In an increasingly wireless world, a battle is brewing over who gets to access the intricate data transmitted by our vehicles. Independent mechanics and right-to-repair advocates are raising concerns that automakers might restrict access to vital repair information through diagnostic ports. This move, they fear, would severely hinder independent repair shops and lock car owners into relying solely on dealerships for maintenance and repairs. Glenn Wilder, a Massachusetts auto and tire repair shop owner, voiced this apprehension to lawmakers in 2020, stating that automakers could potentially “block what they want” when independent repairers attempt to access a car’s sophisticated internal systems. This concern highlights a fight over the right to repair cars that extends beyond just mechanics and dealerships, touching upon fundamental consumer rights and data control.
This struggle has far-reaching implications, not only for the automotive industry but for any device that transmits data back to its manufacturer after purchase. Kyle Wiens, a prominent right-to-repair advocate and founder of iFixit, calls this “right to repair 2.0.” He points out, “The auto world is farther along than the rest of the world is. Independents already have access to information and parts. Now they’re talking about data streams. But that doesn’t make the fight any less important.” The automotive sector, already grappling with these issues, serves as a crucial testing ground for broader right to repair principles in our connected world.
The Expanding Right to Repair Movement
The automotive industry’s current predicament is at the forefront of a larger movement advocating for the “right to repair.” This concept argues that consumers should have the ability to repair their purchased goods, be it a smartphone, a tractor, or, crucially, a car, using independent repair services or by themselves. While independent mechanics have historically had access to repair information and parts, the new frontier is data streams. Modern vehicles are increasingly complex computers on wheels, generating and transmitting vast amounts of data. Access to this data is becoming indispensable for effective diagnostics and repairs. The concern is that if automakers control this data flow, independent repair shops could be effectively shut out, limiting consumer choice and potentially driving up repair costs.
Automakers’ Concerns: Safety and Security
Automakers, however, argue that granting unrestricted access to vehicle data is fraught with danger and could violate federal law. The Alliance for Automotive Innovation, a trade group representing major automakers, initiated a lawsuit against Massachusetts in federal court in November 2020, shortly after voters in the state approved a ballot measure supporting right to repair. Their argument centers on the premise that the federal government, not individual states, should regulate access to cars’ telematics systems. Furthermore, they contend that creating an open data platform as mandated by the law, particularly within the given timeframe, would be irresponsible and pose significant safety risks. They raise concerns about cybersecurity vulnerabilities and the potential for misuse of sensitive vehicle data, emphasizing the complexity of modern car systems.
Josh Siegel, an assistant professor of engineering at Michigan State University specializing in connected-car security, lends some credence to the automakers’ concerns. He suggests that the system envisioned by the law might not be technically feasible or safe. Siegel explains that these telematics systems provide access not only to diagnostic data but also to critical driver-assistance systems, such as emergency braking and drive-by-wire controls. He argues that expecting automakers to develop a secure and open telematics system in a short timeframe was unrealistic, highlighting the intricate nature of these systems and the potential safety implications of unauthorized access. “I think that they could create a platform that would meet some of the requirements of what the legislation is calling for,” he says, “but I wouldn’t want it in my own car.”
Independent Repair Shops and Consumer Rights
The Massachusetts Right to Repair Committee, representing over 1,600 repair shops in the state, counters that automakers have had ample time to prepare for data sharing. They emphasize that independent shops need access to this data to continue providing competitive and affordable repair services to consumers. Advocates for the right to repair also point to the Biden administration’s support for the movement. In the summer prior to the Massachusetts lawsuit, the administration directed the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) to formulate rules that would simplify consumer access to their data and repair tools. There is hope among right-to-repair proponents that these federal rules will extend to the automotive sector, creating a more level playing field for independent repair shops and empowering consumers with greater control over their vehicles.
Dealerships Caught in the Middle
Car dealerships find themselves in a precarious position, caught between automakers and independent repair shops. This situation is further complicated by the ongoing global chip shortage, which has significantly hampered vehicle production and sales. Bob O’Koniewski, executive vice president of the Massachusetts State Automobile Dealers Association, expresses frustration with both sides. While critical of manufacturers for not actively participating in the dialogue, he also accuses the independent repair industry of a “money grab.” His association has proposed legislation in Massachusetts that would grant automakers until 2025 to comply with the open-data-platform law, seeking a more extended timeline for implementation.
The Bigger Picture: Data Monetization and Consumer Awareness
Beyond the immediate concerns of repair access, the controversy raises a more fundamental question: Do consumers fully grasp the extent of data being collected and transmitted by their vehicles and where that data goes? Josh Siegel highlights the significant economic potential of connected-car data. He and his colleagues estimated a few years ago that the US market for connected-car data could reach a staggering $92 billion. This lucrative market has sparked a race among manufacturers, parts suppliers, dealers, and insurers to secure their share. The data generated by our cars—GPS location, temperature, biometric information, and data on critical components—is valuable and increasingly sought after. “The most important thing is to show people their own breadcrumbs,” Siegel emphasizes, underscoring the need for greater transparency and consumer awareness regarding vehicle data.
For car owners like Marc Ferrelli, the implications of this data battle are clear and concerning. Reflecting on the situation, he succinctly captures the sentiment of many consumers: “Sucks to be us.” His experience and frustration mirror the broader anxieties surrounding data privacy and control in the age of connected vehicles. The fight over the right to repair cars is not just about fixing vehicles; it’s about who controls the vast amounts of data they generate and the future of consumer rights in an increasingly connected world.
