Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 10
Author Topic: Who owns ECU tunes, and what do people consider stealing?  (Read 111557 times)
Tony@NefMoto
Administrator
Hero Member
*****

Karma: +132/-4
Offline Offline

Posts: 1389


2001.5 Audi S4 Stage 3


« on: May 12, 2011, 10:18:09 PM »

What constitutes stealing when it comes to ECU tunes?

Technically all ME7 tuners are only modifying the systems that were made by Bosch. No one says we are stealing from Bosch by enabling systems that are disabled in OEM engine computers. No one says we are stealing from Bosch by tuning data to produce more power then the OEM tunes due.

Thoughts?
« Last Edit: May 12, 2011, 10:20:26 PM by Tony@NefMoto » Logged

Remember you have to log in if you want to see the file attachments!
Info or questions, please add to the wiki: http://www.nefariousmotorsports.com/wiki
Follow NefMoto developments on Twitter: http://twitter.com/nefmoto
DJGonzo
Guest
« Reply #1 on: May 12, 2011, 10:45:11 PM »

Like you said, we are all modifying Bosch's equipment; however when you sell a tune, you are not selling the SW, you are selling a SERVICE. AFAIK nobody has a license to sell Bosch's copyrighted SW.

Now stealing would be just blatently copying someone's elses tune and call it as their own or just flashing or cloning something you didn't pay for. I think its pretty simple.
Logged
Tony@NefMoto
Administrator
Hero Member
*****

Karma: +132/-4
Offline Offline

Posts: 1389


2001.5 Audi S4 Stage 3


« Reply #2 on: May 13, 2011, 12:10:54 AM »

I agree that if you take someones work, and then sell it unmodified, and call it your own, then that is stealing. You are making money off of someones work without giving them credit.

Ultimately I believe that when you get a tune for your car, you are paying the tuner to tune your car. You are either paying them to put a copy of a standard tune on your car, or paying them to create a custom tune for your car. Once the tune is on your car, it belongs to you and not the tuner. If you sign an agreement saying otherwise, then that is another matter.

Personally I see the value in a skilled tuners time to tune a car. Selling copies of a standard tune for hundreds of dollars each is not fair in my opinion, because there is no limit in the number of copies that can be made, and no effort is needed to create another copy. Paying for the service of the tuner to custom tune your car seems much more realistic to me.
Logged

Remember you have to log in if you want to see the file attachments!
Info or questions, please add to the wiki: http://www.nefariousmotorsports.com/wiki
Follow NefMoto developments on Twitter: http://twitter.com/nefmoto
bazaa
Full Member
***

Karma: +14/-1
Offline Offline

Posts: 66


« Reply #3 on: May 13, 2011, 12:37:29 AM »

Also if you buy a car that already has tuned sw in it, purchased by one of the previous owners how could you be held accountable for what ever you choose to do with the ecu or sw .
I think sharing files is fine for r&d for your own knowledge ,Im sure tuners look at each others work if the get the chance.
Bazaa
Logged
Tony@NefMoto
Administrator
Hero Member
*****

Karma: +132/-4
Offline Offline

Posts: 1389


2001.5 Audi S4 Stage 3


« Reply #4 on: May 13, 2011, 12:56:05 AM »

Another thing I think about when it comes to copying tunes is copy protection. If a tuner believes the tune they made really is worth a lot of money, then they should invest in good copy protection like APR.
Logged

Remember you have to log in if you want to see the file attachments!
Info or questions, please add to the wiki: http://www.nefariousmotorsports.com/wiki
Follow NefMoto developments on Twitter: http://twitter.com/nefmoto
julex
Hero Member
*****

Karma: +79/-4
Offline Offline

Posts: 923


« Reply #5 on: May 13, 2011, 07:33:22 AM »

My view point on this is as follows.

Only Bosch holds the rights to ECU software and only they can possibly pursue after and sue people for modifying or selling their software.

No tuner has the right or legal foot to go after anybody replicating "their" tune as the file doesn't belong to them at all.

Moreover, they need to sit quiet and enjoy the qui pro quo situation they're in and collect money from people who have no skills to modify it on their own.


End of story.

