Tesla emailed me today, in MA, asking to "Vote No on Question 1". This is the Right to Repair law that last passed with 86%, in 2012. Here, they are joining a cabal of car-makers (below). I don't know if they are $upporting the lobby, but I have also been called and surveyed by a party who wouldn't disclose its sponsor. The survey feigned "non-bias" and went on to ask how I felt about losing privacy, data security and the idea my car would be less safe, if 3rd parties are allowed access to my car.
Small shops, and auto parts stores have raised ~22 million in support of Q 1. Voting 'Yes' seems as obvious to me as it did in 2012, but I've seen what 10's of millions can do to state ballot initiatives. From Ballotpedia:
"As of October 5, 2020, the campaign had raised $25.9 million in contributions. The top donors to the [vote 'No'] committee were General Motors, Toyota Motor North America, Inc, Ford Motor Company, American Honda Motor Co., Inc, and Nissan North America Inc. "
From Tesla:
Hello,
As you go to the polls this fall, Tesla asks that you vote no on Question 1. Tesla has long applied an open source philosophy to our patented intellectual property for electric vehicles. In this spirit, we provide public access to our service, parts, and body repair manuals, wiring diagrams, service bulletins, labor codes and times, and other information used to perform mechanical, electrical, and collision repair work on our vehicles.
Question 1 goes well beyond what is necessary to perform this work, and it potentially jeopardizes vehicle and data security. The requirements, pushed by two national auto shop lobbying groups, would make vehicles more vulnerable to cyberattacks and would make successful attacks more harmful. But don’t take our word for it. Here’s what the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA), the federal agency tasked with vehicle safety and security, had to say about Question 1:
Please consider sharing this with your friends and family.
Thank you,
Tesla Policy Team
On some things, yes, but for many more than I've experienced with other makers Tesla's, "we provide public access to our service, parts, and body repair manuals, wiring diagrams, service bulletins" does not ring true.
Small shops, and auto parts stores have raised ~22 million in support of Q 1. Voting 'Yes' seems as obvious to me as it did in 2012, but I've seen what 10's of millions can do to state ballot initiatives. From Ballotpedia:
"As of October 5, 2020, the campaign had raised $25.9 million in contributions. The top donors to the [vote 'No'] committee were General Motors, Toyota Motor North America, Inc, Ford Motor Company, American Honda Motor Co., Inc, and Nissan North America Inc. "
From Tesla:
Hello,
As you go to the polls this fall, Tesla asks that you vote no on Question 1. Tesla has long applied an open source philosophy to our patented intellectual property for electric vehicles. In this spirit, we provide public access to our service, parts, and body repair manuals, wiring diagrams, service bulletins, labor codes and times, and other information used to perform mechanical, electrical, and collision repair work on our vehicles.
Question 1 goes well beyond what is necessary to perform this work, and it potentially jeopardizes vehicle and data security. The requirements, pushed by two national auto shop lobbying groups, would make vehicles more vulnerable to cyberattacks and would make successful attacks more harmful. But don’t take our word for it. Here’s what the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA), the federal agency tasked with vehicle safety and security, had to say about Question 1:
- "As this testimony will further elaborate, it is our view that the terms of the ballot initiative would prohibit manufacturers from complying with both existing Federal guidance and cybersecurity hygiene best practices. NHTSA is also concerned about the increased safety-related cybersecurity risks of a requirement for remote, real-time, bi-directional (i.e., read/write capability) access to safety-critical vehicular systems. Given the multi-year automotive product development cycle, the deadline for compliance appears impossible for manufacturers to meet in a responsible manner, risking removal of existing cybersecurity controls over wireless access into vehicles as the ballot initiative directs, which increases the risk of cybersecurity attacks that could jeopardize public safety. Further, the requirement to establish universal and standardized access requirements increases the scale of risks of any potentially successful cybersecurity attack...
- "NHTSA has grave concerns with any proposed policy that would effectively prohibit wireless access controls in motor vehicles sold in the United States. This would raise substantial safety risks for American families. "
Please consider sharing this with your friends and family.
Thank you,
Tesla Policy Team
On some things, yes, but for many more than I've experienced with other makers Tesla's, "we provide public access to our service, parts, and body repair manuals, wiring diagrams, service bulletins" does not ring true.