Frankly, it's not your car, no matter how much money you forked over for it.

And, if you have a Tesla, you can verify this by disabling its ability to talk to Tesla. After some period of time, your car will no longer run.

Or you can crash it, get it fixed by a non-Tesla service provider, and watch it also fail to run. Not because of a mechanical failure or even a software failure, but because Tesla hasn't OKed it to run.

I'm curious about what happens if/when Tesla goes out of business. What happens to all those Model S and Model 3's out there - do they get OTA patched to no longer phone home, does the data coming out of the Tesla flip over to whoever purchases that capability from Tesla, or do they all just stop? It will be interesting to see.

Your car perhaps, but probably not your software - check the EULA (it is an issue that bugs me too - I am offering this in way of explanation, not justification.)

The clause is probably there because Tesla wants to become the self-driving Uber, and it cannot (even if it wanted to) limit the restriction to corporations because, as we know, Uber does not have drivers or cars.

Probably because the autopilot tech isn't just your car. It's connected to the rest of the Tesla `fleet`, all the ML that makes it work is done by Tesla. All the updates you get to improve the capabilities is done by Tesla?

I guess Tesla believes while under self-drive it is no longer your car. That's going to be an interesting case for the law/layers in the future.

Tesla owns their software, not you. Why would they enable other ridesharing companies to profit off of their autopilot work?

If you want to drive your car for Uber, you can. If you want Tesla’s software to drive it for Uber for you, that isn’t part of the end user license agreement.

There will probably be court cases over this.

At one time automakers tried to say if you used third party oil filters or other parts, or if anyone other than the dealer did work, then your warranty was void. That didn't hold up.

Publishers tried to say that you could not re-sell books and recordings and software media after you purchased them. That didn't hold up.

Not sure that this will hold up either.

You’re referring to physical parts. To my knowledge, no automaker providers their software and related tooling to end users (please correct me if I’m mistake).

You’re going to need a copyright law overhaul to change this status quo.

And you're referring to what you can physically do with your own vehicle after you buy it. To my knowledge that has absolutely nothing to do with software copyright law. I don't understand your basis for arguing that software's copyright can be used to infringe other rights.

For example can my water heater's manufacturer ban me from washing my dog in the bath because they own copyright on the software in the thermostat micro-controller?

If Tesla were going to provide liability insurance, I could absolutely see them having the ability to limit usage (under that insurance). But software copyright is an unusual argument.

To use Tesla FSD (full self driving) with a rideshare network, you will need to hook into the Tesla vehicle onboard software or Tesla’s API. Those actions will require Tesla’s cooperation. Otherwise, feel free to sit in the car while it drives itself on autopilot, Tesla isn’t stopping that, only the use of its full autonomy software (when it arrives) for commercial purposes on rideshare networks other than its own.

Existing law supports this, and I don’t foresee policy changing in this regard.

> To use Tesla FSD (full self driving) with a rideshare network, you will need to hook into the Tesla vehicle onboard software or Tesla’s API.

If there is an operator in the vehicle, they could just enter the destination the old fashioned way.

> Existing law supports this, and I don’t foresee policy changing in this regard.

It really doesn't. I'm not sure which "law" you're even referring to.

They are I think referring to first-sale doctrine.

> There will probably be court cases over this.

Well, probably not, because realistically Tesla's self-driving isn't going to be happening anytime soon.

Tesla seems to think software license agreements don't matter though, because they've been violating other people's license agreements for years by shipping GPLed code without source. About a week ago they finally released some (not all) of the code they're required to.

https://electrek.co/2018/05/19/tesla-releases-softwar-open-s...

This is almost certainly illegal, and if you have a Tesla, you should use the self-driving ability for Uber or Lyft and literally just dare Tesla to sue you for it.

The simplest explanation to me is that the self drive software is essentially provide under a non-commercial license.

> Why does Tesla get to tell me what to do with my car?

My guess:

Because they think it's their car, even after they sold it to you. And, because, more to the point, they expect that (contrary to their claims) that retaining that control and exploiting it is the only way they will be able to be profitable with the cars.