Unlocking the NAV / SYNC

Disclaimer: Links on this page pointing to Amazon, eBay and other sites may include affiliate code. If you click them and make a purchase, we may earn a small commission.

jesse

Full Access Member
Joined
Apr 23, 2011
Posts
453
Reaction score
2
There are so MANY nav systems that get hacked or whatever so people can watch and drive...to include a friend of mine, who had a kenwood navigation unit and totaled his Envoy. Not one word was mentioned about his navigation except if his insurance would pay for it, as it was considered an after market radio at the time. So his renters insurance ended up paying for it and all was good. Now he is about to own a new 2011 Camaro LOL

Then again, if it was the stock system, and not considered "aftermarket"...i dont know.
 

Xjrguy

FRF Addict
Joined
Aug 8, 2010
Posts
1,331
Reaction score
12
There are so MANY nav systems that get hacked or whatever so people can watch and drive...to include a friend of mine, who had a kenwood navigation unit and totaled his Envoy. Not one word was mentioned about his navigation except if his insurance would pay for it, as it was considered an after market radio at the time. So his renters insurance ended up paying for it and all was good. Now he is about to own a new 2011 Camaro LOL

Then again, if it was the stock system, and not considered "aftermarket"...i dont know.

i think it all depends on how far someone wants to push the issue.

Was your friend's aftermarket system hacked?

Was the unit professionally installed or was it put in by your friend? (liability trail right there)

I'll tell you this. If myself or any of my family were to get in an accident and seriously injured because some **** head wanted to watch DVD's while driving or talking on the phone without a handsfree in a jurisdiction where it was illegal, you bet your ass I would exhaust every bit of legal discovery into the vehicle involved in the accident, the black box, the last seconds before impact etc and if there was a shred of evidence the driver who caused the accident had ANY illegal modifications performed regarding safety equipment or was distracted due to illegal modifications done to the vehicle or talking on cell phone you can bet your ASS I would make sure the book was thrown at them.

Would you want to leave your ass hangin' in the breeze in a situation like this if it went this far?

If I ever get into an accident, I don't ever want the other side to have ANY reason to stack the deck against me.
 
OP
OP
M

MagicMtnDan

FRF Addict
Joined
Oct 28, 2011
Posts
7,661
Reaction score
1,793
Location
Magic Mountain
i think it all depends on how far someone wants to push the issue.

Was your friend's aftermarket system hacked?

Was the unit professionally installed or was it put in by your friend? (liability trail right there)

I'll tell you this. If myself or any of my family were to get in an accident and seriously injured because some **** head wanted to watch DVD's while driving or talking on the phone without a handsfree in a jurisdiction where it was illegal, you bet your ass I would exhaust every bit of legal discovery into the vehicle involved in the accident, the black box, the last seconds before impact etc and if there was a shred of evidence the driver who caused the accident had ANY illegal modifications performed regarding safety equipment or was distracted due to illegal modifications done to the vehicle or talking on cell phone you can bet your ASS I would make sure the book was thrown at them.

Would you want to leave your ass hangin' in the breeze in a situation like this if it went this far?

If I ever get into an accident, I don't ever want the other side to have ANY reason to stack the deck against me.



Good luck with that. I know lawyers are a dime a dozen (maybe two dozen) and they'll do most anything for money but I see very little chance of anyone ever finding out you or someone else was watching a DVD on their dash-mounted system at the time of a crash. I'm not making an argument for being able to do that because I don't think it should be legal but there are so many distractions for drivers today. I can't see this information being found out let alone playing a pivotal role in a crash unless someone was badly hurt or killed.
 

Xjrguy

FRF Addict
Joined
Aug 8, 2010
Posts
1,331
Reaction score
12
<SNIP>

I'll tell you this. If myself or any of my family were to get in an accident and seriously injured because some **** head wanted to watch DVD's while driving or talking on the phone without a handsfree in a jurisdiction where it was illegal, you bet your ass I would exhaust every bit of legal discovery into the vehicle involved in the accident, the black box, the last seconds before impact etc and if there was a shred of evidence the driver who caused the accident had ANY illegal modifications performed regarding safety equipment or was distracted due to illegal modifications done to the vehicle or talking on cell phone you can bet your ASS I would make sure the book was thrown at them.

