| Author |
Message |
Kurt White (Ferraribooks)
Junior Member
Username: Ferraribooks
Post Number: 81
Registered: 2-2002
| | Posted on Friday, May 16, 2003 - 12:55 pm: | |
Guys,
I have the wire harness adapters to attach to the SD1 & SD2 testers & all the ports need to plug into the diagnostics of the cars computer as well as your laptop, i know it would be best if we actually had the tester too, but at least with the SD1 harnesses, you can still attch to a laptop & retrieve data and such, not too sure what software is needed, but if anyone needs the wiring harnesses, let me know.
We have 2 SD1 & 2 SD2 wire harnesses in stock.
SD1 $899.99
SD2 $999.99
Kurt. |
Jim Conforti (Lndshrk)
Junior Member
Username: Lndshrk
Post Number: 84
Registered: 8-2002
| | Posted on Thursday, May 15, 2003 - 1:16 am: | |
Generally, with the state of technology as it is today, the copying of anything "electronic" will generally run afoul of the law. Because of what I do,
Software "law" has become a "forced learn" for me and I've spent quite a bit of time on it.
Still, I think we can easily, with some cooperation from the 'experts' about, copy the FUNCTIONALITY of the SD1/SD2 for the most part.
We'll need a Ferrari boneyard for "used" ECU's and bits.. and some mechanical types to suggest how they want the screens/User Interface to be.
Beyond that, it's just code, and a hardware interface I already have designed for other purposes.
|
Jason Fraser (Jfraser)
Member
Username: Jfraser
Post Number: 365
Registered: 3-2001
| | Posted on Thursday, May 15, 2003 - 12:38 am: | |
Jim,
You answered the question, the device has patents, agreed it would be illegal to reverse engineer a patented item. I thought that your contention was that the mere fact of copying something was an illegal act.
My comments related to physical objects (eg turbine blades, pumps, mechanical components) which can absolutely be 'copied' legitamately....again with the caveot that no patents are infringed & no original drawings are used (which is a copyright infringement) I have no idea as to IP law relating to processor/software code. |
Jim Conforti (Lndshrk)
Junior Member
Username: Lndshrk
Post Number: 83
Registered: 8-2002
| | Posted on Wednesday, May 14, 2003 - 10:48 pm: | |
Jason,
As someone who develops Intellectual Property, let me assure you that if you copied directly either the SD1 or SD2, you'd be violating more laws than
you care to ever know about. Most of these devices have firmware.. Copyright #1, many are composed of ASICs/PLDs which have "logic" such as fuse
maps thats Copyright #2. Chances are very good the device utilizes technology licensed from one or more Patents as well.. so add Patent licensing issues and/or lawsuits
Which is why I said "Copy the FUNCTIONALITY" not the device. The mere act of even *trying* to "crack" the firmware in a locked processor is now a Federal felony thanks to the Digital Millenium Copyright Act.. aka DMCA. Making a device that WORKS the same is however totally legitimate.
The software from the SD1 is protected by a hardware key (aka dongle). The mere act of attempting to circumvent technical protections (the dongle) of a Copyrighted Work (the SD-1 software) is again, a felony under DMCA.
If you don't think FNA and Ferrari SpA would do their damndest to find and assist in the federal prosecution of same, you'd be sadly mistaken.
After the prosecution, would come the Federal Civil lawsuits as well.. and having not a leg to stand, you WOULD lose on both counts/cases.
Worst of all, I'd probably get called as an expert witness.. somehow the lawyers have found out about my expertise in these matters outside
of any Original Equipment Manufacturer or Factory.
Jim C. |
Jason Fraser (Jfraser)
Member
Username: Jfraser
Post Number: 363
Registered: 3-2001
| | Posted on Wednesday, May 14, 2003 - 7:45 pm: | |
"Copying it is the LAST thing that
you would ever want to do, legally or otherwise"
As long as an object isn't patented, and one doesn't use copyrighted drawings etc (ie reverse engineer it) there's no legal breach, you're covered under 'implied license'....talking purely about 'objects' in general, and not about this specific one (I have no idea what it even looks like) |
Raymond A. Castelhano (Oglmlw)
New member
Username: Oglmlw
Post Number: 8
Registered: 5-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, May 14, 2003 - 6:06 pm: | |
Jim is correct in my opinion. No need to copy the device just build a device of your own that does what you want it to with the signals that Ferrari produces. That is what the manufacturers of hand held devices have done with the SD1 cars. I doubt that it makes sense for even Ferrari to create a unique communications protocol and as soon as you know that they use ISO you are on your way. The rest is software.