Now if said tuner came out with their own engine management system, invested years of development into its software and was selling thatm, then sure, they would hold the rights to software and could go after anybody they wanted.
Logged
Matt Danger
Full Member
***

Karma: +17/-1
Offline Offline

Posts: 116


« Reply #6 on: May 13, 2011, 07:35:38 AM »

Ultimately I believe that when you get a tune for your car, you are paying the tuner to tune your car. You are either paying them to put a copy of a standard tune on your car, or paying them to create a custom tune for your car. Once the tune is on your car, it belongs to you and not the tuner. If you sign an agreement saying otherwise, then that is another matter.

This is how I feel.

On the topic of reusing pieces of code brought up in the anti-lag thread: I like to see code shared openly so long as the original developer(s) are properly credited.
Logged
DJGonzo
Guest
« Reply #7 on: May 13, 2011, 08:52:58 AM »

I agree that if you take someones work, and then sell it unmodified, and call it your own, then that is stealing. You are making money off of someones work without giving them credit.

Ultimately I believe that when you get a tune for your car, you are paying the tuner to tune your car. You are either paying them to put a copy of a standard tune on your car, or paying them to create a custom tune for your car. Once the tune is on your car, it belongs to you and not the tuner. If you sign an agreement saying otherwise, then that is another matter.

Personally I see the value in a skilled tuners time to tune a car. Selling copies of a standard tune for hundreds of dollars each is not fair in my opinion, because there is no limit in the number of copies that can be made, and no effort is needed to create another copy. Paying for the service of the tuner to custom tune your car seems much more realistic to me.
Well I agree with you partly on this. I do tuning for a fee, so you will get a tuners point of view: I always do custom tuning, and I ask the customer if they feel the tune is good or if it needs any tweaks. I never reflash the same ol' file over and over and over again. However, someone buying a tune from me doesn't grant them the right to re-use any of my modified maps/code into making a tune for someone else. I don't mind them tweaking it for their own use, however, I already offer this for free.
Also if you buy a car that already has tuned sw in it, purchased by one of the previous owners how could you be held accountable for what ever you choose to do with the ecu or sw .
I think sharing files is fine for r&d for your own knowledge ,Im sure tuners look at each others work if the get the chance.
Bazaa
One thing is looking at someone else's work and another is copying maps to tune other cars with.

Im sure a lot of people look at another person's work. The thing is that sometimes some individuals just take the easy route and copy some maps over, change the numbers slightly and call it their own...
Another thing I think about when it comes to copying tunes is copy protection. If a tuner believes the tune they made really is worth a lot of money, then they should invest in good copy protection like APR.
Well what about Revo? Their trials are KNOWN to fudge with your ECU so after the trial is over, your car is slower. Not to mention other things they do to ME7/MED9 to make other tuner's lives miserable and make them look bad.

That's not protection; that's being a jerk.

My view point on this is as follows.

Only Bosch holds the rights to ECU software and only they can possibly pursue after and sue people for modifying or selling their software.

No tuner has the right or legal foot to go after anybody replicating "their" tune as the file doesn't belong to them at all.

Moreover, they need to sit quiet and enjoy the qui pro quo situation they're in and collect money from people who have no skills to modify it on their own.


End of story.
Put yourself in a tuner's shoes and ask yourself if you would like everyone that has a 15 dollar dongle and pirated software (and Im not saying anyone on here does this, bear with me) to be able to copy your tune and/or even sell it without you getting one cent for all your hard work?

Just so everyone knows, Im not against this forum or anybody on here at all. Im here to share info.
Logged
carlossus
Sr. Member
****

Karma: +38/-0
Offline Offline

Posts: 394

Leon Curpa Stg1+


« Reply #8 on: May 13, 2011, 10:30:36 AM »

I have a few comments as a newb: -

Most other forms of hacking are open and free. Jailbreaks for phones and consoles being a good example. In these cases the copyrighted code is never distributed - it is always patched in order to remain legal. This is an honest question, how come tuners sell BIN files that are 90% Bosch code without the same fears?

Quote
Well what about Revo? Their trials are KNOWN to fudge with your ECU so after the trial is over, your car is slower.

I have heard this often and even repeated it myself here, but can you please link to any test evidence of this (probably best in a new thread though).
Logged
RaraK
Hero Member
*****

Karma: +58/-2
Offline Offline

Posts: 539


« Reply #9 on: May 13, 2011, 10:53:03 AM »

It all comes down to moral's of the individual, i can copy out a unitronic big turbo tune, and flash ecu's and sell them all day as unitronic big turbo ECU's and make money, however, i dont believe in that practice, nor should anyone do that. 