Would you want to leave your ass hangin' in the breeze in a situation like this if it went this far?

If I ever get into an accident, I don't ever want the other side to have ANY reason to stack the deck against me.

Good luck with that. I know lawyers are a dime a dozen (maybe two dozen) and they'll do most anything for money but I see very little chance of anyone ever finding out you or someone else was watching a DVD on their dash-mounted system at the time of a crash. I'm not making an argument for being able to do that because I don't think it should be legal but there are so many distractions for drivers today. I can't see this information being found out let alone playing a pivotal role in a crash unless someone was badly hurt or killed.


FYI, based on the highlighted sentences I believe you get my drift.

Point being, we live in a litigious society. This is a public forum where many have their pictures displayed, vehicle pictures displayed, etc (whether that individual asked it to be made public or not) along with other information that is backed up here and on Google/elsewhere.

Depending on the case and what was involved, it wouldn't take a savvy lawyer much to gather info and subpoena posts, credit card receipts etc and find out that a NAV was modified. (yes this might be paranoia but crazier things have happened.)

Additionally, depending on the crash, is your first instinct to remove the DVD from your system, hide it and then deal with the post accident issues? I doubt it.

Is anyone 100% sure that the black box in the vehicle doesn't record the activity of the NAV/in car entertainment/other parameters?

Insurance companies and law enforcement are getting more tech savvy by the day, let alone the government (for the right or wrong reasons I am not debating here)

If you've been in an accident, don't you think the cops, insurance agents (for you and the other party) aren't going to ask specifics about what happened?

Now I don't care what you or anyone does with your money or your vehicles, what have you I'm playing devil's advocate here (just like I do with those illegal HID lights that people put in halogen reflectors that are not DOT approved)

I do not think anyone here would want to test current case law and/or give someone a potential "upper hand" if you are scrutinized in some way due to an illegal, distracting modification that could potentially be the root cause of an at fault accident.

There are a lot of what if's here and its a good discussion either way.
 

bstoner59

does it come in shmedium?
Joined
Jul 13, 2010
Posts
6,104
Reaction score
4,753
Location
Orange, CA
Watch DVD's while driving? That's just CRAZY!!!

( Besides, I'm way too busy watching the reflections of ghosts in the mirrors while listening to the voices in my head when I'm driving...)

You have that problem too!!
 

bstoner59

does it come in shmedium?
Joined
Jul 13, 2010
Posts
6,104
Reaction score
4,753
Location
Orange, CA
Police have started to look at phone history at the scene of acciedents to determine if anyone was on the phone regardless of hands-free device or not. I'm sure if there was a DVD playing in the dash when you crash you won't even turn it off let alone remove the DVD. Like Tim said no reason to put yourself in a position to be railroaded. Not to mention the fines are around CA are about $400-$500 for the 2nd offense.

That being said I'm all for us being able to decide whether or not we are going to put ourselves in that position and the government shouldn't tell us what to do.
 

MarkT

FRF Addict
Joined
Mar 4, 2010
Posts
1,202
Reaction score
26
SNIP

I do not think anyone here would want to test current case law and/or give someone a potential "upper hand" if you are scrutinized in some way due to an illegal, distracting modification that could potentially be the root cause of an at fault accident.

There are a lot of what if's here and its a good discussion either way.

Here's my opinion... beyond being possibly being able to absolutely prove fault, there is little risk of any "worse" consequences... If you were at fault, you were at fault.

It's only specifically illegal to watch a DVD while driving in a few states. It's illegal to drive distracted in every state. I just don't believe the fact that you modified the DVD player will make any difference. You could just as easily have been watching a portable player velcro'd to the dash. It would be the same violation either way.

