2008 Tundra Trd Limited 4x4 5.7l Nav Leather Sunroof Bluetooth Back Up Camera on 2040-cars

Auto blog

Toyota asking NHTSA for waiver on 206K vehicles

Toyota has filed a petition with the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration asking for a waiver to avoid recalling about 206,271 2012-2014 Camry, Avalon, Corolla, Sienna, