Who ownes the tune?

[TooManyFords]

I've been reading the the different threads about "custom tunes" and "dyno tunes" and I have a simple question:

Who ownes the tune?

Before you make a quick reply, think about it. On one hand you can buy a "canned" tune from someone and pay $300 and plug a chip in or download it to your car with a Predator or XCal2. But do you own what you installed in your car?

On the other hand, you pay $300+ for a dyno session. Does the man who ran the dyno and dialed your car in or the person who paid for it to be done? When you're done with the dyno session and you have it stored in your Predator or XCal2, can you make every change in the world and put it on your Pro Racer or are you stuck with whatever the dyno operator put on your car?

What do you think and why?

[BruteForce]

Your background as a software author is showing. :D

[Mad4Macs]

Your background as a software author is showing. :D

At least he doesn't sell underwear :D

[torinodan]

At least he doesn't sell underwear :DOr have an avatar of Mr Bean in his!:P nuts!

[SergntMac]

Very good question, John, a real (and very legal) brain twister. Bravo!

IMHO, it's "Intellictual Property".

Like you imagine a really cool 7-UP commercial, and send that to 7-Up advertising executives, but they reply "sorry, it's been thought of", and next week, you're watching your imagination on TV...Right? Happens every day.

But, now you're on a dyno, with XXXX "Master tuner John Doe" behind the wheel of your MM. He completes a pull, you see X RWHP, and X RWTQ, before he applies his tuning skill. He suggests X changes and you agree. He programs those changes, and completes another pull. You both agree it's sweet, and the final program is burned to your chip, or, your HHP.

Once it's burned into your history and you pay the tuner his "rate", it's your tune. You own it...IMHO.

Ummm...Just starting to think on this. Y'all among us who are lawyers, check in, please?

[stevengerard]

I consider the tune "a work for higher" legaly meaning I paid for the service of getting the "tune" and therefore I own it and can modify it at will.

[HwyCruiser]

Bored John?

© HwyCruiser™, 2005

[TooManyFords]

Not bored... (nice JD!)

I'm just getting ready to make the appointment for my dyno session and yes, as a software engineer, I wanted to see what everyone thought before I also weigh in.

Enough talk about bad weather. Let's really get into the how's and why's of "custom tuning" and whether or not is should be "open source" or "strictly for $$".

John

[fastblackmerc]

Not bored... (nice JD!)

I'm just getting ready to make the appointment for my dyno session and yes, as a software engineer, I wanted to see what everyone thought before I also weigh in.

Enough talk about bad weather. Let's really get into the how's and why's of "custom tuning" and whether or not is should be "open source" or "strictly for $$".

John
My $0.02.... you paid for it .... it's yours to do with it as you see fit.....

[Mr Johnson]

The model that seems to have favor in software is value based pricing. IOW, How much money you pay to the "tuner" will determine what you can do with the it. Pay $ and get to flash it and use it. Pay $$$ and you can modify it too. Pay $$$$$ and you can redistribute your changes. I hate value based pricing!

Unfortunately it seems that copyright owners of things like music and movies would love to move away from ever letting you "own" the work itself at all. In their model they would love to only "rent" you the work while having protection after protection to prevent copying of their work. There has to be a reasonable middle ground where I can own what I want for a reasonable price.

That said and back to the specific topic of tuning. I think an "open source" tune is a great thing! I don't blame the vendors for charging what they do for a tune. But I want to muck with it after the fact. Having a choice of a known "great" tune and an "okay" one as open source that I could muck with let's the consumer make the choice of what is worth more to them. A large majority just want a plug-n-play solution but there are those of us that are willing to tinker. Odds are I would use both (A concept the music and movie industries can't fathom) meaning I'd be happy to pay for what works.

Even further afield of tuning: I think automotive companies should make all the software running in their cars "tuner" friendly. Many "tunes" are simply the modification of tables and parameters because the application is a data driven app. How about exposing those parameters to the end user rather than just the local Ford dealers or a "tuner". Some of this has been done (How long do you want your headlights on after key off, should the doors automatically lock/unlock, etc... but a formal way of exposing those parameters and allowing end-users to modify would be a positive move IMO.

[Bradley G]

We own nothing.

We get to use things.
Who leaves with more than than they started with?
Thanks to the tuners, for thier efforts!:P

[MM03MOK]

Pay $ and get to flash it and use it. Pay $$$ and you can modify it too. Pay $$$$$ and you can redistribute your changes. I hate value based pricing!This is not unlike software rights. You pay for single use on one computer; a company pays a corporate licensing fee for multiple computers. The third "option" of modifying the program for redistribution is not an option.

The tune you "buy" is for your single use. You are paying for the right to use the tune and the expertise of the tuner. Depending on which handheld you have, you can manipulate some parameters - but still for your personal use. When you buy the "Advantage Dealer Custom Tuning Software," you're then able to manipulate everything and by virtue of the purchase, you've paid your licensing fee to SCT and can tune other cars, imparting your expertise and charging accordingly.

[Breadfan]

Once you "own" the tune you should be able to do with it what you please, but at that point any sort of implied warranty is pretty much gone...

By "do with it what you please" I'm referring to your own personal private use. Personal private use generally dictates you are free to do what you want with something so long as you are not profiting.

Taking one of the tunes from Lidio or Dennis, changing a few parameters to fit your personal taste, and then trying to re-sell your changed tune would be a violation of their rights as the creators of the original tune. Unless they agree to it, you're basically selling a modified copy of their tune they built from scratch.

Now, changing a few parameters on your personal car, and even sharing what you did as information to others, shouldn't be a problem. Others who own the tune can be free to make those same changes, but you are not making a profit or reselling their tune with your name on it.

The only thing I can see that would be a problem is if the tuner didn't want their code reverse engineered or changed or considered their tune proprietary - in that even you may have agreed to not changing the tune at all or examining the code when you purchased the tune.

And in that case, one must wonder if a tuner COULD call it proprietary. Isn't a tune simply a modification of the existing code from FORD?

So I think once you have bought the tune you're free to modify it, albeit at your own risk.

It's lucky for the tuners that car modding hasn't exploded with high tech as far as it could have. Sure things are becoming more technical, but it could be even more.

Imagine someone writing simple interface software between a laptop and your ODB-II, you rewire a connector to fit on a USB or serial port, and all of a sudden you have access to your computer just like an SCT would give.

Someone then purchases a tune, and starts sharing the tune file over the Internet. People download the tune for free, use their hacked laptops to install it. Voila', free tune.

Tunes are just code and the interface to the car's computer is simply electrical pulses - it's surprising this has not yet been compromised...luckily most skilled software hackers that crack software security protection rarely emerge from their basements enough to start tuning their cars. :) (BTW before the software guys start bashing me keep in mind I'm a systems engineer myself, lol.)

