According to the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, most new cars contain data recorders. While the information captured by the box (speed, direction, etc.) could work in your favor after an accident, things could just as easily go the other way. The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) gets it, calling data recorders the “spy in your car.” According to the ACLU’s privacy director in Seattle, "It's my information not public information." Insurance companies and the police beg to differ. While that battle plays out, the public at large remains ignorant of their hidden homie. “Not one driver I interviewed knew they had a silent witness on board,” says KOMO TV reporter Michelle Esteban. As of 2011, automakers must notify car owners they’ve got a flight recorder on board. Be sure to check page 374 of your owner’s manual.
Find Reviews by Make:
Read all comments
I’m pretty comfortable with this as it will allow for the truth to prevail after an accident. It would be better if everybody was aware of it, but honestly we here at TTAC should also be somewhat interested in the truth about collisions…
Now if it can tell whether the other guy was talking on a cell phone and eating a big mac when the accident took place I’d be totally on board.
kazoomaloo- Should be pretty easy to identify the difference between cell phone on and cell phone in use radiation signals (IANAEE, so I’m just guessing), and I’m good with that. Unfortunately, it’s harder for the scent recognition system to tell if the Big Mac’s fresh, or if it’s just the odor from a wrapper that’s been molding in the back seat for the last 3 months…
Haven’t these been on cars for a long time?
Personally, I’d like the police and accident investigators to as much information as possible after the next time some jackass runs into me.
GM has them since 96, Ford has them on certain miodels after 2000. All GM vehicles are watching what you do. They record brake light on, seat belt use, airbag deployment, throttle position, speed, engine speed and on the vette they go into other things like g forces. All this is recorded for 5 seconds prior to the airbag deployment and is overwritten as you drive. If the bag goes off, it stores the last 5 seconds.
There has been successful prosecutions with the data already, for 2200 dollars you can buy a reader that will show what is in it. Police and Insurance companies are diving right in, in some cases they are reviewing the data at the scene. Thank goodness my 25 year old motorcycle has no such thing.
A gentleman I knew in Atlanta was in the middle of a lawsuit becuase Chevrolet voided his warranty after pulling info from his ‘Vette’s computer. I believe (it’s been about 4 years since I spoke with him) that they stated his engine issues were caused by excessive speed, based on information obtained by the computer. His lawsuit was going on the premise that no where in his paperwork did it state that information would be obtained in this fashion. I don’t know how it turned out but it is an interesting wrinkle to add to the black box debate.
The automaker and the ACLU say the information on these boxes is owned by the owner of the vehicle. But you’ll find you have probably already waived your right to withhold this information when you accepted your driver’s license and/or insurance policy. Read the fine print. Even if you didn’t do so explicitly, you probably accepted some sort of clause about “cooperating fully with any investigation by authorities.”
Even if motorist challenged the use of the data based on self incrimination, the courts would probably say you weren’t forced to incriminate yourself – because you are under no obligation to accept a driver’s license or any given insurance company’s coverage.
What upsets me is that most people aren’t upset when they learn about these boxes. Most people believe they have nothing to fear because they have nothing hide. Until it’s their turn. And then it’s too late.
The world is becoming much too claustrophobic for me.
I’ve often wondered what – if any – the effects of a note reading “CONSENT TO SEARCH DENIED – SEE U.S. CONSTITUTION, AMENDMENTS #4 and #5”, wrapped around such module, would be.
Assuming, of course, that it cannot just be removed – I suspect it’s integrated with the ECU these days.
With all the fabulous aftermarket performance chips out there, you’d think somebody would have a hack/autoerase feature to override this scary crap.
Pretty soon we’ll all be rolling up our sleeves to have our medical data/transponder chips implanted.
On so many fronts, from the ubiquitousness of surveillance cameras to google data warehousing to RF tags and car black boxes, societies’ progress towards complete info-awareness of “the authorities” is continuing unabated, and this is not a tinfoil-hat type dystopian fantasy either.
I suppose the black-box thing willl be a moot point once our cars are driving us around anyway, so we can concentrate on text messaging and stuffing our morbidly obese faces on the way to our cubicles.
“Excessive speed” in a Corvette can void the warranty?
What’s the point of a Corvette, then?
While I can see that a manufacturer denying warranty based on the recorder is going way too far, the use of such data for accident investigation is not. If an accident causes the loss of life or severe injuries then all evidence in the case should be presented to establish a clear picture of what happened.
driving is a privilege not a right. it is your right to know that your actions are being recorded in return for the privilege of driving. in other words, fair disclosure is a must for this thing. also, there needs to be transparent policy for ensuring through a third party that the recording is accurate. i find it hard to believe that the courts would take the auto manufacturers word that these things are flawless.
