Search Archive

NO installer is ready to put ducatiboy circuit

By eu_phoria · Jul 20, 2006in General💬 31 posts👁️ 5,970 views
Page 2 of 2
Posted Jul 29, 2006 · 10:25 UTC#26
stic2it said:
I had my installer who refused to install the circuit, run the wires too the drivers side kick panel...the only question is, I think they installed the parking brake correctly, because video will only play with it down but flashing the lights works just fine...If I install the flasher as is will it work?


Yes, it will work. As long as the parking brake is disengaged when you start the car. And if you engage the parking brake once the car is running, you will have to shut off the car, disengage the parking brake, and restart the car before the flasher will "work" again.
Posted Jul 30, 2006 · 14:25 UTC#27
guitar7272 said:
In NJ, it is illegal to have motion video playing on a screen in view of the driver. I had a small monitor that was no longer hooked up in my last truck and I couldnt even pass inspection until I removed the screen. They gave me a red rejected sticker and a month or two grace period to remove it.

I dont think, however, that it is illegal to have the navigation features unlocked; it's just a liability issue that no one wants to take responsibility for. Thank the lawyers and the greedy jackasses that take no responsibility for their own actions.


Why wouldn't they pass you? The law in most states, as you stated above, is that you "cannot have motion video playing in the drivers view." You just had a screen, which is perfectly legal in any state, drivers view or not.
Posted Aug 02, 2006 · 21:46 UTC#28
In NJ, it is illegal to have motion video playing on a screen in view of the driver. I had a small monitor that was no longer hooked up in my last truck and I couldnt even pass inspection until I removed the screen. They gave me a red rejected sticker and a month or two grace period to remove it.

I dont think, however, that it is illegal to have the navigation features unlocked; it's just a liability issue that no one wants to take responsibility for. Thank the lawyers and the greedy jackasses that take no responsibility for their own actions.


Don't blame the lawyers, dude. They are doing their job. If Pioneer sold completely unlocked HUs, then fucktards would be trying to watch movies, play XBOX, or whatever while driving. Pioneer is protecting itself from liability. And assume that they did sell unlocked HUs... when fucktards did try to watch The Matrix or play HALO on the XBOX while driving, then Pioneer deserves to have the balls sued off of it for selling a dangerous product. That's the beauty of products liability law. By making a safety measure, no matter how easily bypassed (thanks, DucatiBoy!), Pioneer has thus covered its ass.
Posted Aug 02, 2006 · 23:08 UTC#29
thisiszachary said:
That's the beauty of products liability law. By making a safety measure, no matter how easily bypassed (thanks, DucatiBoy!), Pioneer has thus covered its ass.


Well yah, but what about my ass? I want to cover it as well. I'm happy to help all you guys out with this little circuit and all but I want to cover my ass as well. I'm hoping the disclaimer I ship with each one is enough.
Posted Aug 03, 2006 · 00:08 UTC#30
ducatiboy said:
thisiszachary said:
That's the beauty of products liability law. By making a safety measure, no matter how easily bypassed (thanks, DucatiBoy!), Pioneer has thus covered its ass.


Well yah, but what about my ass? I want to cover it as well. I'm happy to help all you guys out with this little circuit and all but I want to cover my ass as well. I'm hoping the disclaimer I ship with each one is enough.


Well, DucatiBoy, like any potentially dangerous product (and that term is used broadly, as most people wouldn't consider a navigation system as "potentially dangerous"), there are workarounds. If someone removes a speed governor from a car, or removes safety guards (or alters the "dead man's handle") from a lawnmower or other dangerous lawn equipment and then injures themselves, they (the end user) has no recourse to sue the manufacturer. The end user can't sue the manufacturer of the scissors, tools, or other methods of alteration used to remove the safety features. Once the end user has removed the safety features, he assumes all risks of injury. If I recall my first year torts course correctly, the user's alteration of the manufacturer's safety features is called a "superceding, intervening" event that the manufacturer cannot foresee. Of course, if the manufacturer could reasonably foresee the alteration, then that would be a different story, but that is for a jury to decide! :wink:

In other words, by incorporating a disclaimer on your product, you are relieving yourself of liability if someone purposely alters the original manufacturer's safety features.

Of course, I'm not a lawyer (yet), and this cannot be construed as legal advice... merely the opinion of someone (a citizen-consumer) who is awaiting the results of the bar exam.
Posted Aug 07, 2006 · 11:55 UTC#31
you just could'nt wait to tell us that, could ya?
Page 2 of 2