Is there really an actual law that prohibits the owner from modifying the in-dash NAV system to bypass the built-in safety features? I say no. (except maybe in California)

So then there's liability... could it make a difference to a jury as to how much money they award the victim if they find out you deliberately modified the system?? Possibly. But I'd bet most of us have limited finances. If the jury awards $10 million or $100 million it's still more than the victim is likely to be able to collect from the average person.

Bottom line: If you are at fault, you are at fault. The fact that you were irresponsibly driving while distracted is what really matters.

Enter "deep pockets". You might not have $100 million, but Ford does. A jury could decide that if Ford installed a player that worked while driving, they "enabled" you to drive distracted. Guess who ends up paying out the big bucks?

What's silly (or scary, depending on how you look at it) is that just about every car on the road is capable of exceeding the speed limit by a good margin. Does that mean the manufacturer should be held liable if your excessive speed was a factor in an accident? I mean, if the car wasn't capable of going that fast........

Like I said, scary. What's next? Sensors in the road and governors that prevent speeding? But fortunately most people still accept that cars can go fast and it's the driver's responsibility to stay within legal speeds.

Just like it's the driver's responsibility to NOT WATCH THE DVD WHILE DRIVING!!!

Too bad we live in a society that often seems to be more accepting of someone assigning blame to others instead of taking personal responsibility...
 

bstoner59

does it come in shmedium?
Joined
Jul 13, 2010
Posts
6,104
Reaction score
4,753
Location
Orange, CA
I would agree with you but there are certain cases (say someone pulls out in front of you and you t-bone them) if you have a DVD playing on the screen when the cops show up that may tend to sway their decision on who's at fault??

Here's another reason to love CA...CVC 27602

Television
27602. (a) A person ( )1 shall not drive a motor vehicle if a television receiver, a video monitor, or a television or video screen, or any other, similar means of visually displaying a television broadcast or video signal that produces entertainment or business applications, is operating and is located in the motor vehicle at ( )2 a point forward of the back of the driver’s seat, or is operating and the monitor, screen, or display is visible to the driver while driving the motor vehicle.
(b) Subdivision (a) does not apply to the following equipment when installed in a vehicle:

(1) A vehicle information display.

(2) A global positioning display.

(3) A mapping display.

(4) A visual display used to enhance or supplement the driver's view forward, behind, or to the sides of a motor vehicle for the purpose of maneuvering the vehicle.

(5) A television receiver, video monitor, television or video screen, or any other( )3 similar means of visually displaying a television broadcast or video signal, if that equipment ( )4 satisfies one of the ( )5 following requirements:

( )6 (A) ( )7 The equipment has an interlock device that, when the motor vehicle is driven, disables the equipment for all uses except as a visual display as described in paragraphs (1) to (4), inclusive.

( )8(B) The equipment is designed, operated, and configured in a manner that prevents the driver of the motor vehicle from viewing the television broadcast or video signal while operating the vehicle in a safe and reasonable manner.

(6) A mobile digital terminal that is fitted with an opaque covering that does not allow the driver to view any part of the display while driving, even though the terminal may be operating, installed in a vehicle that is owned or operated by any of the following:

(A) An electrical corporation, as defined in Section 218 of the Public Utilities Code.

(B) A gas corporation, as defined in Section 222 of the Public Utilities Code.

(C) A sewer system corporation, as defined in Section 230.6 of the Public Utilities Code.

(D) A telephone corporation, as defined in Section 234 of the Public Utilities Code.

(E) A water corporation, as defined in Section 241 of the Public Utilities Code.

(F) A local publicly owned electric utility, as defined in Section 9604 of the Public Utilities Code.

(G) A city, joint powers agency, or special district, if that local entity uses the vehicle solely in the provision of sewer service, gas service, water service, or wastewater service.

(c) Subdivision (a) does not apply to a mobile digital terminal installed in an authorized emergency vehicle or to a motor vehicle providing emergency road service or roadside assistance.