Two problems:
1. If you are going to claim “excessive speed” voids the warranty, and you plan to use the data recorder then you should be obligated to define excessive speed quite clearly in the contract. Also, fair play would suggest warning the driver of when he is pushing the envelope. Otherwise, you are, in my non-bar-member opinion, engaging in a bad faith contract.
2. The problem with data recorder info is that it is quite prejudicial. Authorities and juries tend to overly weight what the lawyers tell them this stuff means – even when it doesn’t say that, or is being misread. Both sides will now need to get their experts in, and now it will cost a mint if any of these things go to trial. While it can save your bacon, it can also get you blamed when the other guy has no recorder to show that you were BOTH speeding or otherwise at fault (which happens a lot in accidents).
The insurance industry will soon be the ones deciding whether we get to drive ourselves in the future. That classic everyday driver is starting to look better and better.
Uhhh … if you were at fault for an accident because you were going 20 over the speed limit in the rain, then why is it a problem that the investigators know that. So you get caught breaking the laws of which you are fully aware, that’s the risk you take when breaking the laws.
One more thing. Is there anyway we can get over this ridiculous “driving is a privilege, not a right” myth? It’s a distinction that people try to take too far. Look up the word, and they are practically synonymous. All the reasons for denying the privilege are set out in law (just like you can lose your rights).
With apologees to postjosh (it’s a pet peeve) most of the arguments that follow that statement are useless. Logically, there is no difference from saying what you said, and saying that they can shoot you for a traffic infraction. I know there is a big difference, but if you take it down to basic propositional logic they are equivalent statements.
If the government started willy-nilly taking peoples licenses the revolution would start the next day. Please file the whole privelege vs, right thing away next to frogs and warts, cooties, and the tooth fairy.
Thank You.
OK we had 3 teens killed about 2-3 years ago by some imbicile who “just had to be going” 74 mph in a 45 zone. He was in a full sized GM SUV. They were on lunch break, going to the mall. One teen lived out of four in the Corolla. He drove into the side of them as they crossed traffic turning left – yeah, I know – it was partly their fault – but they’re dead (including the driver), so now what? The guy in the SUV lived.
The local prosecutor’s office got a SEARCH WARRANT for the OBD-II unit in the SUV, had it removed, had the information accessed which proved he had the throttle hard down, and was doing 74 in a 45, prosecuted him, and won.
So, where is the problem with this?
Now, I’d have a BIG problem if the prosecutor hadn’t gotten the search warrant. But that wasn’t the case.
Where’s the problem with this, even under the United States Constitution?
We sign a document (our driver’s license) and in doing so, indicate that while driving, we’ll actually obey the rules of the road (in other words, driving is not a “right” but a “privilege” – otherwise, legally speaking, the government could not issue licenses, could they?)
So that makes most of us who drive (99.99999% plus) hypocrites and liars, right? ‘coz we willfully break the law.
So what’s wrong with taking responsibility for our actions, and if we aren’t willing to do so, being prosecuted within the laws of the land, with evidence from what is available?
If you want to be a scofflaw and not have OBD-II and so forth, then you’d
a) better become familiar with old cars
b) better get a good tool set to fix the car
I’m actually fairly shocked by the amount of people who kinda sheepishly accept these black boxes as the “cost of doing business.” How about if you had a GPS unit that constantly tracked your every movement and reported this to the NSA or the FBI or just your local cops?
I realize that life is a trade-off between liberty and safety…I don’t want anyone plowing into me because they blew a red light, but I don’t think that anyone has the right to know what I was doing at any specific moment and I sure don’t want a blackbox recording my every movement for the one time that there may be a question about who had a red light…besides, the box doesn’t know who had a red light…I just find it an overt invasion of my privacy and wish that there was a way to be able to undo it…I honestly don’t see this blackbox being able to determine a whole lot more than standard accident investigation would determine anyway.
I guess buying early 90s cars is going to be the way to go for a while.
What’s the point of a Corvette, then?
No kidding. Performance car warranties are usually always pointless. It’s an ongoing war between overprotective dealers and fraudulent drivers. The Us versus Them mentality gets old for both sides and there should be better options.
For example, if the buyer has the full intention of racing or modding the car and voiding the warranty, why not forego the process and receive cash value for the factory warranty during the purchase? On the other hand, the dealer needs to provide better reasoning for damage other than “excessive speed” so lawyers aren’t always involved. Would be a great editorial topic, IMO.
