Does the C63 have Black Box?
07-14-2012, 05:59 PM
#1
Super Member
Thread Starter
Does the C63 have Black Box?
Some cars record speed and other conditions that can be used against them later in court. Does the c63? 2009 specifically? 
07-14-2012, 06:27 PM
#3
MBWorld Fanatic!
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 1,955
Likes: 0
Received 7 Likes
on
7 Posts
2017 Mini Cooper S Clubman ALL4 - British Racing Green
Almost all vehicles within the last 10 years have some sort of black box. In most cases, it is only ever used for accident reconstruction, and has to be done in conjunction with the manufacturer, and they do not always comply (the recent Toyota Unintended acceleration lawsuit is a prime example, there was only 1 system in the US that had the ability to pull that data).
Some vehicles also do not maintain the data, rather only a few seconds before and after a crash are retained.
But the information cannot just be used against you in a court unless you were involved in a major accident. Hell, insurance companies cannot arbitrarily use that information, they must ask for permission (which is why you see Prograssive advertising there little dongle you drop into your OBD port that lets them monitor your driving for a $5 a month discount.. not worth it to me).
Don't worry about law enforcement using the data in any real sense unless you are a serious criminal.
Some vehicles also do not maintain the data, rather only a few seconds before and after a crash are retained.
But the information cannot just be used against you in a court unless you were involved in a major accident. Hell, insurance companies cannot arbitrarily use that information, they must ask for permission (which is why you see Prograssive advertising there little dongle you drop into your OBD port that lets them monitor your driving for a $5 a month discount.. not worth it to me).
Don't worry about law enforcement using the data in any real sense unless you are a serious criminal.
07-14-2012, 06:32 PM
#4
http://www.extremetech.com/extreme/1...ur-car-already
By 2015 all cars must have black boxes if a transportation bill before Congress passes, as it’s likely to. The goal is to help investigators understand more about crashes. Safeguards are built in to protect your privacy, or so the bill says. Meanwhile, it’s something of a moot point: Cars have had black boxes for more than a decade and 85% of cars currently built have a black box installed. You may want to brush up on the technology and also what privacy rights you have. Like, does it record you singing along, badly, while driving?
The in-car event data recorder (EDR) is the cheaper cousin of the airplane black box, which is actually orange. The car’s EDR is about the size of a pack of playing cards, has its own non-volatile memory, and is designed to withstand a crash and follow-on impacts. If an automaker opts to install an EDR now, there are rules for what’s recorded in 2013 models and likely more rules for 2015. The EDR mandate is one part of a big highway construction and highway safety bill called MAP-21, or Moving Ahead for Progress in the 21st Century Act. It’s likely to pass since it contains highway construction funds.
MAP-21 also sets out privacy rules that appear to favor you. “Any data in an event data recorder… is the property of the owner… or lessee,” the bill says. You can consent to let your dealer see the data for repair purposes, but that’s probably a non-issue because the same information can be stored elsewhere, by the car, outside the EDR. High-level accident investigators (not the police) can see the data if it’s scrubbed so there’s no personally identifiable information passed along. Emergency responders can access the data via an on-board data port to “facilitate” medical assistance. (Would they privately share the impact speed with the investigating officer? Hmmm.) But it’s also available with a court order, which suggests a warrant might be issued in the case of a fatal accident and a zealous law enforcement agency might decide to seek the data in a range of lesser cases: any personal injury accident or speeding.
MAP-21′s privacy provisions may conflict with the rights automakers have already assigned themselves. If you browse the owner’s manual of a recent car (start at the back and work forward), if there’s an EDR fine print section, you’ll see wording that says, and we’re paraphrasing, but not by much: “This is your car and the data belongs to you. Unless the cops ask for it. Or in case you decide to sue us.” In a civil lawsuit between two sides in a car crash lawsuit, it appears you have to turn over the EDR information if the other side asks and a judge agrees. Less clear is what happens if, oops, something happens to the EDR after the accident but before the search warrant arrives. With current and pending durability requirements for the black boxes, it will be hard to argue that it was destroyed in the crash.
What’s recorded? Think of it as a data snapshot of the few seconds before and after a crash. The device has to be able to “capture and store data related to motor vehicle safety covering a reasonable time period before, during, and after a motor vehicle crash or airbag deployment, including a rollover.” This data includes speed, throttle and brake position, seat belt usage, and how long it took the airbags to deploy. Some automakers, such as BMW, include more crash-sensing data, such as the location of the impact (a side impact might require more medical assistance than a front impact). They even use the data to estimate the crash severity and suggest the level of emergency response.
