Tesla Retroactive Feature Deletion

[JeffKeryk]

Originally Posted by P10crew

Gee wiz a Tesla thread and no Jeff..... WTH?

Just got another over the update night before last... Maybe Elon stole my FSD too? Guess I'd better check? That boy cra... I'm gonna go steal the tow hitch off his ugly truck cuz I don't think he paid for it! By the way, I think we paid $4K, now the FSD is $7K.

 

[wdn]

Originally Posted by Wolf359

You are basically proposing a finder's keeper mentality. In your case of a tow hitch, if the owner didn't pay for it and it was a mistake, it's still possible for the owner to retrieve it. This has been litigated multiple times. You buy a house, there's some hidden treasure that belonged to the previous owner. You are the new owner so do you own it? Not if the owner didn't intend to include it. New owner loses in court all the time and they have to give it back.

I disagree with your analogy. It is not a pricing mistake such as you were given a piece of physical equipment that you did not pay for. Instead is a manufacturer's decision to equip all cars identically and to provision options with software. A better analogy is an aftermarket tuning chip. A custom tuning chip that unlocks 25 HP from your existing engine hardware is not illegal either. On the contrary it is a thriving aftermarket. Why? Because it is your engine not the manufacturer's. If the performance chip also tunes the engine and the transmission shift points, nor is that illegal. Car manufacturers have tried and failed, to harass tuners. Now suppose it also tunes the active suspension mimicking an optional feature offered by the car manufacturer, or doing it one better. Still perfectly legal. As long as it does not disable emissions controls the government is completely uninterested. Now if the same aftermarket unveils a "interior comfort chip" that enables say, one touch power windows or cruise control that would be just as legal as an engine chip.

 

[JeffKeryk]

Originally Posted by wdn

Originally Posted by Wolf359

You are basically proposing a finder's keeper mentality. In your case of a tow hitch, if the owner didn't pay for it and it was a mistake, it's still possible for the owner to retrieve it. This has been litigated multiple times. You buy a house, there's some hidden treasure that belonged to the previous owner. You are the new owner so do you own it? Not if the owner didn't intend to include it. New owner loses in court all the time and they have to give it back.

I disagree with your analogy. It is not a pricing mistake such as you were given a piece of physical equipment that you did not pay for. Instead is a manufacturer's decision to equip all cars identically and to provision options with software. A better analogy is an aftermarket tuning chip. A custom tuning chip that unlocks 25 HP from your existing engine hardware is not illegal either. On the contrary it is a thriving aftermarket. Why? Because it is your engine not the manufacturer's. If the performance chip also tunes the engine and the transmission shift points, nor is that illegal. Car manufacturers have tried and failed, to harass tuners. Now suppose it also tunes the active suspension mimicking an optional feature offered by the car manufacturer, or doing it one better. Still perfectly legal. As long as it does not disable emissions controls the government is completely uninterested. Now if the same aftermarket unveils a "interior comfort chip" that enables say, one touch power windows or cruise control that would be just as legal as an engine chip.

No, it is not like a tuner chip. It is an option. These cars are software controlled. Everything is configurable like an IPhone. It is getting an app without paying for it. I wouldn't call it pirated software; it was a mistake by Tesla. That does not make it yours... FSD is $7,000 now.

 

[zzyzzx]

Would one need an internet connection in the car for this to happen?

 

[clinebarger]

Originally Posted by Dinoburner

Then, there is the move by Toyota and GM in lobbying Washington for thier company's to forever own the software in the vehicles we buy.

Come & take it

 

[JeffKeryk]

Originally Posted by zzyzzx

Would one need an internet connection in the car for this to happen?

Yes. When you get your car, the first thing you do is connect to your wireless. I have never heard of removing software over the air, but I suppose it is possible. A typical update includes bug fixes and new features. After an update, a message comes on the screen with the updates that were installed. You cannot drive during an update. You can choose when to allow updates, such as 2 AM or manual only. Recent updates seem to be mostly new voice commands such as "set the temperature to 76". I can hardly remember 'em all. Once we got an acceleration update. Knocked half a second off the 0 to 60 times... Ours is 5.2 seconds I believe; we have the slow Model 3. Famous updates include "dog mode" where the windows are cracked and the AC keeps it cool, and "sentry mode". People kept breaking into Teslas looking for laptops and stuff. Tesla programmers quickly wrote sentry mode where the cameras come on when someone stays too close to the car without the Tesla app. A big red message comes on the dash screen. Everything is captured.

 

[Skippy722]

The way I understand it is this... Car was originally specced with Autopilot according to the window sticker, was lemon lawed and bought back, fixed, sold at auction to a third party dealer, sold to customer with Autopilot, and then Tesla removes the feature claiming they didn't pay for it. Sounds like double dipping to me.

 

[bulwnkl]

Originally Posted by Wolf359

Originally Posted by bulwnkl

I wish someone would bring suit against Tesla, if this is real.

What's the suit for?

"I _meant_ to charge you more" is tough nannies. You sold what you sold for the price you sold it.

 

[JeffKeryk]

My understanding is FSD is licensed to an owner, not the car. Regardless, the new owner is getting the short end of the stick. That's putting it lightly. Tesla needs to step up. If they were gonna remove the FSD app, they should have done it before selling the car to the auction. Who does the new owner go to? This should be between Tesla and the auction company.