[Bradley G]

According to the "Basics of tuning" SCT certificaction Book, the 9100 hand held can be returned to stock four times, then has to be sent in for recalibration.
Someone with the same setup(mods), could sample the said tune, and use "as is", or purchace an existing (used) tuner and have it retuned to thier preferences.
Besides the licensing costs, SCT has a certificaction requirement as well.
A Dyno, the training and expense to become an SCT franchise (or other) is all you need!

This is not unlike software rights. You pay for single use on one computer; a company pays a corporate licensing fee for multiple computers. The third "option" of modifying the program for redistribution is not an option.

The tune you "buy" is for your single use. You are paying for the right to use the tune and the expertise of the tuner. Depending on which handheld you have, you can manipulate some parameters - but still for your personal use. When you buy the "Advantage Dealer Custom Tuning Software," you're then able to manipulate everything and by virtue of the purchase, you've paid your licensing fee to SCT and can tune other cars, imparting your expertise and charging accordingly.

[DEFYANT]

I know better.

I paid Lidio for his experiance and expertise. If I need changes or updates, I know I have the support to do it. I will limit the intrusion into the cars computer to the data logger. (Which BTW, Lidio has helped me with already)

my.02

[Mr Johnson]

This is not unlike software rights. You pay for single use on one computer; a company pays a corporate licensing fee for multiple computers. The third "option" of modifying the program for redistribution is not an option.

The tune you "buy" is for your single use. You are paying for the right to use the tune and the expertise of the tuner. Depending on which handheld you have, you can manipulate some parameters - but still for your personal use. When you buy the "Advantage Dealer Custom Tuning Software," you're then able to manipulate everything and by virtue of the purchase, you've paid your licensing fee to SCT and can tune other cars, imparting your expertise and charging accordingly.

This leads to an interesting dilemma. I think SCT deserves the $, or $$$ or $$$$$ for providing the tool that allows the underlying programming. What I think we then debate is the value of the tuner himself rather than the tool to create the tune. If we all pay SCT their $$$$ why can't/shouldn't we create an open source tuning database? Those uncomfortable with messing around can buy the OTC tunes from a reputable "tuner" and the market will decide what that is worth. Those more advanced may get a more custom solution by going open source, so to speak.

FWIW: I provide significant props to our custom tuners for providing a great solution for our Marauders. :beer: Heck I bought one myself and have no regrets whatsoever having done so and would recommend others buy them too. But the software industry, LAMP, that there is a market for open source too. :rasta:

[Smokie]

I was wondering when this would come up. Here is my point of view: When I bought the car from FOMOCO it became my property in it's entirety, if I change the car from it's original design, Ford has the right to deny me free warranty service...however they do not have the right to take the car away from me.

When I purchased from Dennis a software flash to improve my car, this is an improvement on the parameters created by the Ford engineers, there is a difference between improving and creating.

When I purchased the Trilogy Kit, again it contains a software improvement that is necessary for the car to run properly with the different hardware installed.

I consider myself the property owner of everything about my car, because I PAID for it, nobody gave me anything.
However I do not have a legal right to reproduce and sell a Marauder, or the flash Dennis sold me, or the blower kit Jerry sold me or the tuning Lidio created for my car.

If I mess with the blower kit Jerry has the right to void the warranty if he wants to, if I reproduce and sell Lidio's tune he has the right to sue me.

What I do with my car, my tune for my own personal private use...is nobody's business...it is my property.

[SergntMac]

I'm just adding some thoughts to some wonderful presentations here. Thank you all ^ there.

Scenario: I go to an auto parts store and buy a set of spark plugs. I take them to a tuner, who takes the spark plugs to a secret place and gaps them. I pay for this service and install the plugs in my MM. I wonder...

1) Who owns the plugs?
2) Who owns the secret gap?
3) If I own the plugs, and paid for the secret gap, can I manipulate the gap myself? Measure it? Replicate it on other plugs? Install the plugs in any car other than my MM? Share the secret gap with friends? Brag about performance? Sell the secret gap on e-bay?

What are my limitations here? At what point am I stealing the intellectual property sold to me by the tuner, i.e. the secret gap? Moreover, where did he get the secret gap? Did he create it himself, or, learn it from another? Is the tuner a gap genius? Or, does he covet known practical theory with a history all it's own, as his own creation and resell that under his own name?

Let's be honest about this? Only Ford owns the tune, it's their intellectual property. They created and developed the EEC and the software to run the car the way they want it to run. When you buy a Ford, you own your copy of that software, and without any agreement, or, permission from Ford to manipluate that in any manner, including sharing it with anyone. You own your copy, with Ford's limited permission to use use it as Ford dictates. When you disobey Ford's intent, violate this agreement, Ford simply voids your warranty, and cuts you off from further agreements. This is about all Ford can do to protect it's intellectual property.

If any of y'all come to buy a replacement EEC, as I have, you'll get an agreement to sign off on and return to Ford with the old EEC, and it's all about this crap.

Now come the tuners. Granatelli, Jet, HyperTech, SCT, Diablo, and more. I don't know this for sure, but I seriously doubt any of them have any agreements in place with Ford that allows them to manipulate Ford's EEC and it's software. IMHO, this is the first instance of stealing intellectual property, software bandits of the first order, each stealing tuning concepts and proceedures from Ford, and for their own profit.

Now come consumers, owners like me who bought a copy of the software from Ford when I bought the car, and again, without any agreement allowing me to modify, or, redistribute that software in any way. When I pay a tuner to suck out a copy of my program, I am a software bandit of the second order. I'm allowing...No, make that paying another unauthorized person to copy my OEM tune without permission from Ford. I am as guilty as they are, maybe more guilty, because I am paying the tuner to steal Ford's intellectual property from my MM. If you're starting to feel a tad funny about this, good. But, IMHO, it's true, and it gets worse.

Now comes the deal with the tuner, who modifies my tune and programs that back into my MM, perhaps via chip, or, HHP. On average, a dyno tune is 300 bucks, and while I'm renting dyno time, I'm paying mostly for the tuner's intellectual investment in his property, i.e. his talented manipulation of my stock tune, with the same agreement we made over the secret gap of my spark plugs. Almost.

Some tuners share their results freely, I know tuners who will gladly copy my freshly stolen custom tune to a floppy, or, e-mail that to me for my future use. Some do not, and refuse any future support other than re-working the original stolen tune themselves (the secret place where they gap spark plugs?), claiming a right to protect their intellectual property from copy, distribution, manipulation, and so on. Funny isn't it? A serious effort to protect something that wasn't their's to begin with? Kind of like a looter calling the cops when another looter snatches his freshly stolen television from his grip? I love the irony!

And, despite my payment for their services, I can't get a copy of my own, for fear that I will somehow steal it from them. I can have it in my EEC, and drive on it, but I can't hold it in my hand on a floppy, or, look at via the custom software I have purchased from the same aftermarket company the tuner purchased his tuning program from. This makes me dizzy, how you doin?

