The husband of the Shanghai rights-defending female car owner does not recognize the driving data, saying that Tesla infringes on personal privacy.
The husband of the Shanghai rights-defending female car owner voiced again in the middle of the night: Tesla has violated personal privacy and demanded that the data be revoked and apologized.
Mr. Li, the husband of the rights-defending female car owner, responded to the elephant journalist late at night, saying that he violated the owner’s personal privacy and consumer rights and would immediately complain to the Zhengzhou market supervision department.
The person in charge of handling the accident in Tesla said that the data had been sent to the customer by email. Since the customer’s phone has not been answered, Tesla sent it to the mailbox that the customer filled in when buying a car through the company mailbox.
"My wife is still in the detention center, and the mobile phone is in the hands of the police. How can I get a call?" Mr. Li said that before Tesla released the data one minute before the vehicle accident, he never got in touch with Zhang’s family.
Mr. Li only telephoned the relevant person in charge of Zhengzhou Zhengdong New District Market Supervision Administration on the afternoon of the 22nd. The person in charge only told Mr. Li that Tesla had been ordered to provide data to the owners, and did not mention that the driving data should be released through the media.
Tesla released the driving data without any communication with the owner, which surprised Mr. Li after seeing this news. "This has violated our personal privacy and consumer rights." Mr. Li first expressed disapproval of the driving data presented by Tesla. At the same time, he believed that the driving data belonged to personal property and privacy, and Tesla released it to the media and the public without the permission of the owner, which he could not accept.
Next, Mr. Li will make a complaint to Zhengzhou Municipal Market Supervision Administration, and ask Tesla to apologize publicly and cancel the driving data.
Tesla once again voiced late at night: he will cooperate with the investigation without reservation.
Tesla issued another document on the night of 22nd, saying that it fully accepted the decision of the State Administration of Market Supervision and Zhengzhou Municipal Market Supervision Administration, did its best, actively cooperated with all relevant investigations, earnestly fulfilled the main responsibility of quality and safety, and provided consumers with high-quality and safe products and services. Tesla said that up to now, on April 21st, it has provided complete driving data half an hour before the accident, and has repeatedly contacted relevant parties and reported relevant information.
Extended reading
Another Tesla rights owner voiced: Detection can’t keep up with technological development.
Shortly after Tesla announced the situation one minute before the data restoration accident, another car owner, Baojia, who participated in the rights protection voiced through Weibo, responding why he didn’t do a third-party appraisal. He said that "detection can’t keep up with technology", and it is difficult for authoritative appraisal institutions to find the dilemma that car owners encounter after the current smart car dispute accident.
In Weibo, Baojia first expressed his joy that Tesla began to provide data. He expressed his gratitude to the motherland and activists. "There was no clear relevant legal basis before. (Background data) Tesla doesn’t give it, and consumers can’t help it. Consumers can’t help it if they find a consumer association. In recent days, it has just been approved by the superior. Consumers have the right to know the driving data generated during the use and driving of pure electric vehicles, and enterprises need to provide them unconditionally. With this regulation, there will be disputes in the future, and it will be much more convenient for everyone to get data. "
It is not easy to get the data, but the security guard raised the second question: "I can’t understand and analyze the specific causes of the accident."
Security Jia said: "There is a rider who is doing related work, but he can’t analyze it. At present, I don’t know which institution can interpret this data. "
The reporter found that at present, most of the vehicle appraisal institutions recognized by the relevant judicial departments were established earlier, and they were basically used for accident appraisal of fuel vehicles. After consulting with several automobile inspection agencies, the other party indicated that the hardware inspection can be carried out for the vehicle, but if there is a problem with the software or system, it cannot be guaranteed to be detected by the existing technology of the agency.
An industry insider who didn’t want to be named told reporters that in the past, the institutions that conducted accident identification for fuel vehicles may not be able to meet the needs of smart cars. The reason is that smart cars are built on the basis of computer technology, so the role of the owner stepping on the brakes when an accident occurs is likely to be affected by system operation. Therefore, the traditional appraisal agency can only appraise whether the brakes of the current situation are normal, but can’t appraise the braking situation of the vehicle when the accident occurs. To completely restore the truth of the accident, it is also necessary for car companies to provide background data.
However, even if the car companies provide background data, whether the background data is complete or not has become a point of contention. In addition, a testing agency service staff also said that many emerging technologies like Tesla do not have equipment testing software now, and the most "authoritative" may be the manufacturer’s own analysis.
This makes the smart car accident go back to the embarrassing situation of the manufacturer’s "one statement" and no authoritative evidence from the third party.
In this regard, Bao Baojia said that it is an inevitable phenomenon that testing can’t keep up with the development of technology. At present, there are no relevant standards for software testing of new energy vehicle controllers, and the relevant standards of computer industry can not be fully applied to software testing of vehicle controllers, nor can they guide engineers in the automotive industry to carry out software testing in an all-round way.
It is reported that at present, under the leadership of the State Automobile Standards Committee, the formulation of large-scale intelligent network automobile safety standards is in full swing at this stage.
It is understood that Baoan Jia is different from Ms. Henan Car Advocate who stands on the roof of the car to defend her rights. The reason for defending her rights is not the brake failure, but the loss of power of the vehicle. He also said in the Weibo: "After Ms. Zhang came out, she must have something to say about Tesla’s data. I can’t speak for her. Each of us has a different problem. Recently, the video was broadcast directly about my car. Listen to the professional interpretation before Ms. Zhang comes out. "
According to his account, in March this year, when he was driving Model S from Nanjing to Shanghai, the vehicle suddenly gave an alarm prompt: "The power has been reduced and the vehicle is closing". Then, the vehicle stepped on the pedal without any response. He contacted Tesla to send the vehicle to the service center after sale, but the customer service staff first said that the vehicle lost power due to motor failure, and then thought that the motor problem was caused by Mr. An’s vehicle wading. Bao Baojia believes that Tesla is "shabu-shabu" and does not recognize the accident identification.
Original title: Tesla rights owners’ new voice: detection can’t keep up with technological development