[Fabulist]

Open letter and petition to Fisker Automotive regarding CIU Software​

We, the undersigned, are Karma owners and enthusiasts. Some of us bought our cars from Fisker Automotive in 2012 while others began their ownership experience more recently, and many of us were also investors in Fisker Automotive. What we all share is a deep and abiding passion for this unique car and its prominent place in automotive history.

For many of us, our devotion has been severely tested over the last four years through Fisker Automotive's fall and the Bankruptcy proceedings that followed. However, despite the hardships, such was our loyalty that we kept our Karmas on the road through dogged determination, and often at great expense, with the help of a few former dealers and repair centers.

As part of our efforts, we formed a community where we supported and assisted one another by sharing information and our experiences with the owners, enthusiasts, prospective purchasers and even skeptics. We encouraged and helped like-minded individuals who were tempted by the beauty and excitement of the Karma and wanted advice on buying and keeping a Karma. We were advocates and cheerleaders for the technology and the brand throughout the dark times, and served as ambassadors for the brand by talking to anyone who was interested in our cars, attending events, and promoting the Karma as a transformative development in transportation.

We were all thrilled when new investment and commitment promised the revival of the Karma and the development of future products. We all watched with great interest as the darkness of the great fall began to abate and the company began to move forward again, and greatly appreciated the support we received, particularly in the form of updated software for our Karmas, that the company provided for our cars free of charge.

As part of the natural progression, we were recently informed that the most recent Central Infotainment Unit ("CIU") software release will be the last for our Karmas. We understand that because of the limited number of Karmas that run the current version of the CIU software, continuing to develop it does not make business or technological sense, and that upgrading the Karma's technology requires transitioning to a new CIU platform and new CIU software. But we also believe that abandoning the current CIU software is not the only viable option. Third party independent software developers, some of them Karma owners, could continue to enhance and update the CIU software to provide the very limited number of existing Karmas with better and additional functionality and bug fixes at no cost and almost no risk to Karma Automotive if they could have access to the software's source code under appropriate Open Source license.

We are writing to request Karma Automotive to release the source code for the CIU software that Karma Automotive will no longer support or upgrade, under an appropriately drafted Open Source license to any interested developer that agrees to abide by the terms of that license. The terms could include, for example, indemnity provisions for Karma Automotive for the use of any third party software.

In making this request, we acknowledge that Karma Automotive has legitimate concerns about releasing the CIU software. As Karma Automotive has previously stated, the inherent complexity of the CIU software, combined with reliance on an archaic development platform and the loss of expertise during the tumultuous bankruptcy period, present enormous challenges to continued development of the CIU software. But in our view, these factors argue even more strongly for opening up the development opportunity to third party developers to tackle the complexity and arcane environment and attempt to create an improved version of the software while Karma focuses on the future products. We suggest that there is no downside for Karma. If a third party developer can successfully create working CIU software, it will help the existing owners at no cost, and without any distraction, to Karma Automotive. And if they fail, they do so at their own cost and we are no worse off than when we started.

We also acknowledge that the CIU software represents Karma Automotive's intellectual property that deserves protection. But if Karma Automotive plans on abandoning the software due to a move to a new CIU platform, allowing third-party developers access to it, under an Open Source license, in order to extend and enhance the software would benefit both the owners and Karma Automotive. The benefit to owners is obvious, and Karma Automotive would also benefit by helping keep first-generation Karmas on the road longer as a testament to the robustness and flexibility of the design. In addition, there will be little or no competition between the updated Karmas and the Revero because the Revero's enhanced capability will far exceed any possible upgrades to the old CIU software. To the contrary, the longevity of the first generation Karmas would enhance and further validate the allure and credibility of the Revero design.

Karma Automotive has gained tremendous goodwill among the existing owners by reviving the company, supporting us, and most importantly actively listening to us. It is in that spirit that we submit this request for consideration by Karma Automotive management. Everyone involved shares a desire for continued improvement of the entire product family, past, present and future We believe that providing the CIU software source code to interested developers under a properly drafted Open Source license would be a win-win-win for the owners, for the company, and for the Revero.