(d) Subdivision (a) does not apply to a mobile digital terminal installed in a vehicle ( )9 when the vehicle is deployed in an emergency to respond to an interruption or impending interruption of electrical, natural gas, telephone, sewer, water, or wastewater service( )10 , and the vehicle is owned or operated by any of the following:

(1) An electrical corporation, as defined in Section 218 of the Public Utilities Code.

(2) A gas corporation, as defined in Section 222 of the Public Utilities Code.

(3) A sewer system corporation, as defined in Section 230.6 of the Public Utilities Code.

(4) A telephone corporation, as defined in Section 234 of the Public Utilities Code.

(5) A water corporation, as defined in Section 241 of the Public Utilities Code.

(6) A local publicly owned electric utility, as defined in Section 9604 of the Public Utilities Code.

(7) A city, joint powers agency, or special district, if that local entity uses the vehicle solely in the provision of sewer service, gas service, water service, or wastewater service.

Amended Sec. 1, Ch. 303, Stats. 2003. Effective January 1, 2004.
Amended Sec. 31, Ch. 615, Stats. 2004. Effective January 1, 2005.
Amended Sec. 6.5, Ch. 229, Stats. 2009. Effective January 1, 2010.
The 2009 amendment added the italicized material, and at the point(s) indicated, deleted the following:
1. “may”
2. “any”
3. “,”
4. “has an interlock device that, when”
5. “motor vehicle is driven, disables the equipment for all uses except as a visual display as described in paragraphs (1) to (4), inclusive. ”
6.“5”
7.“A television receiver, video monitor, television or video screen, or any other, similar means of visually displaying a television broadcast or video signal, if that ”
8.“(6) A mobile digital terminal installed in a vehicle owned or operated by an electrical corporation, as defined in Section 218 of the Public Utilities Code, a local publicly owned electric utility, as defined in Section 9604 of that code, a gas corporation, as defined in Section 222 of that code, or a telephone corporation, as defined in Section 234 of that code, if the mobile digital terminal is fitted with an opaque covering that does not allow the driver to view any part of the display while driving, even though the terminal may be operating.”
9.“owned or operated by an electrical corporation, as defined in Section 218 of the Public Utilities Code, a local publicly owned electric utility, as defined in Section 9604 of that code, a gas corporation, as defined in Section 222 of that code, or a telephone corporation, as defined in Section 234 of that code,”
10.“.”
 
OP
OP
M

MagicMtnDan

FRF Addict
Joined
Oct 28, 2011
Posts
7,661
Reaction score
1,793
Location
Magic Mountain
"Taxifornia" doesn't begin to describe what's wrong with this state!

If I were to override the NAV controls and enable DVDs to play while I'm driving (which I wouldn't mind doing) it would be MY responsibility not to be distracted by it. I'd like to do it so we could listen to concert DVDs while driving and others in the vehicle (like Sadie) could watch while I watch the road.

I understand the liability issue but EVERYTHING is a liability because WE HAVE TOO MANY ****ING LAWYERS IN THIS COUNTRY! Why can't the lawyers just go after lawyers?! It'd be like mother animals eating their young. The lawyers would be sated and we would have 1/2 as many lawyers every day. Even cutting their numbers in half every day we'd still have too many lawyers for years. (What's the 1/2 life of a lawyer?)
 

MarkT

FRF Addict
Joined
Mar 4, 2010
Posts
1,202
Reaction score
26
B~ Yes... you are 100% correct. If you have a video playing and the driver can see it you're more likely to be ruled at fault... and even if the state you are in doesn't have a specific law against video screens you would probably get nailed big time for "distracted driving"... maybe even manslaughter if someone was killed.

California modified their law recently... it used to be only "television" was specifically listed as illegal. They've added "video" to keep up with the times.

In California, it appears it is illegal to have a "lockpick" or similar device installed.

(One note... if the screen was just a TV or video player and was not also a navigation aid and/or vehicle display it would be illegal to have it mounted in view of the driver... Period. So don't mount one of those portable video players where the driver can see it or you could get busted even if it's turned off. )
 
Top