Lengthy discussion here:<p><a href="https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6731894" rel="nofollow">https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6731894</a> :<p><pre><code> Renault ships a brickable car
with battery DRM that you're not
allowed to own
(boingboing.net)
</code></pre>
That's old enough that it's no longer possible to contribute, but there are some interesting comments there.<p>Other contributions of the same story:<p>====<p><a href="https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6718341" rel="nofollow">https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6718341</a> :<p><pre><code> Renault introduces DRM for cars
(techdirt.com)
</code></pre>
====<p><a href="https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6723522" rel="nofollow">https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6723522</a> :<p><pre><code> Renault introduces DRM for cars
(techdirt.com)
</code></pre>
====<p><a href="https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6729800" rel="nofollow">https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6729800</a> :<p><pre><code> DRM in Cars Will Drive Consumers Crazy
(eff.org)</code></pre>
This whole battery renting scheme is bad, that's pure greed.<p><rambling>
I know it's more difficult (orders of magnitude harder) than in sw but we need new startups to emerge in the automobile industry, just like Tesla. I'm french and this is one of the things I worry the most because I think we're not a country where this is possible anymore, this is a shame.
How do they know they aren't stranding you and your 90 year-old grandma in the middle of the desert with no water?<p>How do they know they are <i>SAFELY</i> bricking your car?<p>How do they know you're legally parked? That the car won't be destroyed? If the car is destroyed, will anyone continue their payments?<p>Is that not their problem? Do they not care? Is that what you get for being a deadbeat?
>We already knew that Tesla was doing this with its cars since the company’s very public spat with a journalist who reviewed one of their cars for the New York Times. Seeing the same thing in a mass market manufacturer like Renault makes clear just how dangerous this trend is.<p>Didn't know Tesla had a remote command to kill your car. This guy doesn't really know what he's talking about; Tesla has some kind of OnStar service going on but they have no way to physically turn your car off or have not been proven to be able to.
Sadly this is a general trend though. In the past we used to buy things, like software. Now everything is subscription based and that sucks for consumers. Look at Billings (invoicing app) for example. It used to be reasonably priced as a download, now you have to buy a monthly subscription which ends up being much more expensive than before AND they can cut you off from your own data.<p>This SaaS trend is good for businesses and bad for consumers (there are advantages). It is even more evil in 'real life' as Renault is doing.
Automakers are trying hard to seize back the entitlements and perquisites they reluctantly gave up when the laws around mechanical ICE automobiles were standardized: the right to look under the hood, to maintain, to tinker, to repair, to modify, and so on. What automakers in these newer markets seem to want is something equivalent to what software corporations have: the ability not to <i>sell</i> cars but to issue a <i>licence to use</i> cars under strictly determined and enforced conditions.<p>Renault's remote lock is basically the same as Microsoft's Product Activation DRM, and even more nefarious because it applies to a physical manufactured product.
<p><pre><code> For a long time, cars were a symbol of freedom and independence</code></pre>
I actually never saw cars as a symbol of freedom and independence, rather of the opposite. Both the ownership as well as the use of those vehicles is spun in so many laws that any semblance of 'freedom' and 'independence' they give is no more than imagination.
It seems that with everything new technologies is going to allow in the future, we'll need a whole slew of new laws meant to stop abuses from both corporations and the government.
TL;DR: Renault has a clause in the contract that allows them to remotely stop their EV from charging<p>This is an interesting issue but the article overstates the case. "... [electric cars] collect reams of data on how you use them, and send this data off to the manufacturer without your knowledge". Without your knowledge? Really?<p>EVs are very new technology and none of them have shown to be profitable without government support. Buyers have choices and making the trade-offs between vendors clear is always worthwhile, but this piece is not helping the debate.