Chinese Knock-off of Tactrix OP 2.0

[echo4papa]

I don't know about you, but I don't have a user agreement with Mitsu, I purchased a car. I'm the owner, not a user, not lessee.

I do have a warranty with them, that they can void if I make a modification to the vehicle that causes damage, but that isn't the same thing.

[Markspd6]

Originally Posted by echo4papa

I don't know about you, but I don't have a user agreement with Mitsu, I purchased a car. I'm the owner, not a user, not lessee.

I do have a warranty with them, that they can void if I make a modification to the vehicle that causes damage, but that isn't the same thing.

Actually thats the exact same thing... You agree not to mod the programming or bye bye warranty, thats a user agreement..

[echo4papa]

We might be getting into a semantics argument here, but I think there's a difference between a user agreement, where you are agreeing to terms in order to benefit as an end user of something (typically software for example), but a warranty is an agreement for service so long as you don't break the conditions of the agreement.

Yes, they are both contracts, but there are subtle difference between the two that make them more applicable to certain situations.

Overall point being, they really don't have anything to do with the theft of designs/equipment in this case. I'm sure Tactrix has products & completed ops coverage as part of their CGL coverage, but that wouldn't cover liability from their product if you blow your engine up because of a bad tune. That isn't something they are liable for either way. Remember, you aren't running their software in your car, you are using their cable and software to swap tunes. If the tune causes damage to your car, again, that isn't something they are liable for anyway.

[Drew]

We can talk semantics all we want. But building and selling something that is a clear violation of copyright laws, and a clear theft of intellectual property under the guise that it was built by, and equivalent to the product made by the company you have labeled it as is immoral and illegal. If I build a kit car from scratch from parts I have lying around, and sell it to you as a Mitsubishi Lancer RalliArt, I will go to jail without passing go or collecting $200. That is a violation of the law, and a theft of intellectual property. It is not illegal or immoral to violate a warranty. That is a decision you make on your own, from your own free will, and is no way affecting anyone but you. Those are drastically different scenarios.

Having said that, I do see, to a certain point, what Mark is saying. In a quick glance on Tactrix sight, I did not see any warnings that use of their hardware or software may not only void your warranty, but violate federal emissions laws. That might be a disclaimer that they want to add, unless it is already there, and I just missed it.

[MikeyPSF]

Originally Posted by Drew

MikeyPSF, I have edited the thread title to make absolutely certain this product is not confused with your company, and to clearly state it is a knock-off with stolen firmware.

Thanks very much doing that Drew and for your comments.

Originally Posted by Markspd6

Isnt your product a basic violation of the user agreement we make with mitsu when we buy their cars?

Good question but this isn't actually a violation. The federal law that governs this is the Magnuson-Moss Warranty Act. From this site which I encourage you to visit for more info:

"Specifically, the rules and regulations adopted by the FTC to govern the interpretation and enforcement of the Magnuson-Moss Warranty Act are set forth in the Code of Federal Regulations, Title 16 - Commercial Practices, Chapter I - Federal Trade Commission, Subchapter G - Rules, Regulations, Statements and Interpretations under the Magnuson-Moss Warranty Act, Part 700 - Interpretations under the Magnuson-Moss Warranty Act. Contained within these rules and regulations is Section 700.10, which states:
No warrantor may condition the continued validity of a warranty on the use of only authorized repair service and/or authorized replacement parts for non-warranty service and maintenance. For example, provisions such as, "This warranty is void if service is performed by anyone other than an authorized 'ABC' dealer and all replacement parts must be genuine 'ABC' parts," and the like, are prohibited where the service or parts are not covered by the warranty. These provisions violate the Act in two ways. First, they violate the section 102(c) ban against tying arrangements. Second, such provisions are deceptive under section 110 of the Act, because a warrantor cannot, as a matter of law, avoid liability under a written warranty where a defect is unrelated to the use by a consumer of "unauthorized" articles or service. This does not preclude a warrantor from expressly excluding liability for defects or damage caused by such "unauthorized" articles or service; nor does it preclude the warrantor from denying liability where the warrantor can demonstrate that the defect or damage was so caused.

