Onstar will now be available to third-party developers

By B. David Mehmet, January 16, 2011

On October 6, 2011, I published an article entitled “The GM – Relayrides Partnership Violates Anti-Trust Laws“. GM motors had entered into an agreement with Relayrides, a peer-to-peer car sharing service, to allow it to offer its service via its Onstar system. However, as I wrote in the prior article, that deal violated Anti-Trust Laws. In that article, I also identified how GM could benefit from  an open Onstar system that allowed other peer-to-peer car sharing services to access it. In and around January 8, 2012, GM announced that the Onstar system will now be open to a select group of third-party developers. See GM announcement.

I congratulate GM for its wise decision. The Onstar system is a perfect match for the peer-top-peer car sharing industry. It will promote the industry and the Onstar system by making it affordable to gain access to this technology instead of having each car sharing service install and maintain their own systems.

Virtual Vehicle Rental Sticker (VVRS) and GM’s Onstar System

RentMyCar intends to take advantage of the new Onstar API platform by creating a mobile app. that will work with the provisional patent pending Virtual Vehicle Rental Sticker (VVRS).   The VVRS is to be placed on the windshield of the GM vehicles to place the public on notice that the vehicle is for rent. It is also meant to allow renters to utilize their mobile phones to scan the QR bar code on the VVRS, which will automatically pull up the rental information for that vehicle. And it will allow the renter  to use their mobile phone to  (1)  book the car, (2) open the door, (3) start the car, (4) verify the gas level, (5) view the vehicle maintenance report, (6) buy supplemental insurance for the rental and (7) pay for the rental with the Onstar app. Since the VVRS patent locks down all forms of identifying the vehicle on the street, a renter will have a difficult time finding the rental information for that vehicle without the VVRS. The alternative is to go to the Onstar website or to the third-party peer-to-peer car sharing website to locate the geographical location of the vehicle and then pull up the rental information. However, it the vehicle is parked at another location, or if a consumer walking by the vehicle in route, only the VVRS feature can allow them to immediately grab the rental information on the go. With the VVRS attached to the windshield of the vehicle, the renter merely needs to scan the QR bar code on the VVRS and in a matter of seconds, the rental information will be automatically and immediately displayed on their mobile phone. The person can book the car at that time or they can save the information for a later time or date.

 RentMyCar’s Patent Claims will Help Corner the Market

Onstar had entered into an agreement with Relayrides to offer its customers peer-to-peer car sharing. However, what has been overlooked is the fact that many renters will see the GM vehicles on the street; but they will NOT be able to utilize a facilitated method of pulling up the rental information for that vehicle. For example, a renter walking by a GM vehicle may know that the vehicle is for rent from Relayrides because a sticker placed on the windshield will inform them of that fact. But the renter will NOT be able to utilize their mobile phones to scan a QR bar code or enter a number from that sticker to automatically pull up the rental information on their mobile phones. Instead, the renter must go to the website of Relayrides and locate the geographical location of that vehicle and then pull up the rental information.

The VVRS patent locks down any method of identifying a vehicle on the street to pull up the rental information on a mobile phone (e.g. license plate, registration number, symbol, design, mark, electronic, etc). Thus, Relayrides by law will be prohibited from placing any identification number, symbol, design, electronic emitter or any other identifying mark on their stickers that would be used by a mobile phone or an electronic reader to pull up the rental information. To do so would be to infringe on RentMyCar’s VVRS patent claims.

Although there is a viable use for identification numbers attached to a peer-to-peer car sharing vehicle,  Relayrides has never included an identification number on their stickers nor on their door advertisements that can be utilized with a mobile phone. Instead, Relayrides provides key cards that are held over an electronic sticker on the windshield to open the car door.

