Tesla refusing to show me my own logs?

[bob_p]

The OP may be in a gray area about getting access to the logs.

The only legally binding terms and conditions are in the Motor Vehicle Order/Purchase Agreement that is executed as part of the purchase from Tesla. This agreement is extremely simple and doesn't actually say anything about the technology or the features that were purchased, such as defining what "Supercharger Enabled", "Enhanced Autopilot", or "Full Self-Driving Capability" actually means. And there isn't anything in the agreement that states anything about Tesla's collection of data or the use of software (in released or beta state).

So, it's unclear who actually owns the software running on the vehicle or the logs that are being generated.

It's possible a case could be made under lemon laws for some of the software issues (such as frequent console/dashboard reboots).

Though with anything related to EAP/FSD (including TACC), since that software is marked as "beta", the lemon laws probably don't apply - which likely means even if a case could be made to get access to the logs, logs of using optional software operating under beta wouldn't be considered justification for triggering a lemon law.

As for Tesla's T&C's since purchasing our first Tesla in early 2013, it's been surprising how little Tesla puts into their T&C's and that their lawyers haven't insisted in providing more details in the agreement, to provide Tesla more legal protections on their technology and potential liability.

 

[Az_Rael]

It looks like Tesla has removed the paragraph in the owners manual that they would release logs to the vehicle owner in the event of a non warranty repair issue. I was wondering why no one in this thread had brought that paragraph up yet. Wonder when they made that change?

2016 Model S manual:


Today:

 

[mmmk]

Strictly taken, you don't even own the hardware - they don't allow you to load your own software into it (without "hacking" which is probably infringement of DMCA)

DMCA explicitly states car owners are allowed to modify their software. So unless you're leasing you own your hardware, and if you own your hardware you can do whatever you want to the software.

Sources:
Soon It'll Be OK To Tinker With Your Car's Software After All
Car owners allowed to modify vehicle software after Library of Congress ruling

Tesla also uses an enormous amount of GNU GPL licensed software projects which have a copy-left policy described here:
A Quick Guide to GPLv3 - GNU Project - Free Software Foundation

 

[E-Ryc]

If they weakened the rules, the better. If I remember well, originally it was sth like: You can do ... (whatever) but you can't bypass any protective countermeasures (like encrypted boot loaders).

 

[ricebucket]

It's just like I can take notes and you can take notes. Both can write notes but a note belongs to whoever writes it.

Tesla keeps its log in a certain place.

Owners who know how that works can also keep a car log in their own location (memory card, cell phone, or server...)

For those who don't know to get a car log, get a dash cam not just for front view but also for your foot pedals so you can have proofs.

Two things:

1) there should be a distinction between what are legal rights and what *should* be the rights of owners. I make this distinction in my original post. Tesla is a first in this industry with the amount of software in the car, and it's conceivable that laws should be updated to reflect new scenarios that did not exist when the laws were made.

2) I don't think the legal case for log ownership is clearcut here. I understand that Tesla owns the software and you own only a license. But what about derivative works resulting from the software? Think about this: If I write a book using Microsoft Word, does Microsoft own my book? Or maybe just the binary file containing the contents of the book? If everything generated/produced/made by the car is owned by Tesla, then I think we have a very slippery slope in terms of what Tesla can claim ownership on.

 

[drklain]

You'd be hard pressed to define a data log as intellectual property/derivative work you created using the Tesla. Far more likely is that the data log is treated just like other equipment logs which computerized system manufacturers (to include cars, airplanes, heavy equipment, DDC and SCADA systems) generate and use for data collection and/or maintenance purposes. The manufacturer notifies the user (purchaser of the device) that (a) they generate logs and (b) use them for X, Y and Z. Unless they advertise and sell the product saying you are able to see the logs, they are under no obligation to share them with you. Not GDPR, but EU regulations mandated that Teslas in Europe have a button where the owner can elect whether or not to share the information with Tesla. Those who choose not to, cannot take advantage of some services Tesla provides.

I just don't see how there is an expectation to see these logs, but maybe that's just me. I agree that it would be nice to see them, but I don't see a basis (legal or otherwise) that accessing these logs SHOULD be the rights of owners.

 

[Electroman]

Think about this: If I write a book using Microsoft Word, does Microsoft own my book?

What?? how do people come up with these kinds of reasoning?

MS Word's primary function itself is for the end user to create content. The function of the AP software is to drive the car. You only own the rights to USE the software. You are not even allowed to the sell the software on its own without the car. You are not allowed to reverse-engineer the software. Any logs it creates falls in the same domain of the software itself.

 

[bob_p]

You only own the rights to USE the software. You are not even allowed to the sell the software on its own without the car. You are not allowed to reverse-engineer the software. Any logs it creates falls in the same domain of the software itself.

Can you point to where this is specified in either the Vehicle Purchase Agreement or any other legal document provided to owners, with their agreement?

Software typically comes with terms and conditions, and by opening packaging or agreeing to T&C's within the software, the owner agrees to abide by the T&C's.

I don't recall seeing anything official from Tesla about the software or data logs (and even if something is stated in the Owners Manual, that's not the same as an agreement or T&C's that have been implicitly or explicitly agreed upon by the owner).

I agree that Tesla owners should only have usage rights of the software, and be prohibited from reverse engineering. The data logs are in a gray area - because Tesla may be including diagnostic data to help them in the design of their software, not just in monitoring the operation of the vehicle, so there could be a portion of the data log that Tesla would want to maintain as proprietary and not give to competitors (or hackers) to use in reverse engineering the software.

But unless Tesla has put the rights into an official document, agreed upon by the owner, it's not clear what rights owners have to the software. It's possible that by providing the software to customers, without an agreement in place to cover software rights, this could be interpreted as Tesla giving the software away, to use without restrictions by the vehicle owners...

I'm not an attorney - so an expert on this could provide more insight on how this works, without any agreement in place between Tesla and vehicle owners on the software and data logs.

 

[drklain]

Your assumption is wrong because you are treating it as if you bought a software product. This is no different than the iphone you bought with iOS on it. You have no rights to iOS or to any of the logs Apple may keep. Same goes for the software running on your ICE vehicle (and every modern car has software running behind it to control the engine and the various displays in the car). People are treating a Tesla as something different than those items. Tesla owns the software and all rights to it. You bought the car and own the car, but they don't owe you access to the software that drives the car anymore than Apple owes you the software that drives your iphone or Ford owes you the software that drives a Mustang...

 

[Dragetreneren]

...

because Tesla has not yet delivered a product to be defective...

Exactly. Advanced AP hardware along with the software features have been purchased. Which means the author may ask interest for the time since the promise has not been delivered. This does not apply to FSD.

To clarify about software release cycle, the Beta release is characterized as folowing:
"...Software in the beta stage is also known as betaware.[3] Beta phase generally begins when the software is feature complete but likely to contain a number of known or unknown bugs..."
There is a lot of materials on this, e.g. Software release life cycle - Wikipedia
The features promised for Advanced AP might be buggy but must be complete. When this is not true it is a subject of a complaint.

Responsibility is 100% on the driver however.

I would recommend to try keeping a constructive dialog with manufacturer. Tesla is a young company. While you might be 100% right in your complaints it does not hurt to be cooperative. Even if you need to employ legal instruments. Appealing to the latter does not imply one being "mean". Know your rights, but do not misuse them.