back to article Who OWNS data generated by 'connected cars' sensor slurpers?

The fundamental question of whether the data generated by "connected cars" can legally be owned and who actually acquires ownership in such data at the time when they are generated must be answered before the extent to which companies can make use of that data can be determined, an expert has said. Munich-based technology law …

COMMENTS

This topic is closed for new posts.
  1. Thorne

    Easy Answer

    Who owns the sim card? They're the ones paying for the data thus should own it. Phone companies don't transmit for free.

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: Easy Answer

      That makes as much sense as saying that the person who pays for a website owns any of your data on that site - quite apart from the fact that no-one in their right mind would agree to that, fortunately data protection laws also suggest it's not a sustainable view.

      1. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: Easy Answer

        That makes as much sense as saying that the person who pays for a website owns any of your data on that site

        Actually, that person does own the data you leave behind like statistics and logs of your use of the site (although generally, the ISP tends to sneak themselves a copy). The rules only come in as soon as that data becomes personally identifiable, at which point the user MUST be told before collection and be given an opportunity to opt out. Even a site login does not make it personally identifiable unless the site asks for personal details instead of a handle.

        In this context, collecting IP addresses is also not an issue. It only becomes an issue when a name or identity gets attached to it - the simplest test is if the data you have can be used to uniquely track back and identify one specific individual. Even a combined chain of events can exist, until one entry makes it identifiable (this is the whole principle on which Google operates).

    2. FoxyRaider

      Re: Easy Answer

      ahhh the naivety...

      First its for your own safety, however Its a long slippery slope..I can just imagine the Police loving this. Caught not wearing a seat-belt by your SIM card. And how long before GPS data is added etc.

      (Substitute speeding, parking in a no parking zone, etc take your choice)

      1. Thorne

        Re: Easy Answer

        "ahhh the naivety...

        First its for your own safety, however Its a long slippery slope..I can just imagine the Police loving this. Caught not wearing a seat-belt by your SIM card. And how long before GPS data is added etc.

        (Substitute speeding, parking in a no parking zone, etc take your choice)"

        No naivety here. I've known the police would install black boxes for years. A total record of when and where and fines will be automatically deducted from your bank account.

        These black boxes will be legislated that all your data belongs to the government.

        The only thing that has a hope of crushing the black box dream is self drive cars. If the car is driving and can't break the law, then there is no money to be made and the government loses interest.

        1. Anonymous Coward
          Anonymous Coward

          Re: Easy Answer

          Hmm. Parking fines. For that it needs a reliable source of positioning, so a cheapo made-in-China GPS jammer will prevent that from working. Add a 3G/GSM jammer and I can't see that box do much. Naturally, I won't be able to make a call either, but if I don't want to be tracked my "normal" GSM should not give the game away either..

          So, that's $40 on Alibaba, I guess.

  2. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    Obviously, the driver owns the car

    and so owns the data it generates.

    Unless the NSA has prior access rights.

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: Obviously, the driver owns the car

      Obviously, the driver owns the car and so owns the data it generates.

      I know for a fact that that is the principle on which one specific German car make operates (no, it's not Mercedes, I don't like what their emergency phone system can do as it's dangerous in the wrong hands). If other car makes do the same, we should be OK unless they have their HQ in the US, in which case there are no realistic legal barriers for at least government to compel disclosure.

      However, I can see this damnable "sharing" trend pushing people towards giving up what little privacy they have left anyway, or even be offered cheaper insurance (or at least lower rates) in exchange for data (AFAIK there is already a scheme where youngsters get less-than-insane rates if they allow the installation of a black box - imagine that trend setting through). In my book, that is the "coercion" that the Data Protection Act prohibits, but it will happen. If it's available, they will come.

      I must admit I'm on the fence on this. If it's continuously shared with 3rd parties I don't know, no way. If I have the ability to choose (and to limit) this data, that's better. For example, the dashboard cams that seem so common in Russia could make a difference in fraudulent insurance claims, but that's specific, time limited data you would only hand off on demand. However, there is no way I will allow a continuous uncontrolled data stream to leave my car - it would surely influence my car buying decision (and if I discover this afterwards there will be Sales of Goods Act and Data Protection issue because I will certainly get this in writing at the time of purchase).

