Published October 30, 2020

Question 1

MELROSE — In addition to voting for president, United States Senator, Representative in Congress, State Senator and State Representative, Massachusetts voters casting ballots in the Nov. 3 election face two ballot questions.

Question 1 pertains to Motor Vehicle Mechanical Data. A “Yes” vote would provide motor vehicle owners and independent repair facilities with expanded access to wirelessly transmitted mechanical data related to their vehicles’ maintenance and repair. A “No” vote would make no changes to the current law.

According to the summary in the Secretary of the Commonwealth’s Information for Voters booklet, the proposed law would require that motor vehicle owners and independent repair facilities be provided with expanded access to mechanical data related to vehicle maintenance and repair.

Starting with model year 2022, the proposed law would require manufacturers of motor vehicles sold in Massachusetts to equip any such vehicles that use telematics systems –- systems that collect and wirelessly transmit mechanical data to a remote server –- with a standardized open access data platform. Owners of motor vehicles with telematics systems would get access to mechanical data through a mobile device application. With vehicle owner authorization, independent repair facilities (those not affiliated with a manufacturer) and independent dealerships would be able to retrieve mechanical data from, and send commands to, the vehicle for repair, maintenance, and diagnostic testing.

Under the proposed law, manufacturers would not be allowed to require authorization before owners or repair facilities could access mechanical data stored in a motor vehicle’s on-board diagnostic system, except through an authorization process standardized across all makes and models and administered by an entity unaffiliated with the manufacturer. The proposed law would require the Attorney General to prepare a notice for prospective motor vehicle owners and lessees explaining telematics systems and the proposed law’s requirements concerning access to the vehicle’s mechanical data.

Under the proposed law, dealers would have to provide prospective owners with, and prospective owners would have to acknowledge receipt of, the notice before buying or leasing a vehicle. Failure to comply with these notice requirements would subject motor vehicle dealers to sanctions by the applicable licensing authority. Motor vehicle owners and independent repair facilities could enforce this law through state consumer protection laws and recover civil penalties of the greater of treble damages or $10,000 per violation.

What a “Yes” vote means

According to Mass Right to Repair, a “yes” vote on Question 1 “will guarantee that as technology advances, drivers can continue to get their cars repaired where they want. We passed the first Right to Repair law in 2012, but as new cars become more computerized auto manufacturers are using a loophole to restrict access to data needed to diagnose problems, make repairs, and perform maintenance. This means car owners are steered toward more expensive dealer repair options. Vote YES to protect independent repair shops and preserve your ability to shop around. Voting YES provides access ONLY to mechanical and repair information, not personal information. A YES vote ensures that YOU will have the choice to provide access to the repair information necessary to fix your car to your local independent repair shop even as cars become more computerized. It’s your car, you paid for it, you should get it fixed where you want.”

What a “No” vote means

The Coalition for Safe and Secure Data advocates voting a “No” on Question 1. They argue that Question 1 “has nothing to do with fixing cars. Question 1 is a data grab by third parties who want to gather your personal vehicle information and access it remotely, including location data in real time. Domestic violence advocates warn how dangerous this information could be. Jane Doe, the Massachusetts Coalition Against Sexual Assault and Domestic Violence, wrote, “Access to vehicle data, particularly call logs and GPS location, enables persons who perpetrate abuse to possess the tools necessary to track and monitor their victim.” A similar proposal failed in California after the California Coalition Against Sexual Assault warned, “from this information, a third party, such as a sexual predator, could stalk and/or harm victims.” Privacy advocates, cybersecurity experts, and domestic violence advocacy groups urge you to vote NO on Question 1.”