffs for engineers. Engineering is an exercise in prioritization and there are sometimes very legitimate reasons to deprioritize serviceability. For example, the tires on my car are designed to prioritize safety and efficiency, rather than being able to be retreaded.
Certainly, this is why I've not made a universal claim above. I have indeed partially rebuilt a couple cars. I generally support right to repair. I recognise that anything against that is anathema here but there's some cases where we need to be able to make exceptions.
Someone buying a refurbished powerbank, for example, may end up lighting something on fire because it was repaired incorrectly.
Yes it'd maybe be on the manufacturer of a replacement regulator if an insulin pump was 3rd-party repaired and failed, but would it maybe be safer to say that the device should be modified or repaired only within its certified supply chain?
There's CE and UL listings for communications and electrical devices to in part protect consumers against poor manufacturing leading to irradiated or electrocuted people.
Could we agree that there's a difference between a bushing and a microcontroller?
Thank you for the wonderfully detailed reply. I mostly agree with your right to repair sentiments. I have a remote controlled car, and have to keep reminding myself fixing it is half the fun. It sure would be nice to have the option to evaluate repair, either myself or pay a professional, rather than throw things away and buy a new one.
I'm not sure to be honest, it's a big issue these days that car companies lock third parties or of the computer systems and diagnostics. Right to repair seems fundamental to something as expensive and long lived as a car.
Absolutely you do. I expect there to be a certain amount of certification and oversight in safety critical systems - perhaps similar to how the FAA regulates repair and maintenance for general aviation.
reply