A  Partnership that echoes the mistakes of Microsoft’s Windows-IE bundling

by B. David Mehmet

Without a doubt, the partnership between GM and Relayrides has created a peer-to-peer car sharing monopoly that may involve millions of  cars. On the Onstar website, www.onstar.com, they state that the Onstar system is “Built into 30 GM models“.  Thus, GM will be bundling Relayride’s peer-to-peer car sharing service into its Onstar system right off the assembly line. This unfair business practice hinders competition because no GM owner who already has Onstar in their car is going to want to have another peer-to-peer car sharing service install keycard equipment into their cars. Furthermore, peer-to-peer car sharing services will have a higher expense in creating, installing and maintaining keycard equipment similar to the Onstar system into their clients’ cars. This includes the difficulty of convincing car owners with Onstar to use their services.

Anti-Trust laws were created to:

• prohibit agreements or practices of companies that restrict free trade and competition.
• prohibit abusive behavior by a company dominating a market, or anti-competitive practice that leads to such a dominant position.
• prohibit agreements that may be considered as threatening the competitive process, or approving such agreements subject to conditions. For example, offering licenses to other businesses.

In the case of U.S.A. vs. Microsoft 98 cv1232, the United States charged Microsoft with violating the Sherman Act (Anti-Trust law) by bundling Internet Explorer with its Windows operating system. This hindered competition and created an unfair business practice to other providers of Internet browsers whose users had to download their browsers over a slow internet connection. Microsoft paid $1 Billion to settle the lawsuit. And Microsoft was sued again by the EU for bundling their Windows Media Player with their operating system. The EU fined Microsoft $666 Million. Here, GM is manufacturing 30 different models of cars with a built in Onstar system that will offer their customers the peer-to-peer car sharing service of Relayrides and intentionally excludes all other peer-to-peer car sharing services. This situation is worse than the Microsoft case since Microsoft actually allowed other companies to access their operating system while GM is not. In addition, GM has invested monies into Relayrides and it is obtaining a financial benefit from assisting Relayrides to exclude other companies from accessing millions of cars installed with the Onstar system. Thus, the GM-Relayrides partnership creates an unfair business practice that effectively hinders competition. Therefore, the GM-Relayrides partnership has violated anti-trust laws as identified under the Sherman Act.

SOLUTION: The solution would be to have GM open its Onstar system to ALL peer-to-peer car sharing services by selling them licenses. GM car owners can then use the Onstar system to choose one or more peer-to-peer car sharing services to work with. This will create fair competition, it will promote the new peer-to-peer car sharing industry more, it will create a new revenue source for GM and it will create a new sales force for GM to sell its Onstar services via  all the peer-to-peer car sharing companies. The alternative is to terminate the GM-Relayrides partnership that clearly violates anti-trust laws.

Parkswap Your Public Curbside Parking Space for a fee

http://www.parkswap.com/

How many times have you traveled to the City or Town and you had to circle around the block looking for a free public curbside parking space?  How many times have you located a curbside parking space to only have someone in front of you take it before you could? What if you could just pull out your mobile phone and reserve a public curbside parking space before you got there?

Parkswap.com will allow  you to utilize your mobile phone to view local public curbside parking spaces and pay a small fee to have the current car parked there moved for you by the owner for a few hours or days.  Although  a public parking space is NOT individually owned by any single person, a person parked in a public curbside parking space has a legal right to remain in that parking space until they are legally required to move the car. e.g. They must move the car for street cleaning or non-parking hours. However, the majority of these car owners would sit in their cars and wait for the street cleaning truck to pass by and they would then park the car in the same public curbside space. Car owners in the City would do this for weeks and months at a time, which prevents other drivers from accessing those public parking spaces. ParkSwap would allow these car owners to agree to voluntarily give up those public parking spaces for a fee.

