In January 2025, the legal battle between the Alliance for Automotive Innovation (Auto Innovators) and Massachusetts Attorney General Andrea Campbell saw a new development. The case, which has been ongoing since 2020, is centered around the state’s Data Access Law. This law, approved by voters in November 2020, expands Massachusetts’ right to repair law and requires Original Equipment Manufacturers (OEMs) to create a standardized diagnostic system that all users can access, regardless of whether they have permission from the OEM.
The Alliance for Automotive Innovation, which represents many major car manufacturers, argues that the law puts them in a tough spot. They claim that the law forces them to comply with new requirements that could be unsafe and difficult to implement. The dispute has now entered a new phase, with a new judge overseeing the case and additional issues around witness testimony.
The Background of the Case
The case first began in 2020 after Massachusetts voters approved a new Data Access Law by referendum. This law essentially aims to make vehicle-generated data more accessible for repair shops, car owners, and others, even if they do not have permission from the OEMs. For Auto Innovators, this is a big concern. They argue that allowing anyone to access this data could create security risks, violate federal laws, and lead to problems in car repair and safety.
Auto Innovators filed their lawsuit against Massachusetts Attorney General Andrea Campbell in 2020, challenging the law. In 2021, a trial was held to review the arguments from both sides. The court delayed its decision multiple times, and now, in January 2025, the case has seen a new twist with a new judge taking over.
The New Judge and Legal Disputes
U.S. District Judge Denise J. Casper is now in charge of the case. On January 24, 2025, a new legal document was filed by Campbell’s office, opposing a motion from Auto Innovators to recall several witnesses to testify. These witnesses are crucial for the Alliance’s case as they could provide important testimony on developments since the trial, especially on cybersecurity concerns and how companies are adjusting their strategies in response to the law.
Campbell’s office argues that Auto Innovators is trying to “re-try” its case by introducing new witnesses and evidence that haven’t gone through the normal legal processes of disclosure and discovery. They claim that allowing these new witnesses would be unfair to the state and could result in “gamesmanship,” where Auto Innovators is attempting to gain an unfair advantage in the case.
The Dispute Over Witnesses
One of the key figures in the dispute is Wayne Weikel, who is Auto Innovators’ Vice President of State Government Affairs. Auto Innovators wants Weikel to testify about a recent law passed in Maine that requires the Maine Attorney General to set up an independent entity to control vehicle data access. The Alliance believes that this new law could help address some of the concerns raised by Massachusetts’ Data Access Law. However, Campbell’s office opposes Weikel’s testimony, arguing that he was never on the witness list and his testimony should not be allowed.
In addition to Weikel, Auto Innovators also wants to recall three other witnesses: Bryson Bort, Kevin Tierney, and Steven Douglas. Bort and Tierney are experts in cybersecurity, and their testimony would focus on the risks posed by the Data Access Law, especially in terms of vehicle data security. Douglas, a retired executive from the Alliance, would testify about changes in compliance efforts since the trial, particularly regarding the shift in focus to Maine’s new law.
Campbell’s office argues that allowing these witnesses to testify would violate the fairness of the trial, as their testimony hasn’t been properly disclosed in advance.
The Potential Impact of the Case
The outcome of this case could have a significant impact on the future of vehicle data access laws across the United States. If the court sides with Auto Innovators, it could set a precedent that could make it harder for states to require car manufacturers to make vehicle data accessible for repair shops and other third parties. On the other hand, if Massachusetts prevails, it could strengthen state rights to regulate vehicle repair and data access.
For now, both sides continue to make their case, and the legal battle seems far from over. With the new judge in place, the next steps in the trial will be closely watched by those in the automotive and tech industries.
(Source : repairerdrivennews.com)