Under the Magnuson-Moss Act, a dealer must prove, not just vocalize, that aftermarket equipment caused the need for repairs before it can deny warranty coverage. If the dealer cannot prove such a claim — or it proffers a questionable explanation — it is your legal right to demand compliance with the warranty. The Federal Trade Commission administers the Magnuson-Moss Act and monitors compliance with warranty law."

Originally Posted by Markspd6

And you as a company cant afford to accept liability for any problems that arise from using it, and thats why the software is free?

There are lots of companies that sell software similar in function to what we give away. For instance, for Mazda you can use our OpenPort 2.0 hardware with Versatuner ($399 for the software locked to one VIN) or MazdaEdit ($250 for the software locked to one VIN). Selling vs. giving away the software doesn't change anything other than simplifying the distribution of our software for our customers. By the way, both of those prices are for software only, which helps put in perspective what one gets in terms of value for purchasing our hardware for $169 and getting free software equivalent to those Mazda products except that you can use ours with as many cars as you want, which allows a lot of professional tuners to create a small business around their tuning abilities all for only a $169 investment along with their hard work of actually tuning.

Originally Posted by Markspd6

I say this only because installing your software, is an instant warranty killer.

That's not exactly true. Any dealership might give you varying amounts of pushback on a warranty claim once you start modifying the car, but reflashing an ECU isn't a blanket void of the warranty. In reality, very few people will ever simply reflash their ECU without also making mechanical changes. In fact, most of us will quickly approach the point where we make enough physical changes such that if the motor destructs, we probably won't try to make a motor warranty claim because it's obvious to us and the dealership that we've pushed things beyond what the manufacturer intended. But if you reflash your motor and then brakes fail, it would be hard for a dealership to say that they won't repair your brakes under warranty because you've installed a new CAI and updated the ECU to take advantage of it.

Also, in the many years that I've answered customer calls and emails I have never once had someone say: "My dealership denied my warranty claim because I used your product to reflash my car."

Originally Posted by Drew

Having said that, I do see, to a certain point, what Mark is saying. In a quick glance on Tactrix sight, I did not see any warnings that use of their hardware or software may not only void your warranty, but violate federal emissions laws. That might be a disclaimer that they want to add, unless it is already there, and I just missed it.

Good point Drew. It's included in the previously mentioned software license you must agree to before it can be installed on your computer. From that agreement:

"...modification of your ECU's software will most likely void your drivetrain warranty from the manufacturer and violate emission control regulations in some regions."

That's a wide blanket statement we have to include, but in practice an ECU modification alone is unlikely to cause you warranty headaches. I say that without spending extensive time searching for end user comments about specific experiences but again, as someone who fields dozens of emails per day for years and years, I've never had anyone alert me to any warranty issues they've had.

[Chaz17]

Don't support knock-off, ripped-off crap.

Spend a few extra dollars and support the companies that support us.

It's $100 more. Not like you're saving a few grand. You drive a $30k car, save up and do it right.

[RalliNurse]

^overall...what he said! Just to give you guys a scenario without diving into the topic too much...some guy bought Chinese made UICP for his X and brought it to RRE for a tune...couple of hard runs and in the middle of the tune his UICP cracked in half...I don't know what happen to his X...I presume nothing bad happens...but the lesson to the story here is...all these parts for the car is what I consider "mission-critical" parts...if you try to cut corners and save a few bucks...you'll spending a lot more down the road...that's just my 2 pennies...

[netracerx]

I'm relatively new to the board, and an absolute noob at tuning/modification, so there's my disclaimer to my opinion about this.

Having said that, many (but not most) car owners who turn to tuning/modification are doing so under a tight budget. It's something we do to personalize our vehicles and get the performance/look that characterizes us as drivers.

When I go "window shopping" for parts, tools and upgrades, at the end of the day the dollar (as it does for most people) wins. I'm not saying that I willingly and knowingly will steal to do this, but if Part A is $100 cheaper than Part B (which is official) then I'm more than likely going with Part A. That $100 is a lot of money, and can go toward the next part to support the modification I wish to make.