“alokj :
September 13th, 2007 at 5:23 pm
I’m actually fairly shocked by the amount of people who kinda sheepishly accept these black boxes as the “cost of doing business.” How about if you had a GPS unit that constantly tracked your every movement and reported this to the NSA or the FBI or just your local cops?
I realize that life is a trade-off between liberty and safety…I don’t want anyone plowing into me because they blew a red light, but I don’t think that anyone has the right to know what I was doing at any specific moment and I sure don’t want a blackbox recording my every movement for the one time that there may be a question about who had a red light…besides, the box doesn’t know who had a red light…I just find it an overt invasion of my privacy and wish that there was a way to be able to undo it…I honestly don’t see this blackbox being able to determine a whole lot more than standard accident investigation would determine anyway.”
Well, here’s the thing. The black boxes currently (for the most part) record only the last five seconds of vehicle activity. Despite my philosophical problems with this, in a practical sense, many of us could live with this (just not me).
But, as we all know, the march of technology is relentless. These boxes will be recording far more than five seconds’ worth of information very soon. Some already are. Did you know that OnStar’s traffic direction service works partially through the anti-lock brake and stability-control systems? Which mean it’s keeping track of where you go and what you do.
Look for these boxes to record hours – if not days – of your movements in the not-too-distant future. If your wife is filing for divorce, maybe her lawyer will get a warrant for your black-box information to prove you were driving to your girlfirend’s house.
And people I personally know in law enforcement say these things will eventually send out beacons with information so that the officers won’t even need to tap into the computer back at the station in order to find out what they want to know about you. They can even just send you a ticket in the mail if they think you’ve broken the law but aren’t dangerous enough to bother stopping.
Of course, it will be illegal to disconnect these boxes and if your vehicle isn’t sending out a beacon, they’ll know they need to stop you. And if the information sent out via the beacon can be received by cops, how much more difficult do you think it’ll be for criminals to do the same? Oh that’s right – it’ll be illegal. So no one will do that. Just like no one listens to your cell phone conversations because it’s illegal.
What bothers me most is that there isn’t much public discussion about this – and none at all at the legislative level. This technology is simply being rolled out and we have virtually nothing to say about it.
Re: Steve Biro
Look for these boxes to record hours – if not days – of your movements in the not-too-distant future. If your wife is filing for divorce, maybe her lawyer will get a warrant for your black-box information to prove you were driving to your girlfirend’s house.
This may be all coming. However, it’d be only a matter of time before some manufacturer decided that PRIVACY has a value – and allow you the choice of monitoring levels.
I have doubts about the traffic enforcers using these tech-tools on a grand scale. Sure, the cement-head demographic traffic cops who think speed causes 112.4% of all accidents will think it’s the best thing since internet porn. However, given the percentages of garbage drivers who also vote, it won’t be too long before there’s a backlash.
There’s also a sleeper issue here: SECURITY.
If these black boxes can be used to prove criminal conduct, I hope they’re protected better than the WindowsXP machine at my office.
The problem with these data recorders is that the data recovered from them is “black and white” but the events they’re recording are real life stuff.
So you’ll see accidents where the insurance company denies coverage because the vehicle was being operated in an illegal manner – and the driver being sued for property damage, etc. based upon this illegal operation.
Sounds like a good idea – until you realize that the vast majority of automobiles are being operated outside of the law every day. Including yours – unless you’re the one in a million who never exceeds the speed limit, never runs a red light, comes to a complete stop at every stop sign, etc. What’s different now is that this little device will cause you great misery when something goes wrong…
In response to the Corvette case:
I certainly think it is crap that GM voids a warranty simply because of “excessive speed” – in a Corvette!… If I were arguing the case, using a promissory estoppel argument, I would bring in every Chevy advertisement that shows a Corvette driving and every Chevy Corvette pamphlet that makes claims about the top speed or 0-60 time. Then I would say that I reasonably relied on GM’s claims that my car could go 150 mph, that it is within the normal operation of my car to be able to go that fast, and that I would be protected in the event that I did drive that fast. Furthermore, speed was the reason I bought the Corvette. Now Chevy will probably respond that it is unreasonable, unsafe, and illegal for me to be going that fast… of course they can’t prove that you weren’t on a track or in other controlled circumstances.
As far as the black box goes, I am with the right to privacy people. Just to note from a previous post though… This black box is not, legally speaking, self-incrimination… Remember that self-incrimination is a right to not TESTIFY against yourself in a proceeding. The black box evidence is the same as a breathalyzer or blood test for these purposes – it is just data about you – it is not your testimony.
