NHTSA requires disclosing "black box" details
Starting in 2011, automakesr will be required to inform consumers if their new vehicle includes an event data recorder, or "black box". Such devices have recently come under fire from privacy advocates, as manufacturers have been somewhat less than forthcoming about information on the devices.
The National Highway Transportation Safety Administration (NHTSA) will also require that any data recorder be capable of gathering at least 15 pieces of information, but stopped short of requiring that the devices be installed on every new vehicle. Currently, over 60% of new vehicles include black boxes that are triggered by the deployment of a vehicle's supplemental restrain systems.
As expected, no one seems satisfied with NHTSA's ruling. Public Citizen's Joan Claybrook was quite unhappy after hearing that the recorders will not be required across the board, while representatives of the American Civil Liberties Union did not like the fact that certain issues regarding the use of crash data were not addressed.
[Source: AP/Yahoo!]
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 2)
Shawn Gyorke 3:47AM (3/03/2009)
I know that many people are uncomfortable with the possibility that their own car is "spying on them." These devices will be installed in most cars. Therefore, people should know how these devices work, their limits, what the data looks like, what NHTSA's ruling really means, and how their right to privacy relates to the data that a black box records.
12 states have laws on black boxes so far. They all have been pro-privacy (rightfully so). Many laws have even gone as far as to prohibit insurance companies from requiring release of said data as a condition of their policies. Even though I am involved in law enforcement, I firmly believe that the data should only be treated as property of the vehicle owner and therefore be granted the same rights to search and seizure as any other property.
These pages might be of interest:
State Laws - (http://www.crashdataservices.net/stateCDRlaws.html)
Black Box Examples (http://www.crashdataservices.net/CDRExamples.html)
Vehicles with black boxes by Make -(http://www.crashdataservices.net/Vehicles.html)
Explanation of NHTSA ruling - (http://www.crashdataservices.net/NHTSAruling.html)
Black Box FAQ's (http://www.crashdataservices.net/FAQ.html)
Reply
Dr. Woo 11:10AM (8/22/2006)
As hokey as those guys are, I'm 100% with the ACLU on this one.
Reply
Corey W. 11:18AM (8/22/2006)
Do your d@mn crash data collections in a lab. There is no reason for these data recorders. If so, where do you draw the line... There might as well be a camera/data recorders everywhere. Nothing will be admissible in court unless it can be retrieved from some electronic device... Where will it end!!!
Reply
Fabulo 11:21AM (8/22/2006)
It's my car, it's my black box. I drove my car, the blackbox recorded my data, I own the data, it's mine and I'll keep it to myself.
I don't mind a blackbox at all. I mind nosey insurance and law enforcement (the ones lobbying to the blackbox in the first place) getting in my data.
Reply
Takeo 11:26AM (8/22/2006)
Well since we own the car and the black box, then there's nothing illegal about disconnecting or destroying it.
Reply
Tri-Bob 11:26AM (8/22/2006)
In my humble opinion, we are to blame, not government. Follow me, we want low insurance, faster commutes, better fuel efficiency. To do this insurance companies want more data on how to charge the worst drivers, faster commutes can be made by analyzing driver characteristics per area, and better fuel efficiency can be garnered with real time data. We want things and the lobbyists and big business pay the government to enact these rules, we are fostering a viscous cycle. I agree that this is a little too much Big Brother, but it also helps keep costs down. What do we really want, freedom from scrutiny or reasonable prices?
Reply
hj 11:27AM (8/22/2006)
#2 lab crashes are not real world collisions. THe data collected from these recorders will help improve automotive safety and save lives. I say F the ACLU or as I like to call them the (American Communist Liberal Union) I'm all for these recorders.
Reply
David P B 11:33AM (8/22/2006)
OMG IF WE ALLOW THIS NEXT THING WE WILL HAVE HOMING DEVICES UNDER OUR SKIN...IT IS 1984!
Oh please people. That arguement has been used for years for just about everything. I worked as a claims adjustor for two insurance companies and this device would be very useful in helping auto and injury claims. The problem is people lie way too much to try to look our for #1, themself.
It is not like they are constantly checking the data. Only looking at it AFTER an accident. If you are afraid people are gonna find out you were drunk going 90mph, how about you don't do that and save a life or two!
Reply
Jim in Tampa 11:35AM (8/22/2006)
Personal injury attorneys are now using black box data in lawsuits.
Reply
Baumann 11:51AM (8/22/2006)
To me this falls in the "what do you have to hide?" category. Just like any technology, this can be used either for or against you. Personally, I'd like to consider myself a good driver. Therefore, if I'm in an accident, I'd certainly like that to help prove my side of the story. The only people who should be worried are those that are causing accidents.