      Looks like it's time to sharpen ye olde harkerz skills..

      1. big_D Silver badge

        Re: Obviously, the driver owns the car

        Public transport and paying in cash seems a lot safer...

        1. solo
          Trollface

          Re: Obviously, the driver owns the car

          [ROTM]

          ".. If you buy a car, you are the product .."

          ".. If you buy a refrigerator, you are the product .."

          ".. If you buy a television, you are the product .."

          "..."

    2. Oninoshiko

      Re: Obviously, the driver owns the car

      I have to agree with this.

      When a painter paints, who owns the painting? Surely not the brush-maker!

    3. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: Obviously, the driver owns the car

      What about all the data sent back to Apple and Google from their phone's operating systems? All that geolocation stuff.

      LG were caught sending back details of what you watch (including names of files on USB sticks) with their TVs.

      I'm sure they claim to own the data too.

  3. Khaptain Silver badge

    It doesn't matter whether it is Samsung or Apple that make my phone, whether the provider is Orange or Vodafone, the data generated through my phone is generated by me, I am ultimately the owner since the data concerns my usage.

    I don't see why the car is any different.

    I can only presume that GPS will be turned on permanently, I can't even begin to imagine the abuse that could result.

    BIG question : Will the user be able to control/switch off the data transfer?

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      So long as you can access under the hood to disconnect the right wiring harness, or the fuse panel to pull the right fuse, you can always turn it off.

      Someday maybe the car won't start if you did that, but so long as "connected cars" have to share the road with unconnected ones, that isn't likely to happen.

    2. Elmer Phud

      " I am ultimately the owner since the data concerns my usage."

      Sez you.

      Now check the small print.

      1. Khaptain Silver badge

        @Elmer

        That brings up another point, will it be the car manufacturer that actually includes an almost invisible paragraph within the Garauntee.

        or

        will it be a seperate Telco contract,

        or even worse,

        a pseudo DataWarehouseComeServiceProvider weirdly named company which in reality will be a see through heavilly disguised GCHQ(NSA) front end.....

    3. edge_e
      Big Brother

      RE:BIG question : Will the user be able to control/switch off the data transfer?

      small answer: no

  4. jake Silver badge

    Whatever.

    I don't rebuild or drive anything post 1970.

    With the exception of the Peterbilt, which is a whole 'nuther kettle o'worms. ;-)

    1. This post has been deleted by its author

      1. jake Silver badge

        @AC: Re: Whatever.

        What part of "rebuild" do you fail to understand?

        My 1970 Mercury Cougar convertible has over twice the horsepower than the stock Cleveland, half again the fuel economy on the freeway, better brakes, fewer CO and NOx emissions, and modern metal internal bits. She is street-legal in California.

        As for crash protection, I'm more worried about clueless idiots like yourself on the road than I am about my vehicles.

    2. Anonymous Coward
      Thumb Up

      Re: Whatever.

      You have a personal Peterbilt? That's so cool. I've wanted one of those since I was 5.

      1. jake Silver badge

        @theodore (was:Re: Whatever.)

        It's not a personal Peterbilt. It belongs to the the ranch. We use it to haul critter-chow & the 12-horse trailer.

  5. M Gale

    How is this even a debate?

    Oh yes. The "IP" land grab. That's how.

    If you own the car, you own the data it generates. Simples.

    Whether you are liable for the data it generates depends on how much extra-warranty mucking about you've been doing to it. That however, is another matter entirely.

    So long as it has an off switch, eh?

    1. Elmer Phud
      FAIL

      Re: How is this even a debate?

      "If you own the car, you own the data it generates. Simples."

      And if it's bought under a leasing package or similar it is the property of the lender until you've been fleeced well and proper.

      Yup it's really, really simple

    2. big_D Silver badge

      Re: How is this even a debate?

      So, on a lease car, that would be the lease company...

      And what about the actual driver? Don't they get a say in the matter?

      1. M Gale

        Re: How is this even a debate?

        No more than a lorry driver gets a say in whether to turn their tacho off?

        Depends on what data is being gathered of course. Sticking cameras all over the interior might be met with a barrage of chewing gum.