Some insurance companies offer carrot-and-stick discounts that lower your rates if they can install a different black box that records when, how fast, and sometimes where you drive, in order to give or take away insurance discounts. These are essentially always-on, always-tracking recorders. To many motorists they smack of big brother. But they also provide a financial lifeline for a driver with a lousy record; it may be the only way he or she can get insurance. Concerned parents (as well as jealous partners) have the ability to locate a family car if they have an OnStar-equipped GM vehicle with Family Link, a $4-per-month service. OnStar vehicles have the ability to report other things such as speed but currently Family Link is just a locater. It wouldn’t take much more memory to record the day’s driving information, but so far that’s a place automakers don’t want to go. Porsche does offer an option that lets you pull trip information onto a USB stick for helping in tracking mileage for reimbursement or tax deductions.
By 2015 all cars must have black boxes if a transportation bill before Congress passes, as it’s likely to. The goal is to help investigators understand more about crashes. Safeguards are built in to protect your privacy, or so the bill says. Meanwhile, it’s something of a moot point: Cars have had black boxes for more than a decade and 85% of cars currently built have a black box installed. You may want to brush up on the technology and also what privacy rights you have. Like, does it record you singing along, badly, while driving?
The in-car event data recorder (EDR) is the cheaper cousin of the airplane black box, which is actually orange. The car’s EDR is about the size of a pack of playing cards, has its own non-volatile memory, and is designed to withstand a crash and follow-on impacts. If an automaker opts to install an EDR now, there are rules for what’s recorded in 2013 models and likely more rules for 2015. The EDR mandate is one part of a big highway construction and highway safety bill called MAP-21, or Moving Ahead for Progress in the 21st Century Act. It’s likely to pass since it contains highway construction funds.
MAP-21 also sets out privacy rules that appear to favor you. “Any data in an event data recorder… is the property of the owner… or lessee,” the bill says. You can consent to let your dealer see the data for repair purposes, but that’s probably a non-issue because the same information can be stored elsewhere, by the car, outside the EDR. High-level accident investigators (not the police) can see the data if it’s scrubbed so there’s no personally identifiable information passed along. Emergency responders can access the data via an on-board data port to “facilitate” medical assistance. (Would they privately share the impact speed with the investigating officer? Hmmm.) But it’s also available with a court order, which suggests a warrant might be issued in the case of a fatal accident and a zealous law enforcement agency might decide to seek the data in a range of lesser cases: any personal injury accident or speeding.
MAP-21′s privacy provisions may conflict with the rights automakers have already assigned themselves. If you browse the owner’s manual of a recent car (start at the back and work forward), if there’s an EDR fine print section, you’ll see wording that says, and we’re paraphrasing, but not by much: “This is your car and the data belongs to you. Unless the cops ask for it. Or in case you decide to sue us.” In a civil lawsuit between two sides in a car crash lawsuit, it appears you have to turn over the EDR information if the other side asks and a judge agrees. Less clear is what happens if, oops, something happens to the EDR after the accident but before the search warrant arrives. With current and pending durability requirements for the black boxes, it will be hard to argue that it was destroyed in the crash.
What’s recorded? Think of it as a data snapshot of the few seconds before and after a crash. The device has to be able to “capture and store data related to motor vehicle safety covering a reasonable time period before, during, and after a motor vehicle crash or airbag deployment, including a rollover.” This data includes speed, throttle and brake position, seat belt usage, and how long it took the airbags to deploy. Some automakers, such as BMW, include more crash-sensing data, such as the location of the impact (a side impact might require more medical assistance than a front impact). They even use the data to estimate the crash severity and suggest the level of emergency response.
Some insurance companies offer carrot-and-stick discounts that lower your rates if they can install a different black box that records when, how fast, and sometimes where you drive, in order to give or take away insurance discounts. These are essentially always-on, always-tracking recorders. To many motorists they smack of big brother. But they also provide a financial lifeline for a driver with a lousy record; it may be the only way he or she can get insurance. Concerned parents (as well as jealous partners) have the ability to locate a family car if they have an OnStar-equipped GM vehicle with Family Link, a $4-per-month service. OnStar vehicles have the ability to report other things such as speed but currently Family Link is just a locater. It wouldn’t take much more memory to record the day’s driving information, but so far that’s a place automakers don’t want to go. Porsche does offer an option that lets you pull trip information onto a USB stick for helping in tracking mileage for reimbursement or tax deductions.
The following users liked this post:
silversleeper48 (07-04-2019)
07-15-2012, 01:53 AM
#5
MBWorld Fanatic!
I agree with BH. The auto manufacturers are already using data stored in the ECU against owners to deny warranty claims. Regardless of any bill passed by Congress, they will negate the privacy provisions as soon as law enforcement, the insurance industry, and the trial lawyers push for it. Insurance company's are the worst as they will start making it mandatory to submit annual "black box" downloads to purchase insurance. The flip side of this is an entire cottage industry of "black box" hackers will spring up to alter the results.