There appears to be NO laws that would prohibit these car owner from voluntarily AGREEING to move their cars from a public curbside parking space upon demand and for a fee. In the alternative, these car owners will continue to park their cars in those public curbside parking spaces for weeks at a time and even months at a time.  Thus, Parkswap creates a new and novel business method that allows for public curbside parking space swapping for a fee. This would help to releases thousands of public parking spaces being held by a local resident, it helps car owners pay for the cost of their cars, it helps the environment by reducing the fossil fuel emissions caused by driving around looking for a parking space and it creates jobs by allowing car owners to intentionally reserve parking spaces for other drivers instead of parking in them for weeks or months at a time.  For example, a tractor trailer moving people in or out of an apartment in the City can purchase a few hours of parking space from local resident car owners. Once the tractor trailer no longer needs the parking spaces, the cars return to the same parking spaces as they do when the street cleaning truck passes by.

Therefore, the public curbside parking space  is NOT being rented out; but instead, the AGREEMENT TO RELEASE the parking space for a few hours or days when someone is NOT required to by law is the BENEFIT that is being for.

Oregon follows in the footsteps of California

In September 2010, California passed AB 1871 that promoted the personal vehicle sharing  market. The law converted millions of privately owned vehicles into potential rental cars by removing the threat of losing insurance coverage if a person rented out their vehicle.

Oregon representative Cannon and Dingfelder have introduced house bill 3149 pertaining to “Personal Vehicle Sharing”. In summary, the bill contains the following provisions (http://www.leg.state.or.us/11reg/measpdf/hb3100.dir/hb3149.intro.pdf):

“Establishes standards for personal vehicle sharing programs. Requires personal vehicle sharing program to provide motor vehicle liability insurance for periods when vehicle is in use by program. Prohibits motor vehicle liability insurers from canceling policy or reclassifying use from private passenger motor vehicle to commercial use vehicle because of vehicle’s use in personal vehicle sharing program.”

Recently a New York legislator contacted RentMyCar to discuss the possibility of introducing a similar bill that California has passed. There is NO doubt that a similar bill in New York, if passed, will benefit millions. Especially in the metropolitan area. There are vehicles parked in the street all week long that are only moved on street cleaning days. These vehicles can be put into good use for the local community. The city could also make money by selling vehicle sharing permits and designating parking spots for those privately owned vehicles.

Furthermore, building owners can designate parking spots in their buildings that would allow one tenant to rent out their vehicle to another tenant.  Not only would this help to eliminate the need of a tenant to buy their own vehicle and to help another tenant pay their expenses; but the building owner can promote personal vehicle sharing in their building to provide an incentive to potential renters. What better option to renting out a car than to be able to simply rent it from another tenant in the same building.

There is NO doubt that personal vehicle car sharing is going to be huge once people start understanding how it works and the market settles into a conformed business method. Not only is the economy forcing people to look for other avenues to earn income because of lost jobs and high gas prices; but government support and concerns for the environment is another factor helping to promote this new market.

RentMyCar’s Car  Sharing Search Engine Displays specific geographical locations of cars from multiple car sharing services on one page, and connects them to a single master keycard.

WHAT IS A RENTMYCAR MASTER KEYCARD?

The Shocking connection

In the worst case, a Vehicle owner who rents out their vehicle under the new personal car sharing market can be charged with manslaughter if they fail to regularly inspect their vehicle and a defect in the vehicle caused their renter to get into an accident that killed someone (e.g. bad brakes). Such a defect can be caused by a prior renter and it can go unnoticed by the vehicle owner absent periodic vehicle inspections. Thus, car rental laws mandate that vehicle owners perform periodic vehicle inspections.

Full insurance coverage does not mean you are fully protected

You continuously hear how car sharing services like RelayRides are providing a million dollar insurance policy to their members, which they claim will fully cover them from any liability. This is false. Once a vehicle owner starts to rent their vehicle to the public, they will be subjected to State and Federal car rental laws. One such law requires a vehicle owner to REGULARLY inspect their vehicle. For example, California Vehicle Code Sect. 24010 requires a vehicle owner who is engaged in the rental of their vehicles to regularly inspect their vehicles. Failure to regularly inspect the vehicle, which then causes a renter to get into an accident due to a defect in the vehicle may establish a negligence per se claim against the Vehicle owner, or even gross negligence to establish criminal charges. Thus, it does NOT matter if you have a $100 Million insurance policy on your vehicle, you can still be held liable for your failure to regularly inspect your vehicle while renting it out. http://law.onecle.com/california/vehicle/24010.html