Also, just to correct some terminology being thrown around… Insurance companies and divorcees are not part of the government. Therefore they cannot get warrants to search anything. They CAN subpoena evidence in the event they might have a claim against you. Of course, then it is up to you to go before the court and argue that the evidence they want is privileged, which is exactly what the ACLU is doing on behalf of us right now.
As long as search warrants are required to access the data for legal purposes there are not any constitutional issues.
Speaking of which, can someone point out the Right to Privacy in the Constitution of the US? As far as I can tell, it is one of those “rights” which has been pretty much made up.
There is protection against unreasonable search and seizure, which is what search warrants are all about.
I don’t have any problem with black box data being accessed after an “accident”. Most “accidents” were in fact entirely avoidable if one or more parties had behaved responsibly and lawfully.
As far as voiding warranties for excessive speed, sounds good to me. I’m also for taking away a person’s vehicle, not just their license, after a certain high threshold of violations. Here in California our roads have become a hotbed of illegal and dangerous behavior. It is time for a crack down big time.
“until you realize that the vast majority of automobiles are being operated outside of the law every day.”
And how did this become the accepted norm? It was not always that way.
jthorner: Speaking of which, can someone point out the Right to Privacy in the Constitution of the US? As far as I can tell, it is one of those “rights” which has been pretty much made up.
You are correct to the extent that by reading the plain language of the Constitution one finds nothing verbalizing: “the right to privacy shall not be violated.”
The right to privacy is an implied right found in our Constitution as interpreted by the Supreme Court in cases like Roe v. Wade… One must realize that our constitution is not what is on that piece of parchment in Washington DC… it is really whatever the Supreme Court says it is. If you want to call this “making up rights” then so be it, but regardless of the terminology, it is the law.
Turkeey… you are absolutely correct. But it doesn’t help that the courts have also consistently ruled over the years that we do not enjoy the same implied level of privacy rights in our vehicles as we do in our homes. For example, it’s a lot easier in a legal sense for cops to search your car for, say, drugs than it is for them to gain access to your home to search for same.
I can see where this argument is headed just by taking an anecdotal look at the exchanges on these boards. There will always be the civil libertarians who are prepared to accept a higher level of personal risk in order to preserve personal rights. And there will always be those who are prepared to surrender rights in exchange for perceived security and “protection” – or to maintain order.
As for me, I side with Bejamin Franklin, who said (and I hope I don’t destroy this quote even if it’s not word-for-word): Any society that would give up a little liberty to gain a little security will deserve neither and lose both.
jthorner quoted and wrote:
““until you realize that the vast majority of automobiles are being operated outside of the law every day.”
And how did this become the accepted norm? It was not always that way.”
Well, jthorner, I can’t tell you at what date it happened, but I can tell you when it wasn’t so.
I work with old-car information every day, and was reading a reprinted car-test of the 1956 Continental Mark IV (it was not sold as a Lincoln – Continental had become it’s own division within Ford for about 18 months).
The magazine editor – in Chicago – told the testers to drive the car to New York City on the then-new expressways, and obey the speed limit all the way.
They drove and wrote about the car and journey, and it was fascinating to realize that over all those miles, they were passed by only a handful of cars – about a half dozen – on a busy expressway between two major cities in our fine country, on a holiday weekend in 1956.
Until they got to the New York City area, and then all bets were off; they were passed by speeders there 3x more than the rest of the entire journey.
Now, if you were to drive the same basic route – Chicago to New York City – 51 years later, I can assure you that you would be passed by the number of cars which passed them in the entire journey, in about 2 minutes – if you drove the speed limit.
So, indeed, we know that we have become a nation of scofflaws – that in our grandparent’s generation, it was honorable to obey rules – including rules of the road, pay (then obviously low and relatively fair) taxes, and so forth.
I think it’s beyond the scope of TTAC to further expound on what happened to our nation, however, any Christians out there can have a read here and it will clarify things for you. For non-Christians, it will only appear to be nonsense.
http://www.michnews.com/artman/publish/article_17870.shtml
Not to change the subject, but…Can a vehicle owner download all this information; speed, distances, etc. to make a more informed decision about the next car he or she buys. For example, could a person figure out if a hybrid would be beneficial to him because of his usual speeds and distances. For that matter, what size or type of engine, final gear ratio or type of trasmission is best suited for that person’s usual driving needs. This information could be extremely useful when purchasing a car or truck.