I should get a copy of my tune, I paid the tuner to share his secret gap, and it's mine now. I should be allowed to see what I bought, and discuss with others how certain settings in my software have improved my MM. When I pay a tuner to steal my code from Ford, I expect something in return.

Yes, the tuner is the pro who's tweaked the software, but now he's reselling his tweaks for profit, and the consumer should get what is paid for. Considering that the tuner is as much a software bandit as the consumer, he has no reasonable expectation of any "rights" greater than that bestowed upon Ford.

Just my .02C, carry on Ladies and Gents.

[Hotrauder]

We own nothing.

We get to use things.
Who leaves with more than than they started with?
Thanks to the tuners, for thier efforts!:P
I have been asking myself that for awhile, but only when I have had 2 much to drink! I think I think that the only thing I can think of that I might be leaving with that I didn't arrive with is a SUIT. Doesn't seem like much. So, you can have my tune and the gun that says I own it!
:beer:

[Smokie]

Technology will render this discussion academic in about 3 years or less, I believe end user programable devices will become the norm and they eventually will allow you to change the TUNE that came with your car and allow you to modify the OEM program directly, after all that is what todays tuners are doing.

This will mean that people that don't know what they are doing will be smoking their engines, sometimes people that know what they are doing smoke their engines. It boils down to personal choice, which I am in favor of.

These devices will NEVER replace an expert professional that has a facility to measure the power output of the engine under load and measure the A/F under load. When you pay a professional tuner you are paying for his experience, and that is worth money.

[Cobra25]

Once you pay for it it's your's, Thats the bottom line.

[Bradley G]

I think SCT deserves the ${quote}
I agree and so do they(SCT), The whole tuning package to do Fords, is lots of grands.

[TooManyFords]

How's everyone doing so far? Some really good opinions being expressed ^ there. Sure beats arguing about blowers.

I'm seeing some repeated opinions and I think I'll weigh in now.

Some of you know my background, most probably do not. I'll try to keep this part short. Back in the days of the first PC's, Shareware came about because a few of us programmers back then didn't have the money to compete head-on with the big boys at Lotus, Microsoft and IBM. I was one of a handful of programmers that produced Shareware. Turbo Pascal was the rage and everyone was just finding out that there was more then just CompuServe to chat with. I helped create some of the first BBS software out there (Colossus) and also wrote one of the first Shareware communication programs (Qmodem for those of you old enough to remember what a 1200 baud modem was and ran DOS 2.0). Shareware was new! Give the software away and just -hope- the end user pays?!? Let me tell you, it grossed me over a million $ in 8 years and it never sat on a shelf in a store. Those were the days!

Fast-forward...

Today we still have variations of the same theme, but the buzzword now is "open source". Look at what Linux has done to the server market! I support just as many tux boxes as I do windows. Just built a router for a local utility Monday from a spare PII and a couple ethernet cards and Linux.

As for our cars and our tunes, here's the way I see it. The tuner that creates a custom chip is not unlike myself, the programmer. I never gave away the source to Qmodem and I don't feel they should give away the source to their chip. You see, I'm buying just a chip and it just -happens- to have a better tune for my car than the one Ford gave me. I'm good with that. I expect the tuner to tell me the basics about what they did and it can be in general terms. The tranny shifts at these points and the torque converter locks and unlocks under these conditions. On a dyno I should get xxx RWHP etc. General terms.

However, when I go and pay for a "custom dyno" session, I expect to receive the whole enchilada. I am contracting that tuner to do my car just for me since it would be useless for anyone else. It might end up being a good place to start for another, but I wouldn't run it. The S/C builders have "generic, safe tunes" for a reason, they are a good starting place and it reduces their warranty claims. Are they perfect? Perfect is in the eye of the beholder but suffice to say the tune combined with the hardware makes it head and shoulders above factory!

When I get my custom dyno session, I want it downloaded into whatever form I need and I want to be able to make the changes. I "sub-contracted" him to do so and I should get it.

Now, where does "open source" come in? Look at LS1Edit! Here is a free package that people are sharing their ideas and such to make the LS1, LS2 and LS6 engines more than what GM wanted to release. They share everything!

My question to all of you is; Why are we not sharing? I guarantee that when I get my custom tune next week that I'll be glad to share what I had done. Remember, it worked for me but may not work for you. When we all get software like LS1Edit, then we all can tweak everything. SCT Pro Racer is close but certainly not free.

Bottom line, I'm not against the guy who creates secret Plug Gaps. He should make money. But I do expect the rest of us that pay to tune to share. I've shared all my life and it feels good!

Cheers

John

[Dan]

Imagine if you could go on line and buy custom dyno tunes the way you could buy music?

Would we ever think of the word "iTunes" in the same manner? :)

[SergntMac]

Bravo, John. Well spoken.

[Smokey]

I still have my Qmodem software! I purchsed it new waaaay back in the days before I started my BBS, which is still online today. I ran my first BBs using a 2400 baud modem, now it's on the 'net. Nice to know someone is around that remembers those days. :)

[BruteForce]

I still have my Qmodem software! I purchsed it new waaaay back in the days before I started my BBS, which is still online today. I ran my first BBs using a 2400 baud modem, now it's on the 'net. Nice to know someone is around that remembers those days. :)

I too recall using Qmodem with my 20MHz 386SX. 800 Baud modem built in and 4 x 1 MB 30-pin SIMMs. Upgraded it to its max of 16 MB for $850. HA! The good old days (not)!

[Mr Johnson]

Been away for a bit... Here are my additional comments.

John as I'm sure you are aware there is a very significant difference between shareware and open source, which you touched on. One is completely free. I give you the rights to what I have done and you are free to change it and do with it what you like. The other is providing a set of functionality for free in the hopes that folks will support your good work. So where do I disagree? The tuner that creates a custom tune chip is not a programmer. I doubt that most tuners could write the actual code to run on our engine computers. In most cases they are instead simply manipulating data tables and variables that some other program makes sure is written to the FLASH memory in a recognizable way for the EEC to continue to function. So the value I will ultimately put in the program (Eg. LS1Edit, SCT tuner code) vs. the "tune" aka parameters is much, much higher. Regarding the statement about keeping a tune proprietary. As you said the LAMP folks have killed a lot of companies that didn't add significant value above and beyond providing what are essentially "tuning" parameters. The model will work for some time and like the Free Software Foundation you will find "consultants" that make their living showing people how to use the free tools but.... In any case I agree with most everything you say and I too remember Qmodem and the days of 300 baud modems!


Once you pay for it it's your's, Thats the bottom line.
and

Technology will render this discussion academic in about 3 years or less, I believe end user programable devices will become the norm and they eventually will allow you to change the TUNE that came with your car and allow you to modify the OEM program directly, after all that is what todays tuners are doing.