Rob I can't disagree that Ferrari has a right to stay in business and I'd like to see them do so.
But when Henry Ford put the T on the road, a lot of Americans who bought them were too far from a dealer to have them cars dealer serviced. They learned to do it themselves and we still want to be able to do that. We feel that we have THAT right. If Ferrari NA wants to be the only operation that can service the cars they need a hell of a lot more dealerships. Would a used Ferrari be that can be serviced by any good mechanic in the world be more attractive than one that needs to go to a Ferrari dealer? Value retention is important. Very important. Service costs are becoming more of a factor in the purchase equation. Ferrari needs to think about the future when a 15 year old 360 can only be serviced at dealer for probably $200 an hour.
Sorry about the soap box folks.
MrC |
Hans E. Hansen (4re_gt4)
Intermediate Member
Username: 4re_gt4
Post Number: 1273
Registered: 4-2002
| | Posted on Wednesday, May 14, 2003 - 5:40 pm: | |
I was wondering when Jim was going to speak up. He's disected these systems and probably knows more about them than anyone outside of the factories. |
Jim Conforti (Lndshrk)
Junior Member
Username: Lndshrk
Post Number: 82
Registered: 8-2002
| | Posted on Wednesday, May 14, 2003 - 5:22 pm: | |
Building one is a complete and utter waste of time, what you want to do is duplicate the FUNCTIONALITY that it provides in diagnosis and setup.
Preferably with something small, cheap, and portable that can connect to a PC, or operate in a standalone mode.
As Emeril would say, we're not talking about building a rocketship here.
Initially, I was going to help out in this project, but the person who had the SD2 decided to try Canada to copy it. Copying it is the LAST thing that
you would ever want to do, legally or otherwise.
The Diagnostic functions aren't that hard to make happen in "Non-Ferrari" hardware. If anyone wants to get involved and REALLY do it right,
contact me via email.
Jim C.
PS: I actually design diagnostic tools for (part of) my living ;) |
Rob Schermerhorn (Rexrcr)
Member
Username: Rexrcr
Post Number: 573
Registered: 11-2002
| | Posted on Wednesday, May 14, 2003 - 12:52 pm: | |
quote:talk of building one
Yes, that's what I'm referring to. |
JRV (Jrvall)
Intermediate Member
Username: Jrvall
Post Number: 1443
Registered: 11-2002
| | Posted on Wednesday, May 14, 2003 - 12:47 pm: | |
<>>With so many copycat electronics going around why aren't there any copycat SD-1s and 2s going around? >>Do you know anyone (that is not authorized by F-) that has one? <<
Raymond,
If you read the last question, it's asked why those outside the dealer network don't have SD-1-SD-2 testers...that's where my comments come from. The testers are proprietary and the sole property of Ferrari, even in the event of dealer closure the testers are supposed to be turned back in.... please keep in mind Ferrari is in business to make money and they use every means at their disposal to that end. As any business has a right to do, to stay in business...
Rob,
Is there more info on the tester discussed before? I never saw a post describing an actual tester, only talk of building one.
|
Rob Schermerhorn (Rexrcr)
Member
Username: Rexrcr
Post Number: 571
Registered: 11-2002
| | Posted on Wednesday, May 14, 2003 - 12:19 pm: | |
Warren, et. al., I feel your pain.
In fact, if you search the archives, you'll find some interesting threads, we have a few very savvy FChatters when it comes to electronics, and one with direct access to SDII's internal guts and connections close enough to Ferrari as to stop talking about this subject.
As one who has factory training, I know how powerful and essential SDII is. IMO, no one is duplicating it's capabilities because of the market potential is just not there to justify development costs. So, independents just have to deal with it.