      2. DiViDeD

        Re: How is this even a debate?

        "And what about the actual driver? Don't they get a say in the matter?"

        Thank you. Best laugh I've had in ages.

        The driver!

        Hah!

        Brilliant!

    3. solo

      Re: How is this even a debate?

      I own my data. Now, what can I do with it? Can I withdraw it? They will say that for running the car safely, you must allow them to use the data. Or, don't use the car, simples :)

  6. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    Here's how I look at it

    If I get useful data for free, such as traffic updates or road conditions on my path, I have no problem with sharing my location (in an anonymized fashion) and other data to help the guy a few miles behind me in like fashion.

    If I'm expected to subscribe to this service, I'm unlikely to do so, and they'd better not think I'm contributing my data for free to help them make money!

    So what's the revenue model if they're providing it to me for free? I suppose they can sell the data to people with unconnected cars - they gotta pay for it since they aren't contributing. Oh, who am I kidding, if Google has anything to do with this the revenue model will be advertising, advertising and more advertising.

    1. Richard 12 Silver badge

      It is impossible to anonymise location data

      If you get a small number of my journeys, you will know exactly where I live and work.

      How personally-identifiable is that?

      Historical location data is simply impossible to properly anonymise because of what it is! It's simply not a thing.

      Current location can be anonymised, but only by disconnecting it from all other location data, including the next GPS fix.

  7. Steve Davies 3 Silver badge

    Suddenly old jalopies double in Value

    simply because they don't have this always on, always sending data to GCHQ feature.

    Then on the other-hand,

    Suddenly old vehicle become more desirable targets for the thieves because they don't have auto-kill switches that the obvious next step for this tech is to have that built in.

    Didn't pay your council tax, tough you can walk to work because the council will disable your car until you pay the outstanding plus a £500 release fee.

    It will happen unless there is a revolution.

  8. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    What's new

    The data is already being collected. The only difference is the 'always-on' connection. At the moment, as soon as you take your car into the dealer, they connect the diagnostic software and is slurps up all the data held on every module and sends it to the manufacturer.

    As for disconnecting the SIM, it will be buried somewhere in the depths of the head unit, so unless you disconnect the MOST bus, losing radio / sat-nav / phone etc. , you can't stop it.

  9. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    Insurance nightmare / holy-grail (depending on your point of view)

    It's in the interests of the insurance companies to either buy this data, or make you provide it. They'll probably make it prohibitively expensive to buy insurance if you don't provide the data from your last years driving.......ABS activated 3 times last year, and your traction control activated 10 times, and one-time you exceeded the speed limit in a 20mph zone, that'll be and extra £100 this year please.

    1. James 51

      Re: Insurance nightmare / holy-grail (depending on your point of view)

      If you dont' share the data you won't get insurance. It will be as simple as that.

      Who are these companies customers though? The poeple who buy the cars or the people who buy the data about the people who buy their cars? There's a huge potential for conflict of interest.

  10. Chris G

    In The Long Term

    This technology will lead to (at least in population dense areas) total control of your car so the data will belong to the relevant authority who will have a 'Roadnet' AI controlling all traffic, it will be possible so it will happen.

    Forget about Skynet killing us all just make sure you are wearing your seatbelt when the AI acheives self awareness and decides on a simple solution to road chaos.

    On a slightly more sober note; the data you create in the vehicle you own/are driving should be yours but that does not mean that it will be, certainly the insurance companies (who protect us right?) will want dibs on our data as will the cops, tax people MOT in the UK, and of course ad revenue giants.

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: In The Long Term

      It will be fun to drive a pre-1990's car and see the chaos caused when none of the 'connected' cars can talk to it and don't know where it's going! Or will it be a pre-requisite to get your MOT that the 'connected' bit is retro-fitted?

    2. James 51

      "insurance companies (who protect us right?)"

      No. An insurance company's job is to get as much cash out of you as they can and pass that on to their shareholders. Giving you back money is something they'd rather avoid and will go to some lengths including not paying out when legally required in the hope people will give up and leave them alone.

  11. John Smith 19 Gold badge
    Gimp

    Wow. Sounds like they gave more thought to this than the NHS to patient data.

