Right-to-repair advocates believe that car owners should have full ownership of the technology embedded in their vehicles
Mazda recently surprised customers by requiring them to sign up for a subscription in order to keep certain services. Now, notable right-to-repair advocate Louis Rossmann is calling out the brand.
It’s important to clarify that there are two very different types of remote start we’re talking about here. The first type is the one many people are familiar with where you use the key fob to start the vehicle. The second method involves using another device like a smartphone to start the car. In the latter, connected services do the heavy lifting.
Transition to paid services
What is wild is that Mazda used to offer the first option on the fob. Now, it only offers the second kind, where one starts the car via phone through its connected services for a $10 monthly subscription, which comes to $120 a year. Rossmann points out that one individual, Brandon Rorthweiler, developed a workaround in 2023 to enable remote start without Mazda’s subscription fees.
However, according to Ars Technica, Mazda filed a DMCA takedown notice to kill that open-source project. The company claimed it contained code that violated “[Mazda’s] copyright ownership” and used “certain Mazda information, including proprietary API information.”
I acknowledge the cell connectivity in the car costs Mazda money to keep running. Most cars with that kind of connectivity charge for it. But, I think 10/month is too much.
I acknowledge the cell connectivity in the car costs Mazda money to keep running
They should factor it into the price of the car. Maybe not a lifetime license, but some decent amount of time with a reasonable price to renew it for a few more years.
The connectivity doesn’t work that well anyway. I don’t give a crap about remote start and climate control but my wife uses it when it’s super cold out and only at work. Not worth paying for at all, even from her POV. The car (CX-90 PHEV) is still fantastic to drive.