Your renter can come after you personally for their accident in your vehicle

What happens if your vehicle is defective and your renter gets into an accident that causes the insurance company to indemnify you and your renter from the other driver’s claim; but not from your renter’s claim against you? What if that defect caused the death of your renter and the renter’s estate comes after you personally for $10 Million? The following case may shed some light on the situation, which allowed the driver to sue the rental company for their personal injury due to negligent maintenance of the vehicle.

“Accident victim’s claim for personal injuries against truck rental company was not barred by Graves Amendment which prohibited negligence claims against car-rental companies based solely on theory of vicarious liability, since victim’s claim was based on allegations that company negligently maintained its rental truck. 49 U.S.C.A. § 30106.”

Collazo v. MTA -New York City Transit
74 A.D.3d 642, 905 N.Y.S.2d 30
N.Y.A.D. 1 Dept.,2010

You could be charged with manslaughter for your renter’s accident

In the worst case, you could come home from work to the arms of the police who place you under arrest and charge you with manslaughter for the accident of your renter due to a defect in your vehicle. Imagine the shock on your face and the faces of your family that are full of tears when they carry you away. How about the pain, suffering and legal costs that follow. For example, if your vehicle had bad brakes due to a prior renter damaging them, which caused your next renter to hit and kill a pedestrian, or themselves. And an inspection thereafter revealed the bad brakes, which you could have uncovered upon a reasonable inspection. You could be charged with manslaughter. Surely, the decedent’s family will want your head on a platter and they will come after you relentlessly.You better be ready to prove that you have been regularly inspecting your vehicle. This evidence alone could head off civil and criminal claims against you. And do not depend on your yearly DMV inspection to save you. It won’t save you because it does not prove that you have been regularly inspecting your vehicle as required by State and Federal rental laws. Thus, anything you do to create evidence that you have been regularly inspecting your vehicle  is an intelligent effort to keep you and your family safe from your renter’s accident. It is easy to say it will never happen to me; but accidents happen every day. And since you will be putting your lives of your family in the hands of a stranger, don’t you think it will be smart to collect this evidence before you ruin your life and your family’s life. It will take only one time to ruin it.

“Guilty Pleas in Vehicular Homicide” Published Wednesday, Dec. 16, 2009; Times Herald Staff http://www.timesherald.com/articles/2009/12/16/news/doc4b287d929ff59499257951.txt

“We want people in similar situations who are responsible for inspections, if they decide to cut corners and not do their jobs properly, we’re going to hold them criminally responsible,” Zoll said. …The three defendants await sentencing (Owner, driver and mechanic were convicted of vehicular homicide for putting a defective vehicle on the road that caused an accident and killed a person).

The bottom line here is that if you get involved with personal car sharing, which is a great idea, you MUST be a responsible adult and regularly inspect your vehicle and be ready to provide evidence of such inspections. Therefore, enjoy personal car sharing; but do it intelligently to protect yourself and your family.

If you do not heed this advice, I can see the headlines now:  “A Personal car sharing member has been charged with manslaughter“.

This mini-post is to prepare you for an article I am writing and about to release that discloses serious civil and criminal liability in the implementation of California’s new law AB 1871 when applied to other laws. This liability could place a vehicle owner in serious problems that could ruin their life even if their vehicle is properly insured.

The article is being prepared now and it will be published the first week in January 2011.  A WORD OF WARNING….before you rent out your vehicle to anyone, you must read the article. I assure you, you will understand the serious civil and criminal liability that may befall you  if you are the unlucky one. The article will contain  verifiable statutes and case law. Do NOT listen to any personal car sharing company that tells you you are protected because they are offering you insurance coverage. You can still be personally liable even with their insurance coverage…

Full article to be posted first week of January 2011. The article is entitled: