https://www.evolutionm.net/forums/sh...d.php?t=201279

The following policy was posted in the above thread.

"Legitimate questions have been raised concerning the legality of posting vendor created reflash maps. Specifically, the violation of intellectual property rights relative to the techniques and methods used to tune a motor. We respectfully ask that members not post maps that have been purchased from a vendor. Please understand the tuning methods used by tuners are the result of years of experience which they have transferred to their products. They may have legal rights to those maps. Additionally, there may be restrictions in the purchase agreement concerning disclosure of data.

The decision to remove any vendor purchased maps and detailed discussions concerning vendor techniques is final. Specifically, discussions of sufficient detail to disclose proprietary methods and/or data. This is a legal decision as Evom cannot assume any liability associated with such discussions and will remove any such posts. Thank you for your understanding."


The big question is - What makes the EcuFlash tuning program different from all other tuning platforms? We have 13 other tuning system subforums with no similar rule. Most of them are user tuneable/changable. I do not understand how all of a sudden a policy like this can be applied to only one tuning media, while all the others are left open.

If I paid Tuner X to tune my AEM EMS, and then I add a new part and ask the forum members to look at my tune and offer input on how to update it, that is not against the rules. But if I paid Tuner Y to tune my car by reflashing the stock EMS, according to the rules as posted so far I would not be able to post it up to ask for assistance. I would get banned or the thread deleted.

I feel the forum needs to have a more defined policy on this with regards to ALL tuning platforms. I do not have the answers to what the rules should be, so I would like to open up a discussion here in an open forum.

Here are a couple thoughts to start off the discussion.

- I have had my car tuned by 4 different experts using 3 different tuning platforms/devices. There have been no purchase agreements or confidentiality clauses in any of these encounters. Heck, I didn't even get a receipt on a couple of them. Niether of the websites for two popular reflashers I checked have any sort of non-disclosure information listed.
- Perhaps vendors/tuners on the forum could come to an agreement of what is/is not acceptable. Basically, let them set policy with regards to their specific services.
- If one tuner allows his tune to be shared and another doesn't, I think the market advantage would be to the open tuner
- Are people going to start trading tunes "underground" on KAZAA like they do music and ****?
- As you can see from my sig I am not a staunch supporter of one shop or another. I have a pretty wide array of parts on my car.
- If I purchase a DVD I can have 100 friends come over and watch it, as long as I don't charge them.
- All you have to do is change one setting and the ECU program - now it is custom tuned by yourself. Then, according to the current rules you could share it.


EVOlutionary

 

That is a very interesting point. The one big difference with ECUFlash is that it is an open / free platform. I don't know of any other flashing software that is. It opens up vast resources to the tuner and now the end user. Since both ECUTek and the Techtom products were proprietary and used on a pay basis by the tuners, this was a non-issue. Now that users can essentially pull their tuner created maps off the ecu and view / share them, the could concievably be reversed engineered by budding tuners hoping to learn some of the trade secrets. This either crosses or comes very close to crossing the ethical lines in my opinion. It might be a good start to get the major recognized tuners to weigh in on whether they condone the sharing of their maps. After that, the discussion could move forward. For me, I would have no issue keeping proprietary any tuning that's been done on my car. Others may feel otherwise.

 

While you have a good point concerning reflashes of the stock ECU, the software to tune an AEM EMS, and I am sure most other standalones, is free. AEMPro is an open/free platform also. Any consumer has always been able to use that software to look at a Professional tuners work, copy it, change it, etc on the EMS.

My point is, should reprogramming of the stock ECU be treated differently than reprogramming of an aftermarket ECU. I say NO. It is the exact same principle, just with different hardware and software.

If the forum moderators or owners, or the EVO enthusiast community as a whole, are going to impose strict rules on this latest tuning platform, I feel that they need to keep the rules consistent along all platforms.

I think the release of this new tuning medium could be the beginning of a paradigm shift in the automotive aftermarket tuning community. We can either ignore it and miss out, or work with it and benefit from the changes. We can use paradigms and paradigm shift to explain how some people or companies fail and others succeed. The ones who succeed are those who can shift to a new paradigm; the ones who fail are those who remain hidebound and fixated on traditional ideas because they have proved successful in the past or because they can see no use for some new idea. The Swiss had been the leaders in watch making for a hundred years, yet they have now lost that title to the Japanese. The Swiss failed to patent or market the quartz watch, even though they invented it, because they couldn't shift paradigms. They couldn't shift paradigms because they couldn't see that there would be a market for another kind of watch besides the kind they'd been successfully making and selling for generations. The Japanese made all the money from the quartz watch because they didn't have an old paradigm that locked them into a way of thinking that precluded patenting and marketing quartz watches.

