Quote:
Originally Posted by NotSoJDM
This will be a never ending battle between those who tune for a living and the DIYer. Personally I agree that if I am paying for a service I own the byproduct. Just as the byproduct of an employee of a company is owned by the company.
Those who are not a DIYer will not mind paying for a tune with a set it and forget it approach.
I think the disagreement comes to those who want to make hardware changes and thus make changes to the ECU maps as changes are made to the car. It could be the gap in knowledge where someone is comfortable making small incremental changes based on additional mods, but is not comfortable drafting an entirely new tune when they transition from NA to FI. Is it fair to limit that ability by locking the tune they paid for? Not in my opinion. Does it mean they could take advantage of your base map and exploit it on the Internet? Yes it does, and this is where the disagreement comes in to play. For honest people who value others work, this is a non-issue. Those looking to use the fruits of someone else's labor to make a profit for themselves, are those who you are trying to avoid and I understand that.
This reply isn't intended to argue one way or another. It's just an attempt to explain my views on both sides and acknowledging that your statement of agreeing to disagree is as far as it will get.
|
There is somewhat of a middle ground; some software we work with allows the tuner to assign a level of adjustability to the calibration. this allows the enduser to mess with stuff like MAF transfer, and some scalars, as well as limiters, but protects things like hard won cam timing table input, etc.