Now would a company have an legal protection against this? Not really.  Lets say i change a few things in the maps and now sell it as my own, now im no different than any other tuner.  Im not saying tuners copy off each other, but we all modify bosch code, at the end of the day.  The only person who may have potential rights to this software would be bosch, but clearly its not an issue to them that i know of.

The most one could take legal action on is intellectual property rights.  That is not always easy to win.
Logged
julex
Hero Member
*****

Karma: +79/-4
Offline Offline

Posts: 923


« Reply #10 on: May 13, 2011, 11:20:31 AM »


Put yourself in a tuner's shoes and ask yourself if you would like everyone that has a 15 dollar dongle and pirated software (and Im not saying anyone on here does this, bear with me) to be able to copy your tune and/or even sell it without you getting one cent for all your hard work?

Just so everyone knows, Im not against this forum or anybody on here at all. Im here to share info.

I honestly couldn't care less seeing that I could tune my car from scratch in one day and have it decently running.

OTS tunes don't deserve to be paid more than what the hourly rate to hire a mechanic costs, which would be about 100 per tune if you can't be bothered to do it yourself.

The only reason OTS tunes are so expensive is:

#1 because the companies spent a lot of money making futile attempts to protect the 5 maps they changed

#2 people generally don't know how to make changes

#3 there is a bit of equipment and software required to make such changes

Custom tune on a DYNO, different story. But then you can't just copy custom tune and have it working right on some other car so there is an inherent protection from people grabbing these.


Logged
littco
Hero Member
*****

Karma: +52/-7
Offline Offline

Posts: 903


« Reply #11 on: May 13, 2011, 11:22:16 AM »

I own ECU tunes, did I steal them? no. I was given them or asked for them..

Stealing would be taking without the owners permission. So who owns these files? The tuner or the person that paid the tuner to install the file on his ecu...

So what about the Dealers who buy their maps from someone else under franchise like Revo? Does the tuner own them or Revo.. You pay your money to the tuner..

 
« Last Edit: May 13, 2011, 12:21:08 PM by littco » Logged
elRey
Hero Member
*****

Karma: +32/-1
Offline Offline

Posts: 565


« Reply #12 on: May 13, 2011, 11:34:37 AM »

If it's not specifically copyrighted, and you haven't entered a contract stating you will not do such (sometimes a purchase agreement), it's not stealing.

That's not to say it's ethical tho
« Last Edit: May 13, 2011, 11:36:17 AM by elRey » Logged
DJGonzo
Guest
« Reply #13 on: May 13, 2011, 01:26:04 PM »

I don't think off the shelf tunes are worth $600 USD. Hec, not even custom tunes for a stock car is worth that much.

With that said, just the fact that they are overpriced doesn't grant anyone the right to copy their file. If you don't like the price, just don't buy it. Plain simple.
Logged
Jason
Hero Member
*****

Karma: +38/-0
Offline Offline

Posts: 500


Breaks everything!


« Reply #14 on: May 13, 2011, 10:37:15 PM »

I think the issue is pretty cut-and-dry.

If you use somebody else's code, and it causes them a direct loss of revenue, then you are stealing.

For example if you copy APR's map switching code and don't pay them, or worse use it as your own and sell it as a feature, you are stealing from APR.

If you take somebody's calibration that you didn't pay for and use it, you are stealing.  If you sell it as your own, you're stealing.

If you take somebody's calibration and tweak it slightly, it's a grey area... on one hand you're probably smart enough to have started from scratch, but on the other hand, their calibration as a baseline likely saved you time.

Bosch likely doesn't care what we do because we do not cause a loss of revenue for them.  If Bosch was selling aftermarket tunes, then I'm sure they'd take exception.  If we cloned the hardware, and then used their code for a car we were building to mass produce, then I'm sure they'd have an issue as it would be considered a loss in revenue.

Edit:  I also agree $600 off-the-shelf tunes are bullshit.  $600 should include 3 dyno pulls with a wideband, and tweaks to the file specific to your car if required.
« Last Edit: May 13, 2011, 10:39:32 PM by Jason » Logged
Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 10
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines Page created in 0.027 seconds with 17 queries. (Pretty URLs adds 0.001s, 0q)