We've established the Chinese part is a knock-off illegal clone, and that the Tatrix software license specifically prohibits using unsanctioned/unofficial OpenPorts with the software (we've defined that as stealing). To someone getting into this for the first time, they may not know that. Yes, ignorance still does not excuse the act, but I just want to point that out because it does affect their decision on which OpenPort they decide to buy. Even those that do know may still go for the option $100 less because it puts more of their budget to use elsewhere on options they may not have wiggle room in.

My Ralliart came from the dealer with an AccessPort (thanks Don Herring!). If it hadn't, I probably would have purchased an OpenPort instead. $500 vs. $169... that's a sizable difference in cash expenditure. Yeah, someone could say "but you're getting the expertise and support of a large tuning house" but at the end of the day, money's money, honey.

Now faced with a similar decision, money's money.

I only offer this long-winded post to put this thought into everyone's minds, especially Tactrix, Inc.: The rabbit's out of the bag. Regardless of whether it's legitimate or not, someone's undercutting you and will get away with it. Instead of "hoping" the community will trade legitimate parts for dollars spent, we all know the consumer will hold that only to a point. At the end of the day, dollars matter. I think, and I may be wrong (scream at the noob if it makes you feel better), but someone else was trying to make the point I'm making now: maybe it's time to reconsider your price point on the OpenPort? I understand it funds development, and you have overhead to consider, but you are being undercut and should signal the community you're willing to see that and offer an olive branch to them in exchange for their continued patronage.

Long story short: Everyone faces an opportunity cost for the things they want. Some have a higher ceiling on that cost than others, so can throw money at the better things without question. Others have a lower ceiling. This is no longer about brand loyalty but now about price point.

That's my long-winded $0.02.

And remember, I'm a NOOB so what do I know.

[Drew]

NetracerX, again, I am trying to stay unbiased. But it just so happens that I work for a contract manufacturer that builds PCBAs, and often have had to deal with off-shoring concerns.

First, let's ignore the morality for a moment. We will get back to that. What you said, I don't necessarily disagree with. If I am looking at a boost gauge, and I don't care the brand, I am looking for cheap and functional. The same can be said for strut tower braces, spoilers, and a multitude of other things. But here is where the stick is. I would agree with you IF, and that is a big IF the options were equivalent. There are tons of Chinese knock-off items that we may already own, not knowing. But would you buy a turbocharger that is known to be built of sub-standart quality, and bolt it on to your car? Would you buy TC-SST fluid from a Chinese vendor that you knew was not the factory equivalent, and put it in your transmission? It is a MUCH different issue when you are cutting corners on something that could cause severe damage to your car. The knock-off turbo comes apart? Hello major damage. The knock-off fluid overheat or damage your transmission? Hello major damage. This knock-off tactrix brick your ECU, or even worse, burn your factory wiring harness? Hello major damage!!! No one has used one of these to determine if they are "equivalent", but I can assure you, having seen no less than 300 different PCBAs in their domestic vs offshore forms, the quality isn't anywhere near comparable. I'm not telling anyone to use or not use anything. But don't make it sound like there's little risk to cut corners on things that could do major damage to your car.

Now, back to morality. It IS stealing. I have no clue where notions like these come from....

Originally Posted by netracerx

The rabbit's out of the bag. Regardless of whether it's legitimate or not, someone's undercutting you and will get away with it. Instead of "hoping" the community will trade legitimate parts for dollars spent, we all know the consumer will hold that only to a point. At the end of the day, dollars matter.

Originally Posted by AVENGER

The product exists.. Maybe it's time to see how your price can become a little more affordable.

Should Tactrix try to stay competitive in the market? Absolutely. But to say that someone stealing their product, and offering it cheaper is a reason to re-evaluate their prices is insane. If either one of you gents were selling your OEM wheels for, let's say $400, and I told you that I can give the kid that lives down the block from you $200 to go steal them off your car for me, would that persuade you to lower your price? And that analogy is using two things that are identical, either way me getting legitimate OEM wheels. Buying this thing from China is an unknown quantity, that I would personally be very surprised if it even remotely close to equivalent in function, much less quality.