    But then the NHS seems to think it's their data to begin with.

    As do all data fetishists.

  12. Graham Marsden
    Big Brother

    My car...

    ... my data!

    All that is needed is for it to be able to say "here I am" to any other such equipped cars in the vicitinity. Anything else is going beyond its remit into the realms of monitoring and spying on me and where I go, just as the last Labour government wanted to put ANPR cameras at every major junction.

    It doesn't matter whether you're the government or the motor manufacturer, you do *NOT* have the right to demand that information from me.

    1. JurassicPark

      Re: My car...

      But how will you stop them? They'll sell it as a 'service' , you give us your data, we can give you all these nice goodies...traffic info tailored to your exact location, we'll know exactly how the engine is performing so can tweak it to give you the best fuel efficiency / performance etc.,..oh and trust us, we'll keep your data safe (just like the banks and the NHS)!!!

      Either that, or in the small print on the new car purchase will be 'you agree we can read any data collected by your car' .

      Once one manufacturer starts, they'll all follow, just like the petrol companies will with E10 fuel.

    2. Elmer Phud

      Re: My car...

      My car...

      ... my data!

      But only if you've finished the payments -- like a home under mortgage it belongs to the money lenders until you've completely couged up.

  13. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    offer services to people in connected cars

    from details about available parking spaces nearby to personalised advertising and entertainment and social networking services.

    Read: spam them through the window-displayed ads, those blared through the "enternteinment system". After all, you DID get this self-drivie limousine at a discount, let me display the contract you signed... there you go. Now, if I can point you sir to the superb ad-buster application, which at this very moment is on special, and guarantees, yessir, guarantees to block up to 100%* of the ads, all in compliance with the latest EU regulations, just press your finger against the touchpad here sir, thankyouverymuch and may I also mention that our carefully selected and world-renowned medical partners offer a solution for this high blood pressure you seem to be suffering, and as to the bloodshot eyes our sponsors, Google Almighty, will be able to fix them for you for half the usual price and those quivering lips can be also modified, now you can have them re-grown on the go to present the permanent smile to the world and you know how important it is to project the right image, or we can go for a somewhat crude solution with this needle and a piece of fishwire, and as to your little darlings and the level of noise aren't they creative in developing their vocal cords at this age, we would suggest a solution favoured by 75% of our customers, in the form of a sound and, may I add, bulletproof glass all around, and at this moment this one-off special is bundles with an ABSOLUTELY FREE wife restrainer, yes, this also includes a face-compatible silencer and this superb offer is due to expire in 10, 9, 8, 7 seconds

  14. Otiose

    Are we assuming a new car?

    What happens in the second-hand market? Unless you buy from a main dealer, it is very unlikely you will sign or be bound by a manufacturers' data agreement signed by the previous owner.

    How does a manufacturer turn-off their data slurp once ownership changes hands?

    That said, how many people turn off their phones when they are in the car? Google/Apple probably already have the majority of what we are talking about; the only remaining step would be to tie that information to a car registration.

    1. DiViDeD

      Re: Are we assuming a new car?

      Ah, you're making the classic mistake there. Ownership? VW will, on delivery of 'your' new vehicle, provide you with all the details of your EULA. This will include the obvious fact that what you have bought is a personal, non transferable licence to USE their car for the life of the licence.

      Once you decide to upgrade to a licence on use of a bigger or better car, it is your responsibility to return the car to the owner (VW), who can choose to issue a new licence or disable the vehicle.

      Result? Everybody trades in their old cars when they buy a new licence, no second hand car market, since any unlicensed car can be shut down from home base.

      I remember reading an SF short story once where roads were resurfaced every two years with a rubberised pattern which matched the tyre tread on new cars. If you didn't trade up, your car would literally shake itself to bits as its tyres wouldn't match the pattern on the roads. Please don't suggest this to Call me Dave.

  15. Aoyagi Aichou
    Flame

    NEVAR

    I'd rather ride a bike or use public transport to get around than ever buying a "connected" car. At least until online privacy becomes clear, transparent and acceptable (other than "everything is available to everyone). Or until I find someone who knows what they're doing and can disable the hardware.