 

[Fabulist]

Signed, VIN -0641

 

[Fabulist]

Signed as Proxy with permission: VIN 0750.

 

[Fabulist]

Signatures from Facebook Post:

VIN 1085
VIN 0076
VIN 2250
VIN 2585

 

[Fabulist]

The final signature tally was 53. I just posted the signed petition on the official Karma Automotive forum. Feel free to add your support there as well. Thank you great owners and enthusiasts for your support.

 

[Fabulist]

We have our answer from Karma Automotive:

Dear Owners of 2012 vehicles,

We hope you will forgive the time it took for us to draft this response; we wanted to investigate and address every option before getting back to you.

Karma Automotive has, from the very beginning, done its best to provide support to owners of the 2012 vehicles. We are all familiar with the stories of how hard it was to have a beautiful and beloved car totaled for want of a bumper or a side view mirror that was no longer available. As such, we have allocated – and spent – hundreds of thousands of dollars on programs designed to make your ownership journey easier. Those programs include re-launching the parts distribution network, rebuilding a parts supply chain, the CSP program, the Powertrain Protection Program, the Certified Pre Owned Program and frequent updates to the vehicle software.

We tasked our engineers to create an all-new infotainment system for the Revero. As such, the hardware in the 2012 Karma is completely different from the hardware in the Revero. A retrofit is not a viable solution.

We know that aftermarket companies, as well as individuals, develop their own retrofit and upgrade options. They are free to do this. It is their opportunity and risk. You will appreciate that we, as a vehicle manufacturer, cannot endorse or participate in any such endeavors. The vehicles we bring to market require thousands of man-hours devoted to the products and systems that end up in a production vehicle - ensuring that the entire product, including systems like the CIU, meet all legal and regulatory requirements which include vehicle safety and emissions. Among other things, meeting those requirements means the validation of systems within the vehicle as a whole. A CIU system might, for example, appear to meet standards in a stand-alone environment—but when put into the entire vehicle may cause unintended consequences that mean the vehicle as a whole does not meet the required standards. That is why we, and, to our knowledge, every other OEM does not supply source code to third parties except under terms and conditions that meet commercial and legal requirements.

While we appreciate the suggestion that an open source arrangement could be crafted with requirements for indemnification from third parties otherwise unknown to us, we need to point out that an indemnity is only good if the person providing the indemnification has the financial wherewithal to back it up. You will appreciate that it is not practical for us to accept indemnification from any third party otherwise prepared to agree to any open source conditions that might be put in place.

As we have stated in our previous posts, the Baseline 535 software update marks the end of our planned development for 2012 Fisker vehicles. We are now fully focused on the development of our own vehicles, and the successful launch of our company. We will continue our support of 2012 Fisker vehicles through the production and supply of spare parts and in training for our authorized service centers and retailers. We hope you continue to share the journey with us.

While I am not exactly shocked at the response, I am nevertheless very disappointed that Karma Automotive has chosen to orphan the original cars' CIU and move on to greener pastures. This is not a good day for Karma owners, and I wonder if the Revero owners will be in our shoes in few years.

 

[Fabulist]

I was told at the Atlanta Revero event by Joost that this will never happen. No update planned on a Fisker. They want you to buy the new car. Did you ever send this @Fabulist?

Yes, the petition was submitted, and declined by Karma Automotive.

Interestingly, we were getting new signatures on the petition well after Karma declined it. It was very disappointing, to say the least.

 

[Fabulist]

Here is the reason Joost gave me way they would never do it. He said something as follows:

Let's say we did allow this and you update the car software. Well now you sell it to a new owner. He didn't ok this 3rd party software and something goes wrong with the car or causes an accident. They could sue Karma as liable for ok'ing the 3rd party use. He said it opens the door to issues and liabilty they don't want. He said at some point we have to say ok, we gave you the 535 update and now is time to upgrade the car to the new Revero if you want more.

