New Court (CA) Ruling.....

mjf6175

Viper Owner
Joined
May 17, 2007
Posts
151
Reaction score
0
Location
Edison NJ
Interesting development in the emerging law regarding on-board vehicle computers....

A California appellate court has handed down a fascinating opinion today in State v. Xinos on whether and how the Fourth Amendment regulates government access to data stored in a car’s internal computer that controls the airbags and seatbelts. After a fatal car accident, the police downloaded the data from the impounded car and used it to help reconstruct the accident and convict the driver of vehicular manslaughter. The information from the computer “showed information captured during the five seconds before defendant’s vehicle experienced a change in velocity. It disclosed the vehicle’s speed during the five seconds before the incident” and showed that the brakes had been activated at that time. Held: The data was protected by the Fourth Amendment, the retrieval of the data was unconstitutional, and the conviction had to be overturned. From the opinion:


We do not accept the Attorney General’s argument that defendant had no reasonable expectation of privacy in the data contained in his vehicle’s SDM. The precision data recorded by the SDM was generated by his own vehicle for its systems operations. While a person’s driving on public roads is observable, that highly precise, digital data is not being exposed to public view or being conveyed to anyone else. . . . We conclude that a motorist’s subjective and reasonable expectation of privacy with regard to her or his own vehicle encompasses the digital data held in the vehicle’s SDM.

The Court also concludes that the computer data is in the car, not outside the car, so the legal standard that governs access to the data probable cause but not a warrant
 

slysnake

Enthusiast
Joined
Nov 26, 2007
Posts
1,688
Reaction score
1
We do not accept the Attorney General’s argument that defendant had no reasonable expectation of privacy in the data contained in his vehicle’s SDM. The precision data recorded by the SDM was generated by his own vehicle for its systems operations. While a person’s driving on public roads is observable, that highly precise, digital data is not being exposed to public view or being conveyed to anyone else. . . . We conclude that a motorist’s subjective and reasonable expectation of privacy with regard to her or his own vehicle encompasses the digital data held in the vehicle’s SDM.
Wow! Whats up with courts these days? Actually using reason and common sense to make decisions! First, upholding 2nd amendment rights and now this. And from a California Court! Maybe hope for this country yet.
 

Martin

Enthusiast
Joined
Dec 15, 1997
Posts
1,810
Reaction score
0
Location
Silicon Valley, CA and Portland, OR
California has been getting more reasonable lately - not sure why, but I'm not going to argue. Maybe they're starting to realize that the state is broke, and the state has a reputation for imposing unreasonable laws, taxes, conditions on people that live there - so the only people who are going to stick around are the lawless, non-tax-paying people who fly under the radar... The state needs to attract businesses and tax-generating citizens again - and pass/enforce laws to encourage that.
 

TrackAire

Enthusiast
Joined
Jun 24, 2009
Posts
1,523
Reaction score
1
Location
Vacaville, California
If you are ever involved in a serious accident (injury or deaths involved), you never let your car go to a "holding" yard. It should be taken to a secure, locked area that outsiders have no access to. Even a locked mini storage unit works in a pinch.

One of my best friends works as independent insurance investigator (mainly checking on extended warranty claims and their legitimacy...yes, some dealerships do lie or make mis-diagnoses :omg:). He has seen mulitple situations where outside investigators and OEM's have come in to download the vehicles computer after accidents, claimed runaway acceleration, etc.

It sounds like the above ruling covers you from criminal investigations, but what about civil lawsuits? A civil lawsuit jury might find it very interesting that you were full throttle for the 5 seconds before you crashed your car.....

Cheers,
George
 

gb66gth

Enthusiast
Joined
Dec 10, 2007
Posts
1,855
Reaction score
0
Location
Big-D
Wow! Whats up with courts these days? Actually using reason and common sense to make decisions! First, upholding 2nd amendment rights and now this. And from a California Court! Maybe hope for this country yet.

I second that!
 

Camfab

Enthusiast
Joined
Oct 2, 2004
Posts
2,916
Reaction score
3
Location
SoCal
California has been getting more reasonable lately - not sure why, but I'm not going to argue. Maybe they're starting to realize that the state is broke, and the state has a reputation for imposing unreasonable laws, taxes, conditions on people that live there - so the only people who are going to stick around are the lawless, non-tax-paying people who fly under the radar... The state needs to attract businesses and tax-generating citizens again - and pass/enforce laws to encourage that.


This is so true, and even more shocking to the firearms enthusiaists in the State of Kalifornia is that AB962 was struck down just days before it was to be enforced! I would never have believed it. In a nutshell AB962 required all handgun ammunition purchases to include fingerprinting, face to face transactions with complete info. of ammo, quantity and file on the individual. No internet sales.

As a side note, the City of Los Angeles has required this for ALL ammunition purchased within the city.
 

TheMilkman

Enthusiast
Joined
Nov 15, 2009
Posts
222
Reaction score
0
This is good news as I have read that the newer ODB systems were looking at setting up wireless or RFID type devices inside. This ruling may make it a moot point to have this, or allow the use of the data.

The original thought of the new ODB was so that roadside monitors could check emissions. I'm sure that if the technology is available there would soon be roadside speed traps using this against you. Also, it would **** to have an officer pull you over walk up with a UPS type device, scan your car and it prints a ticket for everything the computer thinks is wrong with your car. It would be convenient for them, and make radar/laser detectors obsolete.

The only way around the auto tickets would be to hack your car :omg: to make it show the data you want. But if you can hack you ODB then so can someone else.

picture.php
 

DarcShadow

Viper Owner
Joined
Sep 2, 2003
Posts
372
Reaction score
3
Location
Azle, Texas
The only thing this ruling really does is just require them to get a warrant before downloading the data, and in cases such as this, I'm sure most judges would sign the warrant.

As for the RFID thing, if that goes into effect then this ruling would have no effect because as it states, it only protects data inside the car. RFID would be data being transmitted to an outside source and therefore "visible" to anyone with a receiver and not protected by this ruling.

Not saying I don't agree with the ruling, just saying, in the long run, it won't do much.
 

Chuck 98 RT/10

Enthusiast
Joined
Oct 15, 2000
Posts
17,923
Reaction score
0
Location
tampa, fl USA
The only thing this ruling really does is just require them to get a warrant before downloading the data, and in cases such as this, I'm sure most judges would sign the warrant.

As for the RFID thing, if that goes into effect then this ruling would have no effect because as it states, it only protects data inside the car. RFID would be data being transmitted to an outside source and therefore "visible" to anyone with a receiver and not protected by this ruling.

Not saying I don't agree with the ruling, just saying, in the long run, it won't do much.

My take on it too. A small victory short term.
 

EllowViper

Enthusiast
Joined
Mar 28, 2006
Posts
1,656
Reaction score
0
Location
Valrico Florida
Just bought a new Kia Sorrento and was looking through the owners manual...noticed the statement regarding the engine management system automatically records the last 30 seconds of vehicle operation to assist in determining system performance during both airbag/non-airbag deployments. I was very surprised by that.
 

Latest posts

Members online

Forum statistics

Threads
153,645
Posts
1,685,216
Members
18,222
Latest member
rharon
Top