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Big Brother

      Re: NEVAR

      > ...or use public transport

      Hah, you think they won't track you with your Oyster card or your monthly travel pass?

      The options for travelling in cognito are being, one by one, deliberately eliminated.

      The only way to be sure is to walk, wearing a balaclava.

      1. Aoyagi Aichou

        Re: NEVAR

        Good thing I travel only in Prague (OpenCard can be completely anonymous, albeit more expensive) or in Tokyo (Suica is anonymous). But yeah, it's unfortunate that they're systematically killing all the ways. :( .

  16. Fredrick Smith

    Who Owns?

    You may think you've bought the car, but actually all you have is a non-exclusive license to drive it.

  17. Carlie J. Coats, Jr.

    Copyright Issues

    Let's look at what the Berne Copyright treaty says: it's a copyright work as soon as it is "fixed in a medium", i.e., as soon as it's recorded. And unless it is a "work for hire" or the subject of an explicit, specific written copyright assignment (which fails, unless there is such an assingment naming each specific trip), then the copyright belongs to the performer -- i.e., the driver. In the US, at least, there is precedent for seizing all the computers of the infringer for investigation :-)

    Note that the Berne Treaty has long been implemented by all of Europe, North America, and most of Asia...

  18. shogun

    "Ownership" is a somewhat silly concept when talking about a "bag of bits". It tends to confuse "possession" and "usage rights".

    Regarding data from a car, European Data Protection Authorities have been quite clear: it has to be considered personal data when and while associated with a unique identifiers, such as a vehicle identification number or an IP address. Also they have judged location data in a car context to require explicit consent to be sent and used "off-board" as it considered to be "sensitive personal data" (as defined in the Eu privacy directive) because intimate information regarding e.g. sex life or religion can be deducted from it by nowadays relatively simple analysis.

    Next to this also "cooke law" applies. This is based on a EU directive which requires any data stored on or retrieved from a/any device connected to a public telecommunication network to be consented to by the user, unless it strictly is necessary for the services offered (of which maintenance of the car could be one). This means that any Big Data effort based on data from a car will require prior consent, based on understandable explanation of the purposes for which the data will be used. Which in itself is at odds with what Big Data intends to achieve: finding new purposes for existing data andor re-purposing data in ones possession (for which one may not have usage rights).

    To cut a long story short: current interpretation of existing laws by Data Protection Authorities put the driver in control over his data, not the car manufacturer or anyone else and require careful thinking in a Big Data context.

  19. earl grey
    Flame

    Oh, Hell NO!

    DO NOT WANT.

  20. Oengus
    Big Brother

    If I can't remove the SIM, I can "Close" the account. If they won't let me close the account I can go to my bank and have all payment for the service stopped (worst case - I can get a new credit card or account to stop the direct debit). Why would I want to pay an additional monthly fee for the car.

    I don't think the car manufacturer is going to pay a fee for every one of their cars manufactured especially as they have no way of knowing when the car is no longer "on the road" and will have to pay for the service "forever".

    I can see a booming "After Market" switching the component with the SIM between different cars to give false information.

  21. xyz Silver badge

    err...

    ...why don't they just put a port in the car where you can plug your phone into? That way, the phone's SIM can be the user identifier and the data owned by that user. No phone in the jack then the data defaults to the manufacturer. Can I have those lawyers' squizzillion dollars please?

  22. Identity

    It seems to me...

    that the most reasonable solution re: privacy is to have joint ownership, whereby neither party can use the data without consent of the other. Don't know how feasible that is, though...

    It's worth noting that (at least in Massachusetts) there has been a technical means to identify speeders on the Mass Pike for decades: time stamps on the card the driver got on entry to the highway (which also noted the exit used) and then read when leaving the Pike. If the time spent on the highway was less than distance/speed limit, the driver was speeding! Fortunately (or unfortunately), Mass law would not allow this to be used as proof, as such a violation has to witnessed by a police officer.

    Today, of course, obtaining such info is trivial, what with EZ Pass (FastLane in Massachusetts, and other monikers elsewhere) — RFID transmitters for toll (and other?) purposes...

  23. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    It's all about road pricing

This topic is closed for new posts.

Other stories you might like