I wish you were both correct but I fear the opposite. Companies today are doing everything they can to not allow you to own anything and instead want to simply give you specific rights to use what you buy. Remember DiVX DVDs? Self-destruct after two plays? Think about how the RIAA would love nothing better than to have copy protection on every CD you bought because of "piracy". All the DRM (Digital Rights Management) solutions are there because movie studios and recording companies don't want you to control the content you bought. They want to control how you use it.



Now come the tuners. Granatelli, Jet, HyperTech, SCT, Diablo, and more. I don't know this for sure, but I seriously doubt any of them have any agreements in place with Ford that allows them to manipulate Ford's EEC and it's software. IMHO, this is the first instance of stealing intellectual property, software bandits of the first order, each stealing tuning concepts and proceedures from Ford, and for their own profit.

It isn't quite so clear cut though. Two very significant cases have held that reverse engineering a companies product is OK under specific circumstances. The two cases in question were Compaq vs. IBM when Compaq cloned the PC BIOS via reverse engineering. The other is, I believe, Accolade vs. Sega whereby Sega attemted to limit what games could run on their Genesis game system (the ones they got approval/money from). In both cases it was cited as "fair use" that Compaq and Accolade reverse engineered the code in the BIOS and console. The court held that it was fair use "if a legitimate reason for the use exists".

Gives me hope for the "we own it, etc.. . above it really does.

Sorry for the long posts. These just happen to be two topics I'm passionate about (Cars and Computers)!

[TooManyFords]

So where do I disagree? The tuner that creates a custom tune chip is not a programmer. I doubt that most tuners could write the actual code to run on our engine computers. In most cases they are instead simply manipulating data tables and variables that some other program makes sure is written to the FLASH memory in a recognizable way for the EEC to continue to function. So the value I will ultimately put in the program (Eg. LS1Edit, SCT tuner code) vs. the "tune" aka parameters is much, much higher. Heh heh..

25 years ago you needed to know 3270 and 360 Assembler (IEFBR14 ring bells?)

20 years ago you needed to know 6502 and 8080 asm, Cobol and Fortran were the norm and Basic was just getting on a roll...

15 years ago the tools changed again. Graphic interfaces were becoming popular and the tools were getting better.

10 years ago the tools changed yet again and now anyone who could run move a mouse and drop an icon on a form could create Windows programs with Visual Basic.

The point is that as the tools get easier and easier to use, the line becomes blurred between what -used- to be called a programmer and what can -now- be called a programmer. Even what can be programmed has changed. Used to be only mainframes, then mini's and finally everyone has a PC. Oh, and then came the engineers for everything else! My god, my vcr is now a fancy Linux box! My car stereo is (Empeg) is a freakin Linux box! My car has a computer more complex than my DVD player!

A tuner is now a programmer, it's just a different compiler and a computer with a gas pedal for a keyboard. haha. Sometimes I type things that make me laugh too!

I think I'll go dig my TSR-80 out of the box and pretend it has lowercase. (Ok, it does because I soldered extra chips into mine along with reverse video and overclocked it back when you needed a soldering iron to make it happen!)

Cheers

John

PS: thanks to all of you who actually remembered Qmodem! Thank you!

[Mr Johnson]

The point is that as the tools get easier and easier to use, the line becomes blurred between what -used- to be called a programmer and what can -now- be called a programmer.

And as the tools become easier to use the output of using the toolsbecomes a commodity thereby decreasing what an end-user is willing to pay for it.

But someone still has to do the nitty gritty... and they typically get paid pretty well. :pimp:

LOL... I remember having to solder some wires to make 1200 baud communication reliable on the Apple IIe serial ports. Here's to the "old" days.. :beer:

[SergntMac]

Heh heh...25 years ago you needed to know 3270 and 360 Assembler (IEFBR14 ring bells?) I'm still using 3270 stuff to run my "Hot Desk" today. Boring and slow, but still in place. We're looking for a few good programmers...
A tuner is now a programmer, it's just a different compiler and a computer with a gas pedal for a keyboard. haha. Sometimes I type things that make me laugh too! I think I'll go dig my TSR-80 out of the box and pretend it has lowercase. (Ok, it does because I soldered extra chips into mine along with reverse video and overclocked it back when you needed a soldering iron to make it happen!) If you need a power supply, you can borrow mine.

I want to get back to the bottom line on this train of thought, which is (IMHO) that Ford owns the territory we are homesteading on. This is true, yes? Ford owns, we rent, no matter how many guns we got. And, any "tuner" who feels his "refinement" of this landscape is strictly his own creative genius, needs some time away from his keyboard. Tuners are just more homesteaders, and just one rung above us consumers.

Ford locked the door. We want in. Tuners got the key. What did you miss here?

We use tuners the same way tuners use Ford. Tuners are overall nice folks, and smart too. But, God's gift to fast 4 doors? Hardly. I've been an SCT customer since before it was called SCT. My MM never would have started up, let along run record numbers back in 2002 without a custom tune. Nonetheless, today, can I get what I want/need from Diablo? Hypertech? Jet? You bet.

Tuners work for us. How (and when) did we forget this?

When tunes get too expensive, no one wants to buy a tune, and the tuners are dead in the water. Tunes get too cheap, and no one needs to pay for them. Tuners are again dead in the water. Tunes get priced just right, and do what we want them to do for us, and everyone stays happy. It's the American way.

So, who's steering this software boat? I am. Me. You. Owners. End users. Folks buying tunes. We all steer this software boat with our desire to go faster, and our willingness to spend money. Truncate either one, the tuners will be looking for work.

So...Tuners are hired labor, and there's a brand new tuner with another twist on things waiting on us just around the next corner. One tuner gets full of himself as the "master" (as we have seen), while another "master" is in the wings, and begging for the chance to step up. One tuner gets lazy, or, difficult to deal with? Ditto...Someone waits for this exact moment. Don't believe me? Just ask Bill Gates.

John...You want shareware? Open source? (like I know the difference) Motoviate the masses, break it down to features and coins...It's the American way, yes?

[TooManyFords]

John...You want shareware? Open source? (like I know the difference) Motoviate the masses, break it down to features and coins...It's the American way, yes?
You bet! And along with the American way, the balance is usually what happens regardless of how we steer the boat. (grin!) I don't know if Logan will allow it, but I would like to see a database of Tune Information like we currently have for the 1320. If not, I'll host it on my website. I'm going to start searching other forums (like the one for LS1Edit) and see what works and then, in another greate American tradition in software, CLONE it!

I'll keep everyone posted.

John

[magindat]

The geeks above will get this....
I do I.T. for a living. For Banks. Among other things, I do a lot of database writing. Database writing? I use Microsoft's Access (or other products) to 'author' a database. I then 'test' my developing database with users as it comes along. I tweak, fix, refine until it suits the user...until it does what they wanted it to do. When I'm done the customer (the bank) or privately (my client) owns the database. If they purchased a copy of Access from Microsoft, they are free to manipulate it. If they screw it up, they pay me more to fix it. Throughout the process, I freely discuss the principles and practices of authoring this database. There is no warranty any further than "It worked when you took it." If it breaks later they pay to fix... since the only way it could break is by their intervention.