 

[Rmay635703]

Originally Posted by Wolf359

You are basically proposing a finder's keeper mentality. In your case of a tow hitch, if the owner didn't pay for it and it was a mistake, it's still possible for the owner to retrieve it.

Your assuming that non physical software has some sort of real hard good value which it doesn't. Hundreds of years ago spoken word had minimal value, software is similar Sadly we are out of decent ideas and are contriving schemes to make money from something of questionable value, sort of like selling a ring tone (which should be illegal) At the end of the day having road in an auto-pilot equipped car I question you can argue it's worth having. I certainly was not very impressed and would argue it's presence or lack of is of no value Similar to this very sad case https://luxurylaunches.com/other_st...on-video-game-character-for-only-500.php Spending a lot of money on something of no value.

 

[Pew]

Originally Posted by JeffKeryk

I wouldn't call it pirated software; it was a mistake by Tesla. That does not make it yours... FSD is $7,000 now.

Then they should suck it up, act like a company, and let him have it. It's not Tesla's, it's his. He bought it.

 

[Olas]

Cut the wire to the antennae and there is no connectivity. RFID wallet protectors can be used to the same effect. Don't let third parties modify your property without your permission! Are you concerned with your Tesla's susceptibility to EMP?

 

[wdn]

Originally Posted by JeffKeryk

No, it is not like a tuner chip. It is an option. These cars are software controlled. Everything is configurable like an IPhone. It is getting an app without paying for it. I wouldn't call it pirated software; it was a mistake by Tesla. That does not make it yours... FSD is $7,000 now.

It is just like a tuner chip which these days are not actual chips they are pure software programmed through the OBD-Ii diagnostic port A tuner chip can be a manufacturer option, offered by Ford as a dealer installed option after the sale. But Ford cannot try to ban another company's tune. Precedent has already been set. An aftermarket software tune is legal. A software tune is no different than software cruise control or automatic door locks enabled by software. If a third party wants to sell a convenience package tune it is just as legal as a HP tune iPhone is a good example. It is not like getting an app without paying for it. It is like Apple trying to set up up a software marketplace called AppStore where nobody else can sell their own software at and get paid for it — unless they pay Apple. Apple lost in the Supreme Court last year when they tried to block an anti-monopoly lawsuit against AppStore. As soon as you (the manufacturer) make your car a software platform, by design, you cannot prevent another entrepreneur from writing a software package for it. It is anti-competitive. You cannot say the car is configurable after the sale but only by us.

 

[wdn]

Originally Posted by Skippy722

The way I understand it is this... Car was originally specced with Autopilot according to the window sticker, was lemon lawed and bought back, fixed, sold at auction to a third party dealer, sold to customer with Autopilot, and then Tesla removes the feature claiming they didn't pay for it. Sounds like double dipping to me.

In that case Tesla are weasels. If they can get away with that, pretty soon they can get away with making your car's air conditioner a subscription service too, and charging you $10 a month to use it. The only way this could hold up is if Tesla were a lease-only company and legally retained ownership of the car, and the schmucks were just renting them.

 

[Olas]

how about people stop commplaining and just use a laptop to enable whatever features they want? its not difficult, people are just lazy. we've swapped engines and brakes for years - why not swap code? you dont even need to get dirty or use tools. be proactive and make it happen.

 

[Andrew1972]

Coubter point I can think of is my first home. Age 21 out college where cable included uni housing. I bought my first house and setup tv into cable worked for 4 years and never paid. I used occasionally and finally stopped. Oddly turning on high speed internet only it came back so never paid for it.

 

[Jarlaxle]

Originally Posted by Olas

how about people stop commplaining and just use a laptop to enable whatever features they want? its not difficult, people are just lazy. we've swapped engines and brakes for years - why not swap code? you dont even need to get dirty or use tools. be proactive and make it happen.

You first.

 

[Wolf359]

Originally Posted by bulwnkl

Originally Posted by Wolf359

Originally Posted by bulwnkl

I wish someone would bring suit against Tesla, if this is real.

What's the suit for?

"I _meant_ to charge you more" is tough nannies. You sold what you sold for the price you sold it.

I'm not sure you understand how lawsuits work. What did the end user pay Tesla? What are the damages and how can they be made whole? There is a term know as Caveat emptor also. As for enabling the software. That seems a bit murky and makes me wonder where the line is between just enabling something that's there and software piracy. I think there's a difference between a car that has an alarm as an option that's disabled and all you have to do is move a jumper over to enable it, vs getting some software to enable a feature that you haven't paid for. Mind you, I don't have a problem with piracy, it's just that if that's what we're talking about, let's call it what it is, not get indignant over some legal issue that doesn't exist.

 

[Gasbuggy]

Originally Posted by Skippy722

The way I understand it is this... Car was originally specced with Autopilot according to the window sticker, was lemon lawed and bought back, fixed, sold at auction to a third party dealer, sold to customer with Autopilot, and then Tesla removes the feature claiming they didn't pay for it. Sounds like double dipping to me.

YUP

 

[Saabist]

Regardless of Tesla's overall merit or lack of same, I would not buy <span style="font-style: italic">any</span> car where the manufacturer had the capability to keep wireless control of the car after you drive it off the lot.