WARNING HP Tuners MPV1 DEAD

They go by many names, P01, P59, VPW, '0411 etc . Circa 1999 to 2006. All VPW OBD2 PCMs.
User avatar
Posts: 6838
Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2012 6:41 pm
Location: Kyneton, Vic

Re: WARNING HP Tuners MPV1 DEAD

Postby vlad01 » Thu Oct 10, 2019 9:28 pm

reminds me of all the tech giants like apple, intel, samsung and the evil green eye etc..
I'm the director of VSH (Vlad's Spec Holden), because HSV were doing it ass about.

User avatar
Posts: 347
Joined: Sun Jan 25, 2015 4:21 pm
Location: Sydney

Re: WARNING HP Tuners MPV1 DEAD

Postby j_ds_au » Fri Oct 11, 2019 10:28 pm

Gampy wrote:It is illegal to INTENTIONALLY damage a customers product (ie: ecu). Proving intent is next to impossible.
Now, If you are capable of disassembling their product and showing code that is there for no other reason then to intentionally damage customers product (ecu) then you have a case.

But to disable their product that they own and are granting you use of is not illegal. (You can thank Microsoft for that)
It's no different then the engineered lifespans most manufactures are following.
Make it die, sell another!

They don't own the ECU that they brick. So it's not necessary to prove intent here; without intent, it's still negligence, which can be sued.

Joe.

User avatar
Posts: 891
Joined: Sat Dec 15, 2018 7:38 am

Re: WARNING HP Tuners MPV1 DEAD

Postby Gampy » Sat Oct 12, 2019 1:30 am

Negligence is just as difficult to prove as intent.

Lawyers say harder.

Most anybody can be sued for most anything ... Will you win?
Windows 10 is like an off idle flat spot ... It stumbles when it's time to go!

User avatar
Posts: 347
Joined: Sun Jan 25, 2015 4:21 pm
Location: Sydney

Re: WARNING HP Tuners MPV1 DEAD

Postby j_ds_au » Sat Oct 12, 2019 9:30 am

Gampy wrote:Negligence is just as difficult to prove as intent.

Not at all. You have one less element to prove (intent).

Working ECU -> HPT Software -> Bricked ECU.

Proof done.

Joe.

User avatar
Posts: 479
Joined: Fri Feb 02, 2018 3:13 pm

Re: WARNING HP Tuners MPV1 DEAD

Postby NSFW » Sat Oct 12, 2019 3:15 pm

Negligence is not that simple.
Please don't PM me with technical questions - start a thread instead, and send me a link to it. That way I can answer in public, and help other people who have the same question. Thanks!

User avatar
Posts: 347
Joined: Sun Jan 25, 2015 4:21 pm
Location: Sydney

Re: WARNING HP Tuners MPV1 DEAD

Postby j_ds_au » Sat Oct 12, 2019 4:35 pm

NSFW wrote:Negligence is not that simple.

I think his local consumer affairs entity may have a different view on that.

From what he has described, it can be readily shown that this software, used in a reasonable and foreseeable manner, can cause harm/damage. A pretty open and shut case then.

Joe.

User avatar
Posts: 891
Joined: Sat Dec 15, 2018 7:38 am

Re: WARNING HP Tuners MPV1 DEAD

Postby Gampy » Sat Oct 12, 2019 10:00 pm

j_ds_au wrote:Not at all. You have one less element to prove (intent).

Working ECU -> HPT Software -> Bricked ECU.

Proof done.

In that scenario all that is known is that HPT is possibly damaging the ECU, not proven it.
It still could very well be the users fault ...

Proving negligence and or intent requires finding out what was in/on that persons mind at that time. (HPT developer(s))
That is nearly impossible without some sort of collaborating documentation. (disassembled software, emails, texts, tweets, etc... etc...)
Windows 10 is like an off idle flat spot ... It stumbles when it's time to go!

User avatar
Posts: 347
Joined: Sun Jan 25, 2015 4:21 pm
Location: Sydney

Re: WARNING HP Tuners MPV1 DEAD

Postby j_ds_au » Sat Oct 12, 2019 10:30 pm

Gampy wrote:Proving negligence and or intent requires finding out what was in/on that persons mind at that time. (HPT developer(s))

Well, that's half right. Proving intent does require this.

Proving negligence does not, it is sufficient to show that the outcome is unreasonable, harmful, and inconsistent with a competent duty of care. State of mind is not required. See :
https://lawhandbook.sa.gov.au/ch29s05s01.php

Joe.

User avatar
Posts: 479
Joined: Fri Feb 02, 2018 3:13 pm

Re: WARNING HP Tuners MPV1 DEAD

Postby NSFW » Sun Oct 13, 2019 4:08 am

HPT will say that they tested the upgrade process internally and it worked.
HPT will say that lots of customers did the upgrade and still have a working product.

Those things might even be true.

HPT's lawyers will say that this shows that HPT was not negligent, because they took reasonable steps to ensure that the upgrade worked. But, mistakes happen.

The big question here is whether or not they are liable. Certainly if they were found to negligent, they would be liable. But they might be liable even without negligence.
Please don't PM me with technical questions - start a thread instead, and send me a link to it. That way I can answer in public, and help other people who have the same question. Thanks!

User avatar
Posts: 891
Joined: Sat Dec 15, 2018 7:38 am

Re: WARNING HP Tuners MPV1 DEAD

Postby Gampy » Sun Oct 13, 2019 7:10 am

A simple testing program (simulators, beta testing, etc...) is enough to show competent care of duty.
That's really all that can be done ...

If it can be proven that the software or device did in fact cause damage that was not the result of outside interference (power fluctuations, RF, poor wiring, etc...) then you have a liable case.
Windows 10 is like an off idle flat spot ... It stumbles when it's time to go!

PreviousNext

Return to GM LS1 512Kbyte and 1Mbyte

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 8 guests