07-15-2012, 02:26 AM
#6
OBD III
^ You bet Duane!
And coming soon to a theater near you...OBD III. (It's not too difficult to see how government can overstep its mandate beyond emissions monitoring with this technology).
Have You Heard About OBD III? - Automotive Service Association (ASA)
With the recent approval of regulations governing on-board diagnostics (OBD) information availability, the Automotive Service Association (ASA) has been pleased with the cooperation of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) in the development of information transfer to repairers. ASA was a strong advocate of independent service shop owners and technicians having access to the same information accessible to new car dealers. The EPA protected these rights in its draft information availability rule and in the final rule published last summer.
One area of concern has been the recent discussion surrounding a waiver of federal preemption to permit California to implement its own OBD regulations. The serious question for independent repairers has been whether our rights will be protected as strongly as in the federal regulations. This is an issue ASA is discussing with regulators and other members of the aftermarket. ASA will make a decision in the near future as to a California strategy on the waiver.
As the OBD II (federal OBD uses the same basic technical standards as California OBD II) debate comes to a close, speculation is already mounting about an OBD III concept in California. OBD III is being discussed as a program to minimize the delay between the detection of an emissions malfunction by the OBD II system and the actual repair of the vehicle. This includes a reading of stored OBD II information from in-use vehicles and the direction to owners of vehicles with fault codes to make immediate repairs. In this concept, faults are picked up by a monitoring technology and reported to a regulator, and the vehicle owner is then directed to get further testing and possible repairs. The debate over controlling vehicle emissions may soon move from what type of testing facilities and test methods are most effective to the complete on-board cycle of fault detection, notification and follow-up testing and repair being discussed in the OBD-III concept.
What types of technology can be used to detect and relay data pertaining to emissions malfunctions? Options include roadside readers, local station networks or satellites. The roadside reader has been tested by the California Air Resources Board (CARB) since 1994. It is capable of reading eight lanes of bumper-to-bumper traffic at 100 miles per hour. It can be used from a fixed location with portable units or a mobile unit. If a fault is detected by a reader unit, it has the capability of sending the vehicle identification number (VIN) plus the fault codes to the regulator. (The term regulator is used broadly here--patrol officers, private contractors or others could be involved, depending on how a program is structured.) The local station network has not been tested by CARB, but would allow a location and monitoring service.
The satellite system can be used with a cellular phone hookup or location monitoring technology. The vehicle would receive an alert via a cellular phone or the monitoring technology. The location, date, time, VIN and OBD II data would be returned to a satellite beacon.
Several issues surround the OBD III concept. From a regulatory perspective, all of the technologies used, other than roadside technology, require a Federal Communications Commission (FCC) license. The possibility of interference with other signals in the same band is of concern. The issues of commercial operators, law enforcement, jurisdiction among state agencies, Intelligent Vehicle Highway Systems, etc., have to be addressed before OBD III is a reality.
How would an OBD-III program prompt further testing and possible repair? An OBD-III program could be incorporated into the current inspection and maintenance (I/M) program. OBD III might also be used to generate an "out-of-cycle" inspection. Once a fault is detected, a notice could be mailed to the vehicle owner requiring an out-of-cycle inspection within a certain number of days or at the next registration or resale, or a citation would be issued. Penalties might include court appearances or fines related to vehicle registration.
A roadside pullover might work this way: the monitoring technology detects a fault, a law enforcement officer stops the vehicle with the fault code, and a technician working with the officer at the scene verifies that a code is set. A citation is then issued requiring testing at a test center, with a time limit for the vehicle owner to do this before a penalty is incurred.
What legal issues arise under OBD III? There seems to be some question as to the "suspicionless mass surveillance" of private property. There is no opportunity to confront or rebut the results; no notice that the vehicle will be tested. Fourth Amendment search and seizure issues tend to arise.
There are obviously technologies and enforcement procedures available to support the OBD III concept. Do the public health arguments as to controlling the severity of air pollution override the constitutional privacy questions involved? What about consent? These are questions that will undoubtedly arise, and could bring a court challenge.
After several court battles with OBD II, the issues are still unsettled as to the California waiver. I/M programs are still to be finalized in several states and the threat of congressional action looms. The concept of bringing all the issues under one program will certainly be controversial, but is being discussed as far as a long-term policy. Independent repairers need to prepare for the next waive of emissions and information issues as they continue to participate in the current debate involving the same.
ASA is working with regulators and other members of the aftermarket to ensure that the independent repairers' interests are included as long-term policies are developed.
--Bob Redding is ASA's Washington representative. He holds a law degree from the George Washington University School of Law.