So, are we going to be like the Swiss or the Japanese. I drive an EVO, so I pick Japanese.

EVOlutionary

 

They should be treated the same way matter of fact there is way more tuner input in an aem.
So if the flash is protected the AEM stuff should be protected the same way.

Sean

 

Sometimes keeping your mouth shut is a great idea. I mean this in the most respectful way. Now the mods are going to shut down all sharing of maps.

 

Possible, not neccisarily true. The way I see it, shutting down the sharing of maps publicly on the forums would do little to stop the actual sharing of maps. People would do it under the surface, via PM or AIM or whatever. I believe that trying to put alot of controls on what you can and can't share about your vendor-purchased tune will be like sticking with the same old paradigm. If we shift our thinking, shift our paradigm, it may just be a huge revolution in the automotive industry. We can probably draw an analogy to the Open Source movement in computer software and GNU and Linux.

Just imagine if you bought a new car and threw on a few performance parts. The way things are now you pretty much buy a generic TTM flash for cheap, or you buy a custom tuned flash for more $$$. You get more power and probably better driveability with the custom tune, but it costs more. Now just imagine in the future - you go to a huge database and download a map for your car based on what mods you have. It will be like a TTM flash, except it may be free. Then if you want to get the best power and driveablitiy you still go to a tuner and pay to have a custom tune.

Now here is another idea. Tuners listen up, here is a free, non-patented or copyrighted idea. What if YOU owned and controlled this database. Say you have 1000 different flashes for different year cars and different part combinations. A customer will pay a one-time membership fee for access to these flashes. The database will be searchable to help the consumer find something for their specific part combination. As they add parts and go farther with modifying they will go back and get the appropriate map. You could also have a cheap one-time-only option for those who don't plan on changing anything on their car in the near future. You will still travel around the country doing custom tunes, and as you do this you can use the information gained to update and add to the open database with new combos. There would be a disclaimer of liability if someone blew up their motor, and there would be a confidentiality clause that forbids sharing of any of the downloaded maps. This would take alot of the busy work out of the TTM flashes - you are basically letting the consumer do it rather than sending it to you. The consumer is paying to do their own work, brilliant!

Now if anyone wants to take this idea and run with it I would be happy to share some more ideas. Free of charge of course. For me it's a hobby, not a business. I understand businesses need to really protect themselves in this day and age, but sometimes it is nice when they really look out for the best interest of the consumer. Sorry for the ramble, but this whole topic has just got my mind racing trying to predict how it will impact the EVO community . . . and the world!

EVOlutionary

 

Sean,

As a tuner sounds like you are in favor of protecting all tuning platforms. Correct? Do you have any input on how exactly we can achieve that?

What happens when I have had Tuner A do my car, but then for one reason or another I decide to have Tuner B work on it next time? Tuner B would then have access to exactly how Tuner A made it hit XXXHP and spool up at XXXXRPMs and idle well with XXX cams.

I think most of the top tuners feel they can as well as or do a better job than the other guys. I don't think there is much reverse-engineering going on in these circles. Now, a new or second-rate tuner that is trying to play catch up with the big boys is a different story. But I doubt that many people would go to them after haveing a great tuner work on their car.

EVOlutionary

 

I don't think it makes much difference..for the reason you stated. I retune cars that have been done by other tuners all the time..and I always start with either one of my base maps, or from scratch. Its MUCH easier to start from scratch with something -you- know works right, instead of disecting someone else's work to see what they've done right/wrong. A million ways to skin a cat...and as a tuner you do it your own way. But I'm sure there are some out there with the sole purpose of copying maps.

 

Hey guys, sorry for the delay in response.

I'll try to keep this as simple I can.

Basically this comes down to a grey area copy write issue. Many of you will argue that when you purchased the tune from the tuner, the property becomes yours. Although it sounds right, it may not be true. Each tuner handles this differently.

An example would be if you bought a magazine off of the news stand. The magazine would be yours but the content inside isn’t yours to distribute. We already ran into a similar issue when someone posted a scanned motor trend article here. We were notified to take it down immediately.

Now I know that there are some people who have created their own maps and would like to share them with the community. I would be all for that, but the issue comes down to trying to moderate which maps are created from scratch and which ones were taken from a tuner and distributed without permission.

The other argument mentioned above was having the same rule apply in the other sections of engine management. This rule does apply to the other sections. Any maps being exchanged without the permission of the tuner who created it should be reported (by the tuner) so we can take care of it. From what I’ve noticed so far, the maps available have been offered by the tuner to the public as base lines or the tuner gave permission to their customers to post them on the site.