In this case I am the 'tuner'. The database or 'tune' is not mine. It's theirs. They paid me to do it. If they break it, I have 2 choices. I either refuse to help them (as Ford does when they void warranty) or they pay me to fix it it (as Ford or a tuner would charge to do the same). Further, (as in the case of Ford) my fix may simply be to re-install my original database.

At the end of the day, it's all about how the tuner (or author) wants to handle their work as compared to what the client is willing to pay within the tuner or authors wishes.

Anything beyond the tuner or author's wishes is theft. Personally, I don't really care if my client gives or sells or otherwise messes with my database. I'll end up getting paid more to fix it for the recipient than I could have charged for the original database!!!! So, in that case they are not stealing. If I felt strongly about such a thing and told them so, then it WOULD be theft.

All in all it's about how people feel. Open sourcers like to share. Others don't. Is it a hobby or a livleyhood?

It's simple to me. If you want good work and ongoing support, maintain a relationship with whomever does work for you and adhere to their wishes.

[TooManyFords]

I agree totally! If I were a competent TUNER, I would want to give everyone I know a copy of a program that lets the customer tweak and twiddle with every setting that is possible. For every customer that is actually able to wrap their brains around the nuances of tuning an engine, there will be hundreds that won't and will need to return back to the tuner to "make it right".

Even with the vast resources of the Internet, my customers still can't fix their own computers and I make money fixing it for them. The computer looks different, is all.


For the TUNERS to make $$$, they need more customers...

And to get customers, the cars need to break...

And for the cars to break, we need free software so users can break them!

I see only a win-win for all of us in this!

John

[martyo]

For the TUNERS to make $$$, they need more customers...

And to get customers, the cars need to break...

And for the cars to break, we need free software so users can break them!

I see only a win-win for all of us in this!

John

And they say lawyers have no business ethics..... :P

[Bradley G]

Thier will always be people(customers) that are willing to pay for the service and expertise that engine tuners provide.

I agree, that some will mess with stuff , they have no business or experience with, and in the end they will pay more. (living proof):o

[TooManyFords]

And they say lawyers have no business ethics..... :P
You're right, THEY DON'T!!

:laugh:

Cheers!

John

[Paul T. Casey]

I wonder what the tuners think. Also, to throw in another monkey wrench, if the OBD2 laws are taken verbatum, aren't ALL custom tunes basically illegal?

[Smokie]

....I wonder what the tuners think?Paul, if you review how tuners handle requests for minor modifications to a tune that a customer already paid for; you will have your answer. Some tuners will e-mail you a modification to a tune, some don't.

[Captain Steve]

Ford is in the business of manufacturing and selling cars. That is their main concern. They created software to run their hardware. They also warrant that their hardware/software combination will work for a set duration.

I'm sure Ford is happy to share their software with companies like SCT and Diablo. It's in their best interest as it allows for greater value of their product in the consumers eyes. If you could modify Chevys but not Fords, then the Chevys would gain value relative to the Fords for any customer that even considers modding. Ford doesn't honor the warrantee if you change from their software, because they're warranteeing THEIR software to work with their hardware.. they don't warrantee your electric water pump either.

SCT is in the business of selling handheld tuners(or chips or laptop software) to modify Ford's software. The tune is what the customer wants, but SCT is in the business of selling you the means to get it. SCT doesn't care what tune you use for your car, as long as you're buying thier product to load it into your car. The pre-packaged tunes that they develop are really just a sales incentive to buy their brand vs another.

Tuners (the people, not the equiptment) are in the customer service business. They are selling a service (tweaking the software). The value of their service depends on how well the tweaks to the software work. Some things that affect that are experience and research. A less experienced tuner who has done no research will be able to command much lower prices than a more experienced tuner who has done better research. A tuner is selling you a service, their tweaking of your software and the piece of mind of knowing it's not going to hurt your car.

If you buy a tune from a tuner, then go ahead and copy it and sell (or give)it to someone else(who would otherwise have also bought it), you're stealing from the tuner. He's invested time and money into perfecting a tune for your car, and deserves a payment for it. You in effect are stealing his research and selling it as your own.


Bottom Line:
Ford doesn't care if you distribute a different tune, they're happy so long as they are selling cars.. anything that makes the car more attractive (and thus sells more cars) is fine by them.

SCT doesn't care if you distribute a different tune, they're happy so long as they are selling handhelds.. anthing that makes the handheld more attractive (and thus sells more handhelds) is fine by them.

Tuners care if you distribute THEIR tune for free. They've worked at tweaking the tune and developing a reputation ... if you give it away for free, then you're causing them to lose money.

Edit: I forgot to answer the original question.

I've been reading the the different threads about "custom tunes" and "dyno tunes" and I have a simple question:

Who ownes the tune?

Before you make a quick reply, think about it. On one hand you can buy a "canned" tune from someone and pay $300 and plug a chip in or download it to your car with a Predator or XCal2. But do you own what you installed in your car?

On the other hand, you pay $300+ for a dyno session. Does the man who ran the dyno and dialed your car in or the person who paid for it to be done? When you're done with the dyno session and you have it stored in your Predator or XCal2, can you make every change in the world and put it on your Pro Racer or are you stuck with whatever the dyno operator put on your car?

What do you think and why?The answer is.. you own the tune in your car. You can play with it all that you like.. in your car.

It's like buying a book from the bookstore, you can take the book home and cut it up into little pieces and re-arange the words however you like.

You can even take the book home and scan the contents into your computer if you like.

Heck, you can scan it in and print it back out again for your own amusement.

So far, everyone's happy.

What you can't do, is scan the book into the computer, and then post a link on the internet, so all of your friends can read it. It breaks copyright laws.

[N40GL]

Okay - things are getting very muddled here. Let's break this down.

<b>The Original Code</b>

What's in the EEC? Computer code. Who owns that? Intellectual property law says that it's owned by the author. So I think its fair to say that Ford owns it, having either hired the software developers as employees to write it, or contracting with an outsourcing entity to write it as a work for hire.

Ford may choose to 'perfect' their rights by filing a copyright for the code, or patenting the code as the 'first to invent' such code. More likely, they'll hold it as a trade secret internally. However, just because they haven't registered or filed doesn't diminish their ownership rights - it just makes them slightly harder to defend.

<b>Infringement</b>

So does that make any changes to the code an infringement of Ford's intellectual property rights? Maybe yes; maybe no.

The Digital Millennium Copyright Act (sec. 1201(f), et seq) specifically permits reverse engineering to achieve interoperability. This grew out of the <i>Sony v. Connectix </i> case, where Connectix created Playstation game cartridges without having access to the Playstation code, and was sued by Sony. The courts held that the Connectix game cartridge was a 'new product', and that the reverse engineering conducted was solely to figure out how to get their game cartridge to work in the player, and was permitted under the law. There's an Atari case that I can't find right now that also applies to Patent law.