To find more information on OBD, use the ASA Search Engine.
And coming soon to a theater near you...OBD III. (It's not too difficult to see how government can overstep its mandate beyond emissions monitoring with this technology).
Have You Heard About OBD III? - Automotive Service Association (ASA)
With the recent approval of regulations governing on-board diagnostics (OBD) information availability, the Automotive Service Association (ASA) has been pleased with the cooperation of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) in the development of information transfer to repairers. ASA was a strong advocate of independent service shop owners and technicians having access to the same information accessible to new car dealers. The EPA protected these rights in its draft information availability rule and in the final rule published last summer.
One area of concern has been the recent discussion surrounding a waiver of federal preemption to permit California to implement its own OBD regulations. The serious question for independent repairers has been whether our rights will be protected as strongly as in the federal regulations. This is an issue ASA is discussing with regulators and other members of the aftermarket. ASA will make a decision in the near future as to a California strategy on the waiver.
As the OBD II (federal OBD uses the same basic technical standards as California OBD II) debate comes to a close, speculation is already mounting about an OBD III concept in California. OBD III is being discussed as a program to minimize the delay between the detection of an emissions malfunction by the OBD II system and the actual repair of the vehicle. This includes a reading of stored OBD II information from in-use vehicles and the direction to owners of vehicles with fault codes to make immediate repairs. In this concept, faults are picked up by a monitoring technology and reported to a regulator, and the vehicle owner is then directed to get further testing and possible repairs. The debate over controlling vehicle emissions may soon move from what type of testing facilities and test methods are most effective to the complete on-board cycle of fault detection, notification and follow-up testing and repair being discussed in the OBD-III concept.
What types of technology can be used to detect and relay data pertaining to emissions malfunctions? Options include roadside readers, local station networks or satellites. The roadside reader has been tested by the California Air Resources Board (CARB) since 1994. It is capable of reading eight lanes of bumper-to-bumper traffic at 100 miles per hour. It can be used from a fixed location with portable units or a mobile unit. If a fault is detected by a reader unit, it has the capability of sending the vehicle identification number (VIN) plus the fault codes to the regulator. (The term regulator is used broadly here--patrol officers, private contractors or others could be involved, depending on how a program is structured.) The local station network has not been tested by CARB, but would allow a location and monitoring service.
The satellite system can be used with a cellular phone hookup or location monitoring technology. The vehicle would receive an alert via a cellular phone or the monitoring technology. The location, date, time, VIN and OBD II data would be returned to a satellite beacon.
Several issues surround the OBD III concept. From a regulatory perspective, all of the technologies used, other than roadside technology, require a Federal Communications Commission (FCC) license. The possibility of interference with other signals in the same band is of concern. The issues of commercial operators, law enforcement, jurisdiction among state agencies, Intelligent Vehicle Highway Systems, etc., have to be addressed before OBD III is a reality.
How would an OBD-III program prompt further testing and possible repair? An OBD-III program could be incorporated into the current inspection and maintenance (I/M) program. OBD III might also be used to generate an "out-of-cycle" inspection. Once a fault is detected, a notice could be mailed to the vehicle owner requiring an out-of-cycle inspection within a certain number of days or at the next registration or resale, or a citation would be issued. Penalties might include court appearances or fines related to vehicle registration.
A roadside pullover might work this way: the monitoring technology detects a fault, a law enforcement officer stops the vehicle with the fault code, and a technician working with the officer at the scene verifies that a code is set. A citation is then issued requiring testing at a test center, with a time limit for the vehicle owner to do this before a penalty is incurred.
What legal issues arise under OBD III? There seems to be some question as to the "suspicionless mass surveillance" of private property. There is no opportunity to confront or rebut the results; no notice that the vehicle will be tested. Fourth Amendment search and seizure issues tend to arise.
There are obviously technologies and enforcement procedures available to support the OBD III concept. Do the public health arguments as to controlling the severity of air pollution override the constitutional privacy questions involved? What about consent? These are questions that will undoubtedly arise, and could bring a court challenge.
After several court battles with OBD II, the issues are still unsettled as to the California waiver. I/M programs are still to be finalized in several states and the threat of congressional action looms. The concept of bringing all the issues under one program will certainly be controversial, but is being discussed as far as a long-term policy. Independent repairers need to prepare for the next waive of emissions and information issues as they continue to participate in the current debate involving the same.
ASA is working with regulators and other members of the aftermarket to ensure that the independent repairers' interests are included as long-term policies are developed.
--Bob Redding is ASA's Washington representative. He holds a law degree from the George Washington University School of Law.
To find more information on OBD, use the ASA Search Engine.
Last edited by bhamg; 07-15-2012 at 04:48 AM.