I sincerely hope that any of you gents that has purchased one of those things do not end up damaging your cars.

[MikeyPSF]

Originally Posted by netracerx

I'm not saying that I willingly and knowingly will steal to do this, but if Part A is $100 cheaper than Part B (which is official) then I'm more than likely going with Part A. That $100 is a lot of money, and can go toward the next part to support the modification I wish to make.

Sure, if two parts are equal but one is $100 less, we'd all go with the cheaper part. Like if one fan belt is identical to the dimensions of the OEM fan belt but it's half price, that's okay to purchase because it's an equal part made by examining the dimensions of the belt needed to fit that application, not by stealing the technology to make that belt.

Originally Posted by netracerx

We've established the Chinese part is a knock-off illegal clone, and that the Tatrix software license specifically prohibits using unsanctioned/unofficial OpenPorts with the software (we've defined that as stealing). To someone getting into this for the first time, they may not know that. Yes, ignorance still does not excuse the act, but I just want to point that out because it does affect their decision on which OpenPort they decide to buy. Even those that do know may still go for the option $100 less because it puts more of their budget to use elsewhere on options they may not have wiggle room in.

I think we can all agree that having more money in your pocket is the primary motivation to buy stolen goods. They tend to be cheaper As for wiggle room, I don't know what to say to that. We're not talking about medications or clothes for your kids to wear to school. We're talking about modifying your car. If buying nice rims that were stolen off your neighbor's car is the only way you can get those rims, then maybe you should figure out how to make the old rims work.

Originally Posted by netracerx

My Ralliart came from the dealer with an AccessPort (thanks Don Herring!). If it hadn't, I probably would have purchased an OpenPort instead. $500 vs. $169... that's a sizable difference in cash expenditure. Yeah, someone could say "but you're getting the expertise and support of a large tuning house" but at the end of the day, money's money, honey.

Now faced with a similar decision, money's money.

That's a poor analogy. If you decide to do your own tuning or to work with a remote tuner instead of purchasing an Accessport, you aren't doing so with a hacked Accessport.

Originally Posted by netracerx

I only offer this long-winded post to put this thought into everyone's minds, especially Tactrix, Inc.: The rabbit's out of the bag. Regardless of whether it's legitimate or not, someone's undercutting you and will get away with it. Instead of "hoping" the community will trade legitimate parts for dollars spent, we all know the consumer will hold that only to a point. At the end of the day, dollars matter. I think, and I may be wrong (scream at the noob if it makes you feel better), but someone else was trying to make the point I'm making now: maybe it's time to reconsider your price point on the OpenPort? I understand it funds development, and you have overhead to consider, but you are being undercut and should signal the community you're willing to see that and offer an olive branch to them in exchange for their continued patronage.

I'll offer you the same question I posed to the previous poster who suggested a price cut is in order: what's the price point that will get someone to not buy a stolen product? We can all find something else to do with $100 on our cars. If you're telling me this is the linch pin in someone's build such that buying a counterfeit item to save $100 is the only way they can make it happen, then I'm going to say that I don't buy that argument.

And suggesting that we need to offer an 'olive branch' suggests that we need to make peace with the community here. I don't really see us as being at war with this community so we're going to let our track record stand as it is. We simply can't compete on price with someone who has stolen our design, company name, firmware, software, and is using Chinese labor to build what we make here in the US. We're not talking about an astronomical sum of money here. If ethics can be bought for $100 or less, then that isn't a sale we're going to win in by dropping our price slightly. If your boss came to you and said we found someone from outside the US who we can have do your job for less money and we can avoid some labor laws, would you offer a reduction in your pay as an 'olive branch'?

Originally Posted by netracerx

And remember, I'm a NOOB so what do I know.

You don't need to have a lot of car experience to understand the issue here. I'm betting your mom doesn't know a lot about Ralliarts but she might still understand the ethics in this discussion.