So, were I arguing this case on behalf of, say, Superchips, I'd say I reverse engineered the code for compatibility of my 'new product' - the handheld tuner and those little flip-chip boards. This clearly is legal.

Now - if I was Ford, and had a couple of smart software developers in house, I'd recognize that reverse engineering isn't a perfect solution, and I'd recognize that Forded be better off by making sure Superchips (and others) had good code so they had the best resources possible to make new products (i.e. flip-chips) with, so that customers remained happy with their Ford product.

That's why I think there is such a free-flow of code between the two bodies of developers. Superchips gets 'known good code' and Ford gets feedback from what customers go to tuners for and what they want to see in new product. Win-win on both sides.

<b>So, where does that leave us?</b>

I think it's reasonable to conclude that Ford owns the core code in the EEC and (however it was derived) Superchips owns the code that modifies what Ford's code does. There are two distinct piles of software here.

<b>The Tuner</b>

The tuner receives a license to use the Superchips software, based on the Intellectual Property Rights (IPR) owned by Superchips. Remember that under Intellectual Property Law, all rights not granted in a license are reserved to the grantor (or owner) of the IPR.

So I would expect that Superchips tuner software license is licensed to a named user (like, say, Lidio) at a named place (Alternative Auto) for a certain type of use (tuning and modifying Ford computer code) and to leave a copy of the modified computer code in the customer's car.

I also expect the license says that Lidio can only tune for a customer that uses the modified code for personal use and not for resale. This restriction is probably embedded in the program, and written into the modified code in the EEC when the tuning software does its magic, as some sort of comment file.

Even though the customer does not see, know about or read that embedded restriction does not make it any less valid. If you go read some of your Sony music disks, likely you'll find a text file that contains a license in respect of how you use the music disk that I bet you didn't know was there (Sony is famous for this). It's been well litigated that this license is valid and enforceable, and it doesn't really matter what the media for the license might be (inside a CD-ROM or embedded in the EEC-IV). You're stuck with it.

<b>Work for Hire</b>

Therefore, Lidio owns a license from Superchips to use the tuning software on customer cars under a fairly narrow set of circumstances.

You, as a customer, go to Lidio and change the tune in your car. You think it's a "work for hire." Is it?

Probably, but remember that Lidio only has a limited set of rights (via license) under all the rights of Superchips (under ownership). Lidio can't grant to you any more rights than he has to give (or that Superchips allows him to grant).

So Lidio can only give you rights to use the modified tune, and not to resell it. You, as a customer, can commission a "work for hire" from Lidio, but what he delivers to you will be limited in its rights - you get ownership of the modified tune, but it doesn't include rights to resell it. It's a limited ownership concept.

Lidio doesn't own it, either. I suspect Superchips would assert they have some sort of rights to the modification, but not ownership, either.

<b>Who Owns the Tune?</b>

You do, but you have limited rights of usage. That's not in conflict with the concept of 'ownership' as 'use' is often quite different under the law (as any Realtor will tell you). I 'own' my MM, but I can't 'use' it to break the speed laws without penalties.

I would bet that the business model that would be constructed for 'full ownership' of the tune, including rights to resell and modify and copy and so forth would be EXTREMELY expensive, because the creators of the tools that allowed someone to do that know that their window of time to sell their product is very short (since, once a sale is made, that guy gives it to all his friends who were potential customers of the software writers). That means they have to recoup their costs over a much smaller base of customers, so the price goes way, way up.

<b> Open Source?</b>

The Open Source Community believes all software should be free for use, ownership and distribution by everyone. Unfortunately, that means software developers never get paid because there's never any money generated from sales to pay them. This has led to "Monetized Open Source," where software developers charge for software, or give software away and charge for maintenance, or charge for the right to distribute, or to modify, or whatever other rights will make a buck. This just makes ownership and economic issues more complex. It ain't worth going into here.


<b>The Test</b>

I'll be passing out a test now. Please don't copy from your neighbor and turn the test in at the next forum.

[Smokie]

Speaking of tunes, does anyone here own an XCal2 that actually allows you to change the parameters of your tune???.....not interested in data logging.

SCT has made some noise promising to sell you a product that allows you to change your tune, however the only one that can activate the end user feature is an SCT dealer who might want to charge for this, he also will control what and how much you can play with your tune.

To me this is the equivalent of buying a very expensive color tv. that you can only watch in black and white until you pay a technician to turn on the color for you and he also will control the intensity of the colors.

[Shaft333]

This is the coolest thread I've seen in a long time.

I would say that you bought the tune, to use, twist, make backups (if possible) all you can manage... but you can't sell a copy or make yourself a distributor of it without permissions.

The stuff I design has software that a team of people spend hours creating. You folks ultimately end up with it. Such as, it might be in your flasher relay. It's yours, enjoy! Just don't go finding a way to pull it out and sell it to my competition without a fight. I'd think of tune as not much different than that of a piece of code to blink your turn signals or unlock your door when you push the button.

[QWK SVT]

Speaking of tunes, does anyone here own an XCal2 that actually allows you to change the parameters of your tune???.....not interested in data logging.

SCT has made some noise promising to sell you a product that allows you to change your tune, however the only one that can activate the end user feature is an SCT dealer who might want to charge for this, he also will control what and how much you can play with your tune.

To me this is the equivalent of buying a very expensive color tv. that you can only watch in black and white until you pay a technician to turn on the color for you and he also will control the intensity of the colors.
If the dealer has the latest and greatest SCT software (Advantage 3), they can program the end user adjustability into their tunes...

I have an XCAL2, that does not allow me to make any alterations. I bought an early unit, before SCT released the software to allow this :rolleyes: Sooner or later, I'll have to figure out how I can get an 'upgraded' tune from Lidio. I guess the next modification I make will necessitate this, as I will probably go with underdrive pulleys.

NOw, this brings us to an interesting point in time. I have a unit. A tuner may email me an updated file, to allow me the functionality originally offered by the product. This could either be a new tune, or the EXACT same tune, with the features turned on... What are the thoughts on this - should one have to pay for either situation?

From what I've heard, some tuners (I have no clue about any of the MM tuners, just speaking in general) are less than forthcoming with their tunes, and refuse to email a file which could then be distributed over the internet, and therefore do not share with anyone. Instead, the tuner would rather the customer return the unit, to be reprogrammed. To me, this is an awful situation.

Showing a lack of faith in the customer makes the customer show a lack of faith in the supplier...

[TooManyFords]

See? Custom tunes and how they are sold is just like the beginning of the PC Software era. Everyone is very protective and require everything to be encrypted (.xtr) or use Dongles (chips, also encrypted) so nobody can learn from anybody else.

I'm telling ya, the first tuner that offers a "modest" subscription service to maintain tunes in a database and supports his clients at super reasonable prices will win.