"Someone may sue us" is probably the weakest and laziest excuse for not doing something in business, and I am saying that as a practicing lawyer. In my experience, if a company wants to do something, they find a way to mitigate or contain the risk. I don't think any lawyer has ever talked any CEO out of doing something the CEO wanted to do for business reasons, regardless of the risk. But when a business executive does not want to do something, their go-to excuse is that that it may lead to a lawsuit, and "the lawyers" advised them not to do it.

The fact is that just existing in the US can expose you to lawsuits, that's part of the business risk of operating any company. In my personal opinion (no legal advice here) Karma's excuse is pretty weak, for a variety of reasons. Following their logic, any car maker could be potentially liable for any modification to any car, simply because the car maker did not make it impossible for the owner to add after-market parts to their cars. That's not how product liability law works. an unauthorized modification actually provides a defense to what is typically a strict liability case of product defect. In addition, the CIU code does not operate any safety system in the car and the chances of it causing an accident is pretty miniscule.

Yes, you can sued for pretty much any reason in the US, but if that risk alone was enough to stop business people, we will still be sitting in caves banging rocks together.

 

[Fabulist]

So I am suggesting: "let it go". Karma Automotive did a lot for prior owners at their expense for good will. My thanks to them and I accept the fact that I have a 5 year old car that runs well, and looks great. I have long considered the price of the Fisker sunk. If I keep it another 10-20K mile for 3-5 years, then so be it. The Revero potentially gives us some market place residual value. I will have to see what Karma Automotive and others have in the market place.

I agree that Karma has been very generous with existing owners, and i don't see any contradiction between that acknowledgement and the request signed by over 100 Karma owners that we would like Karma Automotive to make the software available for third-party development to support existing owners. If Karma is no longer supporting the CIU software, and someone wants to pick up the mantle at no charge to Fisker, I don't see the downside.

 

[Fabulist]

With all this being said, why does Karma Automotive continuously bash us, publicly? Hard to let that go when we have not done anything wrong or in conflict. I cannot agree with the goodwill part, in whole. Looking at the multitude of issues that the new software has caused (many forum posts). I.e. BL530 removing battery balancing and 535 causing blinking ready lights, which require hard resets etc. There are many many forum posts which outline these issues.

We have spent hundreds of thousands in litigation with Karma and now finally have a judgement for many hundreds of thousands against them. Perspective is a h_e_l_l of a thing!

Good for you guys! I believe Karma Automotive see you as a threat to sales.
I would rather update my 2012 Karma than spend the money to essentially buy the same car again. They probably thought keeping you busy with legal issues would distract you from product development.

Interesting paradox that @PowerSource continues to develop new products in spite of being sued by Karma, when Karma refuses to release their CIU source code because maybe, someday, someone, could possibly sue them. As I said before, the possibility of a lawsuit is seldom an obstacle if the company and its leadership really believe in doing something. A good lawyer usually finds a way through if the management is motivated.

 

[Fabulist]

mmm I would imagine KA says let no good deed go "unpunished". They didn't have to give us 535, or anything. If they just let the court ordered warranty prevail, found new dealers, and moved to their new car production while leaving the Fisker owners behind, they would have not been litigated by PS. I expect they will learn from that lesson. Expect NOTHING more for Fisker Owner. Way to go PS. You may have won..... we may have lost.

@aijohn, as we acknowledged in the Petition, the Fisker Karma community appreciates the effort and expense Karma Automotive has put into helping existing owners. Our request was not meant to punish KA, just to extend the life of our Karmas at no further expense to KA. This was carefully framed as a win-win proposal.

I will let @PowerSource comment on the litigation if it is appropriate, but I want to point out that without knowing the full nature of the litigation, you can't assume that it involved anything that would relate to KA's support of existing owners, or that it would impact the KA's desire or ability to continue to support existing Karma owners.

 

[Fabulist]

Hey fab, is this thread even relevant any more?

Mainly to keep shaming Karma Automotive. Last I checked, people were still signing the same petition on KA’s website as well.

 

[Fabulist]

Any update?

No change in Karma's position, as announced in this post,
AFAIK: http://www.fiskerbuzz.com/forums/13...-sign-your-vin-if-you-agree-7.html#post264937