Like everything else these days, cars are getting increasingly computerized, with embedded microprocessors controlling everything from the fuel-air mixture in the engine to the air temperature in the car. That trend will almost certainly accelerate as automakers tune their engines for mileage and increase the use of hybrid and plug-in hybrid technology to meet the new fuel efficiency standards. That increased reliance on technology, however, has brought fragmentation to the repair business, which now requires specialized hardware and software to interface with a typical vehicle. A bill introduced in Congress would ensure that automakers would provide equal access to those specialized tools.

The bill states up front that regular maintenance is critical for everything from basic safety to minimizing the environmental impact of vehicles. It also argues that car owners are entitled to the service provider of their choice when it comes to the repair and maintenance of their vehicles, and that competition among service providers helps ensure that everyone has viable choices in this regard. The threat to this comes from the fact that automakers can provide discriminatory access to the tools required for maintenance, providing them only to authorized service providers or refusing to allow individual car owners to purchase them.

With that as a backdrop, the bill sets new rules for manufacturers. Anyone that makes a vehicle that's introduced in the US would have to provide information, tools, and equipment to owners and service providers on a non-discriminatory basis. On the information side, this includes all the safety and service bulletins and the data needed to diagnose, repair, or replace existing equipment. Tools and replacement parts are to be made available on a similar basis. Trade secrets are protected from disclosure, but the bill would define things such that, if information is given to an authorized service provider, it's no longer considered a trade secret.

Rulemaking and enforcement power is given to the Federal Trade Commission. State attorneys general will also get the right to pursue cases against manufacturers, but they will be required to notify and coordinate these efforts with the FTC.

This isn't the first time that something along these lines has been proposed, but the bill is drawing support from across the ideological spectrum. For example, an editorial in support of it appeared in the San Francisco Chronicle that was penned by libertarian Bob Barr and Ralph Nader.

The EFF's Fred von Lohman, however, pointed out that there's a certain irony in this widespread public support and Congressional interest. What the bill suggests is that the sort of market created by the DMCA, in which companies are given the right to encrypt and protect information of their choosing, shouldn't apply when it comes to autos. To be clear, there are implementation differences. The DMCA could still apply in that third-party tools that provide access to encrypted data in a car would still run afoul of the law. But the need for these tools would be severely reduced by the fact that the manufacturers would be required to provide an equivalent. That would also, presumably, eliminate most of the incentive for manufacturers to take action against the providers of third-party tools.

It's pretty clear that the US citizenry tends to treat their cars as a different class of possession than most other things it owns. But there's a compelling case to be made that the reasons given in the bill for structuring the auto service market in a way that fosters competition among providers are general, and would apply to a variety of other markets.