There are just too many computer literate teens out there that with the right mindset will come up with ways to work around any encryption or dongle. It will become Shareware or Freeware and then they will be giving away the source code so others can make it better.

I pay $19/yr for Model Railroading magazine per year and I'd probably pay more for a subscription to a tuner that helps me with my SCT Pro Racer package. I'm not out tuning other cars, just my own. But then, isn't that what we all want to do anyway? Our own?

2 cents and change...

John

[SergntMac]

Nice presentation, Mark, thanks. You said it better than I could.

The SCT ProRacer package has been out for a while, Zack and I have been using it for over a year. This is SCT software which allows you to modify your SCT tune on your HHP, using a PC.

You can load your tune, change a shift point, turn on a fan, whatever you wish, then program that to one of the additional channels in your SCT HPP. Then you can download (flash) that to your EEC and the change is in effect. This is easy, and it's legit with permission from SCT. Just like other computer software, one user per package, and that package can modify any SCT tune, and load it into any SCT HHP.

The fly in the ointment here, is that it is a one way street. There's no way to upload your dyno tune from your EEC into the ProRacer program. So, when I go to a tuner for a dyno tune, and he's done his magic, I don't have any access to that tune unless he copies that to a floppy disc, or, e-mails the file to me for download to my PC. Though I paid for the dyno tune, and now wish to make a minor change in that tune, I cannot do so if the tuner doesn't forward my final tune, despite my license from SCT to accomplish exactly that.

There's the rub, the tuner. If the tuner won't share the product you bought (his services), you can't make any changes without going back to that tuner. If this is the way SCT wanted it to be, why do they license end-users permission to use the ProRacer program in the first place?

I'm fortunate to have access to a professional tuner who will share the file after I paid for his services. Others are not fortunate, and this probably isn't that important to many of us here, but it's the heart of this issue too.

I contend that when I buy a dyno tune, a copy of that final tune is my personal property and I can do what I want with it, within limitations set by the author, SCT. Isn't this lateral concern to the Video/DVD/MP3 markets? I am allowed a personal copy for my own entertainment, once I've paid for that copy. I can let others listen/watch the product, but I am without any permission to distribute additional copies without additional payment. This is fair, IMHO, but the stall here, is still the tuner who won't share. IMHO, check this out first, make sure your tuner will provide the copy you're entitled to, or, do business elsewhere.

BTW, I accept it as a given, that once a copy is delivered to me, and it's modified by me in any way, all expectations of the tuner's craftmanship is null and void.

[MISTERgadget]

I took an electronic ethics class relating to computer use, and it seems to me as if this issue is very similar to that of software and programming development.

In the professional realm, a programmer paid by a company does not own any of the entities he creates while working for that company. All of his programming work becomes the property of that company. IE, if I develop a game for Blizzard, that game is their intellectual property and copyright, and I have no claim to it.

I would apply the same to tunes, because the tuner is a programmer working under contract with the customer as his employer. Everything he creates while being paid by you is your property.

[Brutus]

Nice presentation, Mark, thanks. You said it better than I could.

The SCT ProRacer package has been out for a while, Zack and I have been using it for over a year. This is SCT software which allows you to modify your SCT tune on your HHP, using a PC.

You can load your tune, change a shift point, turn on a fan, whatever you wish, then program that to one of the additional channels in your SCT HPP. Then you can download (flash) that to your EEC and the change is in effect. This is easy, and it's legit with permission from SCT. Just like other computer software, one user per package, and that package can modify any SCT tune, and load it into any SCT HHP.

The fly in the ointment here, is that it is a one way street. There's no way to upload your dyno tune from your EEC into the ProRacer program. So, when I go to a tuner for a dyno tune, and he's done his magic, I don't have any access to that tune unless he copies that to a floppy disc, or, e-mails the file to me for download to my PC. Though I paid for the dyno tune, and now wish to make a minor change in that tune, I cannot do so if the tuner doesn't forward my final tune, despite my license from SCT to accomplish exactly that.

There's the rub, the tuner. If the tuner won't share the product you bought (his services), you can't make any changes without going back to that tuner. If this is the way SCT wanted it to be, why do they license end-users permission to use the ProRacer program in the first place?

I'm fortunate to have access to a professional tuner who will share the file after I paid for his services. Others are not fortunate, and this probably isn't that important to many of us here, but it's the heart of this issue too.

I contend that when I buy a dyno tune, a copy of that final tune is my personal property and I can do what I want with it, within limitations set by the author, SCT. Isn't this lateral concern to the Video/DVD/MP3 markets? I am allowed a personal copy for my own entertainment, once I've paid for that copy. I can let others listen/watch the product, but I am without any permission to distribute additional copies without additional payment. This is fair, IMHO, but the stall here, is still the tuner who won't share. IMHO, check this out first, make sure your tuner will provide the copy you're entitled to, or, do business elsewhere.

BTW, I accept it as a given, that once a copy is delivered to me, and it's modified by me in any way, all expectations of the tuner's craftmanship is null and void.

Mac, I had a dyno tune and it was downloaded into my HHP. It is my understanding that it can be uploaded from the HHP to a PC and modified then dowloaded back to the HPP. Is this correct? In your statement above you meant that a dynotune flashed directly to the EEC can't be retrieved and modified, yes? Just trying to clarify and see if I understand correctly.

[Lidio]

When it comes to tuning and all the various car stuff we do. Its hard to say what’s right about computer tuning and who owns what etc?? All I can say is what I’ve been through and what I’ve worked for… for a very long time.

I’m in no way a software writer or code guy of any kind. I have a great understanding of how the internal cumbustion engine works and what it takes to make it feel right when you touch the gas pedal every day. All the deep core and electrons moving around in there mean nothing to me. All I want to see is software with a great and easy to use interface that does what its supposed to do. When I want this much spark at this point or this much fuel at this point etc, etc.
Because car stuff like what I do to some isn’t taken super seriously, I think some of these laws and rules haven’t really been put to the test at least at my level.

I’m one of those tuners that some of you have referred to. I do not for the most part give out or freely e-mail or distribute my tunes for cars that are relatively stock or mild. I only give customer a copy of their tune if they’ve come to my shop and had a custom tuning session with their car.

The tune that I sell for lets say a mostly stock F-150 or a mostly stock 05 Mustang, Marauders etc. These are the tunes that I design to extract the most out of a car that has very little other mods done to it. This is the tune that is the most generic and common for an enthusiast to purchase as a “first thing to do to his car”. This is the tune that is typically sold the most by chip makers and tuners etc. This is why my self and others are pretty protective of it.
Some car people that mod their car’s… aside from maybe a gear, moderate exhaust and maybe an air box, will never do much more to their daily driven performance car what ever it is. If the base line tune he/she purchases is done right, they really wont need to deviate from that tune for a long time for the most part. Unless some one hands them a line that his tune is better then the other tune, which most people fall for because of the lack of understanding of all of this. I spend a lot of time with these starter tunes, (ask my wife and kids). I even some times buy the car that I take a big interest in, and decide that a tune and the investment is worth it.

