Writing Assignment

Nicole Shields

History 108

Writing Assignment #14

May 2nd, 2019

Car safety has always been extremely important in today’s society for the sole reason that owning a car is now a social norm and necessity. For the Library of Congress to allow an exemption of the DMCA, which lets anyone who owns a car tamper with their car control codes, is not only an atrocity but also an extremely reckless decision that could very well make the matter of cheating regulations worse and may even put citizens at risk for potential car malfunctioning.

There are many pieces of evidence that make this argument true, especially throughout the article written by David Golumbia.

The beginning of this controversial topic of car safety and car controller integrity started when Volkswagen made a diesel engine that reduced engine emissions as it was tested, but after it no longer was it produced higher engine emissions. This cheat of controller codes caused many to be outraged and scandalized.

Because of this, EFF (Electronic Frontier Foundation) petitioned the Library of Congress to exempt the anti-circumvention provision. According to Blake Brittain’s article, Kitt Walsh a staff member of EFF said “I think the Volkswagen case shows that if independent researchers are able to get access to vehicle code, it’s going to make it easier for the EPA to detect these large-scale violations that have a huge effect on the environment,”(Brittain). Walsh’s reasoning for allowing this exemption is one that is extremely narrowminded, what he fails to consider is that this exemption does not just allow independent researchers access to vehicles codes, but also random citizens that do not know anything about vehicle codes whatsoever.

Get quality help now

Prof. Finch

Verified

Proficient in: Cheating

4.7 (346)

“ This writer never make an mistake for me always deliver long before due date. Am telling you man this writer is absolutely the best. ”

+84 relevant experts are online

Hire writer

What will Walsh say in the face of car malfunctioning ,and as a result fatal car accidents, made possible by this reckless exemption.

David Golumbia writes a phenomenal article that produces evidence for how careless allowing this exemption can really be, “I would argue that the lesson is entirely different: people will cheat. Making it easy for people to cheat means they will cheat more.” (Golumbia). Golumbia hit the nail on the head, where in U.S History is there evidence where not enforcing a law made citizens of society less likely to break that same law? This is exactly what Golumbia explains in his quote, there is no sufficient evidence that giving people more freedom lessens the chance of exploiting that freedom. Golumbia also mentions how EFF states that this exemption of anti-circumvention provision will prevent others, like Volkswagen, from cheating regulations when in fact it only allows a chance for more people to cheat these regulations, “It says, on the one hand, we should not trust manufacturers like Volkswagen to follow the law. We shouldn’t trust them because people, when they have self-interest at heart, will pursue that self-interest even when the rules tell them not to. But then it says we should trust an even larger group of people, among whom many are no less self-interested, and who have fewer formal accountability obligations, to follow the law.” (Golumbia). This quote makes the argument ,that this exemption is one that is not only reckless but contradictory, true because the EFF argues that this exemption will no longer allow instances such as the Volkswagen scandal to occur, yet there is only one instance so far in history of a car manufacturer cheating the system, although now that this exemption is passed the Library of Congress is placing faith in all of society to not cheat these regulations. Where is the logic in this statement, how can this exemption legitimately help society when there is an even larger chance of such liabilities?

In conclusion, the fact that the Library of Congress could rule in favor of the exemption of anti-circumvention provision is not only surprising but also disheartening. This exemption allows random citizens access to their car control codes, citizens who are clueless about everything but driving it. How does this decision seem just? EFF believes that this exemption is necessary because it gives independent researchers access to these codes but the fail to mention that it is not only these independent researchers, people with no knowledge of car functions can intentionally or unintentionally “tinker” with their car controls, the fact is that passing this exemption means those who did so completely ignored that this decision could very well put people’s lives in jeopardy. EFF’s statement about how the exemption of anti-circumvention provision will lessen the chance of situations like the Volkswagen Scandal happening again is one that is “oxymoronic.”(Golumbia). How will there be less cases of exploitation when there is now an even bigger group of people that could possibly cheat regulations? There is no evidence whatsoever that suggests this being a possibility, that humans when given copious amounts of freedom will gladly follow regulations. David Golumbia explicitly supports this claim, that in passing this exemption there is no real evidence that supports the notion that people, when given entitlement, will not exploit that same entitlement, “You don’t have to read far in the automotive world to see how deeply car owners want to bypass those standards, in the name of performance and speed. You’d have to read much farther and much deeper to find evidence of automobile owners selflessly investigating whether or not their vehicles are meeting mandates.” (Golumbia). This quote is one that is brutally honest when it disregards the EFF’s claim that this exemption will lessen the chance that other instances, like the Volkswagen scandal, from happening. He states how there is not any evidence of the human race ever not trying to cheat regulations, whether you are talking specifically about cars or even a whole different matter. He then explains how in the history of mankind people have always found ways, whether they had to neglect the safety of those who drive the car, to evolve a cars mechanisms and now that we are putting faith not only in those who are educated about car function, before the exemption, we are now effectively putting this same faith in all of society, and a society that has a history of innovation no matter the price they pay. This exemption that EFF suggested and the Library of Congress passed, just this year, is one that is both ignorant and impetuous, the statements made to support this exemption are oxymoronic at best and the evidence supported is insufficient. So, where is the logic that the Library of Congress and the EFF used when making this decision, anywhere but here.

Works Cited Page

Blake Brittain, “DMCA at Issue After Volkswagen Emissions Scandal,” Bloomberg Bureau of National Affairs (September 24, 2015). www.bna.com/dmca-issue-volkswagen-n57982058743/#!

David Golumbia, “The Volkswagen Scandal: The DMCA is Not the Problem and Open Source is Not the Solution,” uncomputing (October 6, 2015).

Kravets, David. “US Regulators Grant DMCA Exemption Legalizing Vehicle Software Tinkering DMCA Exemption Is for Both Research and Modification Purposes.” ARS Technica (October 27, 2015).