Reply
rwdmtparkingonly 11:52AM (8/22/2006)
2011 gives the automakers a long time to print disclosure stickers to put on the vehicle manuals, what kind of NHTSA bullshit is that, how about 2007.
A lot of states, including California, are mandating black box disclosure much sooner, but I haven't been able to find any published lists yet. This is the closest I could get:
"The leader in EDR technology is General Motors Corp. The car company, which has used the technology in a limited way since the 1970s, now equips all its models with the feature. Ford Motor Co. and Toyota have some of the capability. Chrysler has downplayed the recorders and said only a few of its models are collecting crash data."
From this article: http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/A16860-2004Jul26?language=printer
Please post if you have something better.
Reply
motorman 12:04PM (8/22/2006)
the audi "uncontroled accelleration problem" lawsuits are the reason these are now in cars. the car company can prove in court that you still had your foot on the gas pedal instead of the brake when you crashed. blame the lawyers for this one
Reply
Corey W. 12:07PM (8/22/2006)
Some of you just don't get it... It's not about lab test, lower rates, being able to better process claims, communism, socialism or whatever else propaganda. It's about where do you draw the line, once you open the door... IT'S OPEN!! During an investigation police can subpoena this data, who's to say that it will be used correctly to defend you. Point being, if you allow this, there is no excuse to not have any other type of monitoring.
Why not have cameras in your house? The data will never be accessed unless there's a crime!!
Think outside the box....
Reply
All World Automotive 12:14PM (8/22/2006)
No matter what your views are on this topic. Garunteed its gonna be long, drug out and split down the line. I don't think this will be the last story about this on autoblog.
Reply
rwdmtparkingonly 12:17PM (8/22/2006)
Good point Corey W., I wonder how hj (poster number 6) would feel about cameras in his house catching him pleasuring himself to pictures of Joan Claybrook.
Reply
cowboy bob 12:22PM (8/22/2006)
I have already been a witness at a courtroom proceeding where black box evidense was appropriated by the prosecution, and admitted by the judge. This resulted in a conviction of speeding for the man who was driving in the accident. (A woman was killed). The box provided the data that the car was exceeding the posted speed limit by 9MPH. This not a "story", as I will provide the case name, date, and location. Contact me at "pitranger@yahoo.com". Please provide the word evidence in the subject box. Furthermore, this conviction and the aformentioned evidence are currently being utilized by the victims realitives in a wrongfull death civil suit. There is currently data being collected that records more than just your speed. It also records braking, lateral G-force, seatbelt use, and other data. The ability to transmit this data in real time to any location connected by satellite is currently available. There is also technology already available to shut down your engine, locate your position to within 3 feet by GPS, lock, or unlock your doors, and listen to conversation in your automobile. It's called Onstar. It is the desire by many to bring all this data collection technology together and keep any motorist within the set parameters of any guidlines desired. I have several pre-box cars tucked away in my shop for use when this becomes the law of the land.
Reply
epp_b 12:29PM (8/22/2006)
["It's my car, it's my black box. I drove my car, the blackbox recorded my data, I own the data, it's mine and I'll keep it to myself."]
Amen to that. I get really sick of this "intellectual property" malarkey, the swiss cheese property that says that "you own it, but you don't really own it". You're absolutely right: it's MY box in MY car that I bought with MY money; therefore, it's MY data and I will whatever I want with it. End of discussion.
Reply
hj 12:38PM (8/22/2006)
#15 Didn't you know if you wrap your head in tinfoil it blocks all transmissions to the CIA!? HAHAHAHAHA YOU'RE A LAUGH!
Reply
Dave T. 12:51PM (8/22/2006)
I sincerely hope in the case where the guy was going 9 mph over the speed limit there was some other reason he was at fault. Considering most common knowledge is that if you speed and keep it under 10 mph over the limit you're "safe" in the cops' eyes. Unless this was a 15 mph zone and they guy was going 24 mph but even then that can't be the only reason you get convicted.
Reply
Corey W. 1:18PM (8/22/2006)
"The ability to transmit this data in real time to any location connected by satellite is currently available. There is also technology already available to shut down your engine, locate your position to within 3 feet by GPS, lock, or unlock your doors, and listen to conversation in your automobile."
hj,
If you think that's funny, I think you better start watching Court TV or the Discovery channel. Any special on high tech/law enforcement should help.
Here's a hint, think about the relationship between the government and the telecommunication companies. Dude, I'm not into conspiracy theories, so I'll let you do your own research....
Reply