Usually beyond that, becomes a true custom tune that requires more of a one on one tuning session. Although there are tuners out there who will take your money and mail you a best guess chip for your rather extensively modded car that eventually leads to what I call “mail order tuning frustrations”.


I have to say that I totally disagree that I should, or any other tuner should give away the tune that is designed for mass public distribution. As the guy who takes the time and effort to do this, I guess this is my perspective of it, and above all its how I make a living.

The customer who comes in for a one on one custom tune… his car and tune are in no way usually sharable with another cars like his for various reasons and combination differnces, so I give him a copy of his tuning file if he ask's for it plain and simple.

But if a guy roles onto my dyno with a stock MM or other Ford’s, and gets the tune that I sell every day for those cars and we do nothing different to the tune then what I normally sell or mail order, then he does not leave with an electronic copy of that file in any way. Only what’s on his chip or flash device when I’m done. This may seem deviant, greedy or just plain not right to some of you. But on this side you look at it very different when your actually devopling the tune and trying to once again, make a living from it.
No offence but when you’re a car lover and performance enthusiast as I still am, but not in the field actually doing this full time as I am, its easy to ask for it for free or to request it to be freely distributed. You simply don’t see the work that us tuners put into it, and not the reward we’re looking for, just a fair fee and compensation.

This is basically how I look at it. If a customer buys a flasher/chip from my competitor and isn’t happy, and then hears that my tune is potentially better or more refined. Why shouldn’t I profit a little from selling him a re-tune or re-flash just like the first tuner/seller guy did. If the other tuners program is no good or not as good as mine… that’s not my problem. I see no way to remedy this other then to charge a fair fee, plain and simple to reflash a hand held with our tune if the hand held was not originally bought from us.

There are plenty of ways to try to sugar coat this, but not on my end when it’s what you do for a living. I see no simple way for end users who want more control other then to simply recomend buying the Pro-Racer type packages from companies like SCT, and learn how to do it your self if you want total or some control of your cars engine management system and not be at the mercy of a independent tuner guy or shop.

For my customer starting about a week ago, the Xcal-2’s come with limited end user adjustments that can be made from the hand held itself. I’ve not converted all my MM and many other files over to the new software to take advantage of this, but most of the N/A tunes I offer are done for those interested in this new feature.


Thanks

[johnfain]

Very good question, John, a real (and very legal) brain twister. Bravo!


Once it's burned into your history and you pay the tuner his "rate", it's your tune. You own it...IMHO.


You are correct, Sir!!!!!

Unless there is a EULA presented to you or attached with the paperwork accompanying the "tune" then you own it once you pay for it. You own the tune if the tune is sold to you. If it is licensed to you (E.G. Windows XP, MS Office, etc...) then the actual code, etc... is owned by the 3rd party and you are only a licensee.

:coolman:

[QWK SVT]

For my customer starting about a week ago, the Xcal-2’s come with limited end user adjustments that can be made from the hand held itself. I’ve not converted all my MM and many other files over to the new software to take advantage of this, but most of the N/A tunes I offer are done for those interested in this new feature.
Lidio, which functions have you enabled? What are the options for your existing customers with an Xcal2, to get this functionality?

[SergntMac]

Mac, I had a dyno tune and it was downloaded into my HHP. It is my understanding that it can be uploaded from the HHP to a PC and modified then dowloaded back to the HPP. Is this correct? In your statement above you meant that a dynotune flashed directly to the EEC can't be retrieved and modified, yes? Just trying to clarify and see if I understand correctly.In the scenario you post, no, it's not possible.

I have a flashed EEC, no chip. I have an SCT 9100 HPP, and SCT ProRacer software on a HP laptop. This is how it works for me.

Let us imagine I want to adjust my flashed EEC for a road trip. My EEC program is a file recently modified by a dyno tune and it's perfect. I don't want to change anything. However, with this tune, my OD comes on after 60 MPH, so, I don't have to keep playing with the OD button, or, stare at the green dash light when I jump on any expressway for short trips. For better fuel economy and a leisurely drive OTR, I'll want my OD to come on early, let's say at 45 MPH?

I cannot read my present dyno tune from my EEC, I can only flash over it. If the tuner who performed my last dyno tune gave me a copy of that on a floppy disc, or, e-mailed it to me, it's on my laptop marked as a "master" file. Just like any Excel spreadsheet, all I need to do, is open it, make the changes I want, and rename it with a "save as" command so I do not overwrite the master file. Then I send it to the HHP, via an SCT provided cable, storing that tune in one of the three memory banks available on the HHP, 1, 2 or 3, since bank 0 (zero) is reserved for HHP identification. I would also store another copy of the "master" file without my adjustments, for use when I arrive at my destination.

Now I plug my 9100 HHP into the OBDII port and flash my modified road tune over the dyno tune resident in the EEC, and I'm ready to leave. To restore my original dyno tune once I reach my destination, I simply reflash my "master" program from one of the memory banks over the road tune, until I'm ready to head home. Then I flash again for the road trip, and flash again when I get home.

Everything I'm doing is a one way street. Every step is flashing one program over another program, reprogramming the next device in line. Without having my "master" copy of my latest dyno tune on a disc, or, as a file on my laptop delivered via e-mail, I cannot make this simple change, without writing a whole file from scratch, which isn't something you wish to undertake. BTW #1, I've done this. It took 13 hours of dyno time to run through all the parameters of the EEC, and reset them for a Marauder. IMHO, don't go there...Gasp!

Note: I cannot read my EEC, or, access the dyno tune flashed to the EEC. However, neither can any dealership/service department, if this is any comfort to any owner here.

Note: I cannot read, or, access the registration file stored in bank 0 on the HHP, used to VIN lock the SCT 9100 HHP for use strictly on my MM. However, neither can any dealership/service department, if this is any comfort to any owner here.

BTW #2...Law Enforcement can access certain parameters of the EEC and they have. But, this is another topic we have already covered here, please do a search, thank you.

BTW #3, it's no different with any edition of the SCT chip, or, any products from other tuners, such as Diablo, Hypertech, Jet and so on. This is how they protect themselves from "shareware" like distribution, and I do not disagree, when a physical device such as the 9100 HHP, is the vehicle for duplication. This is a lot like CDRom writers, yes?

I understand this flash process occurs much faster with the Xcal2 HHP, but not much differently. I understand that when you add ProRacer, or, Raptor software, live data logging is better too, but I have not upgraded my stuff to any of this crap yet. I also believe that some features have been unlocked in the softwarec for access by the end user (me and y'all) with newer versions, and the example I used here (to manipulate my OD) may be one of them. But, I haven't sampled this update and it's features myself.

Nonetheless, the access and flexibility you suggest, Brutus, is not possible, IMHO.