Bottom line is I do feel that EcuFlash is something that will change the tuning industry and as an enthusiast I’m definitely interested in seeing what its capabilities are. That’s why a new section was created to provide open discussion about it.

I hope this answers everyone’s questions.

 

I respect your opinion, but a flash is a work-for-hire. This means that the person who paid for the flash is in fact the copyright owner. The _only_ way it could be seen otherwise is if the person paying for the flash signed a contract that states that the copyright stays with the person who created the flash.

These issues are old hat. I deal with it all the time with software that I write (I am a programmer) and musical artists have been dealing with this forever too. The person who is commissioning the work owns the copyright. Period.


As always, the ever-popular disclaimer: I Am Not A Lawyer

strike

 

This sounds reasonable to me and pretty much follows common sense. I am not a lawyer either, but I know a certain tuner who is

EVOlutionary

 

That's the point. For all I know there could be a few tuners that have something stated in a receipt, website, or actually have a contract that customers sign (maybe within a disclaimer that no one bothers to read). I know when I ran the project evo for the first time on a local shop's dyno, they had a clause in their dyno safty wavier which said the following: "any custom tune provided to the customer is copywrited by the tuner/shop."

The point I was making was it's too much of a grey area and we can't say for sure how every tuner does it.

 

I actually agree with you.. Except that there are "Through the Mail" flashes, which are distributed to multiple users, and the copyright in that case would be retained by the author, since it would now be considered published work and not commissioned work.

I think this policy is more of a sign of respect for the tuners efforts, and not necessarily a way to prevent people from learning. Sharing of tunes will happen, its just a fact of life.. Though I do see that the people who might do that, likely would never have been a customer in the first place, and therefore no lost revenue (no damages)

AEM Calibration files are treated with that same respect, you don't frequently see any "Tuner" calibration maps posted either.

And some tuners do publish "Limited Use Licensing" terms.. (ECUTek and their tuners are a good example) though they also protect their tunes via hardware.

 

There is also loss of value test that should be considered. If you post a generic map purchased from a vendor, then its value becomes zero, regardless of any copyright argument. A vendor would have a reasonable case for damages as a history of selling flashes should establish use. Unless you are willing to sign an agreement to accept, without limitation, liability for this site, a broad axe must be used in those gray areas.

And I don't believe it is going to diminish the technical discussion nor block a fledgling technology. (although this is not a new technology.) Take a look at the quality and detail being discussed in the ECUflash forum. All without using purchased maps as a premise.

Speedlimit..

 

I appreciate the position of the administration in regard to this matter

I wanted to add that without revenue generated from tuning no R & D and testing could be conducted to create the base maps and further the knowlege of how to adjust the ecu settings in a reliable and effective manner.

For example, on the Buschur Flash alone, David Buschur and I spent at least 5 full days of dyno work alone.

On my own reflashes, i did huge amounts of beta testing and development testing and retesting the initial customers over and over again to product a quality product which could produce the kind of results I have obtained.

I have personally spent over $65,000 in dyno time doing custom tuning to date.

Not to mention the thousands of dollars of equipment utlizied in the tuning process.

I spent 4 months of almost daily effort and $12,000 to get the IX flash up and running.

Finally, many reflash vendors support this forum and pay to maintain dedicated sub forums to offer customer support.

All of this takes a lot of hard work, time and investment.

I am not the only tuner who has followed this path, Works, Turbo Trixs and Vishnu are a few others who have done the same type of effort.

If people could just steal the tuning parameters that I and others have created then there would not be any reason to invest additional time, resources and effort to further the development of stock ecu flashing maps.

I personally, do not mind spending $15.00 to obtain a CD or DVD that I want. There are those how ever who would rather steal the product without paying.

To remove all doubt on this subject, all work that I do is now copyrighted and I reserve all rights in the intellectual property of the maps I create.

End users are granted a license to utilize the maps for their own personal use and to examine and compile the data in any form they desire, but they are not allowed to sell the information to others or provide copies to anyone else.

Everyone who purchases my products does so under these terms and is free to not make a purchase if they do not agree.

I have no intentions to waste my time going around suing people who rip off my work.

I hoping that people in the Evo community will respect the work that I (and other tuners) have done and realize that the only way to have professional tuners working to develop products for these cars is to not allow people to steal the work of the tuners.

You can buy a tuning map from myself from $49.99 - $199.99 depending on the format and type of tune. Hopefully these prices are resonable enough and the quality of the end product good enough that no evo owners will be motivated to try and copy maps from others and steal the information. Bu buying your map you get customer support, assurance that you have the correct map and someone standing behind what is sold.

Thanks for your time.