As for manufacturers not "conforming" to standards, IMO, they are conforming in that the mandated specification of open access is addressed, but a OEM is open to add what they want, like F1 control systems, and not give "open access" for those particular systems. It's not a conspiracy, just business. |
Raymond A. Castelhano (Oglmlw)
New member
Username: Oglmlw
Post Number: 5
Registered: 5-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, May 14, 2003 - 12:07 pm: | |
JRV, I don't understand your post. We are addressing tools readily available on the market. How did we get to "stolen"?
MrC |
JRV (Jrvall)
Intermediate Member
Username: Jrvall
Post Number: 1442
Registered: 11-2002
| | Posted on Wednesday, May 14, 2003 - 11:53 am: | |
>>What's the big deal?<<
The "big deal" "to some of us" is that any SD-1-SD-2 testers outside the Ferrari Dealer Network are "STOLEN PROPERTY"!
And SMART Ferrari Experts don't need "magic boxes" to fix cars anyway!
All the system specs and checks info exists, you just have to know where to look. |
Hans E. Hansen (4re_gt4)
Intermediate Member
Username: 4re_gt4
Post Number: 1262
Registered: 4-2002
| | Posted on Wednesday, May 14, 2003 - 11:45 am: | |
As I understand it, OBD (I & II) are *supposed* to be open systems. However.......
Certain high-end manufacturers (I've heard BMW also, but can't confirm that) are simply ignoring the law and choosing to pay a relatively moderate fine to keep things proprietary. |
Raymond A. Castelhano (Oglmlw)
New member
Username: Oglmlw
Post Number: 4
Registered: 5-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, May 14, 2003 - 8:25 am: | |
Hello, We should all press the Federal Government to do their job. Both OBD1 and OBD2 systems are supposed to be built so that readily available equipment can be used to extract data and service the cars. I think that the NADA has used $$$$ campiagn money to prevent this. Be aware however that some aspects of the Ferrari systems (SD1 SD2) are not covered by the above.
You can certainly still bleed your brakes without the tool but you cannot bleed the hydraulics of the F1 gear box. The Onboard computer has to exercise the box for you. There are many operational parameters that can be changed only with a manufacturer specific tool.
This is not a Ferrari only problem. SD1 aka OBD1 is not as big a problem as SD2. SD1 can be partially duplicated using now available OBD1 scan tools. That is to say that you can read trouble codes and fix problems that turn on the MIL (malfunction indicator light) and you can reset the MIL.
At Servizio, we have purchased more than one that works but also have at least one purchase that does not although the manufacturer claims it does. I intend to work with the manufacturer to resolve the problems since his product works on a laptop and using it on my VW GTI (where it does work)is a pleasure.
Unlike our competitors Servizio is truly an enthusiast's shop and we share information. We have had success with EASE Diagnostics scan tool on 355 cars (www.obd2.com). I will check with Dave re 348 and add to this. As we solve more of the puzzle we will publish here. We believe that we will still have work to do.
MrC. |
Greg Owens (Owens84qv)
Member
Username: Owens84qv
Post Number: 786
Registered: 10-2001
| | Posted on Wednesday, May 14, 2003 - 5:48 am: | |
Warren, I asked a similar question the other day regarding SD-1 / SD-2. I currently own a 308-QV and to date, have been able to perform all of the service work myself.
At the same time, I'm beginning to look for a '97-'99 355 and am a little concerned that all of the maintenance I perform on my 308 I won't be able to on a 355 (bleeding brakes for example).
What levels of service on a 355 or 360 are now out of the hands of the owner? Because of SD-1/SD-2, what services require the use of an Authorized F Service center? |
Warren L. (Warren)
Junior Member
Username: Warren
Post Number: 211
Registered: 2-2002
| | Posted on Wednesday, May 14, 2003 - 12:32 am: | |
Ok, these computers are only given to Authorized F- Service centers right? How do they work? Where do they get attached to? What cars do they work on (only 355 and 360?)? With so many copycat electronics going around why aren't there any copycat SD-1s and 2s going around? Do you know anyone (that is not authorized by F-) that has one?
What's the big deal? |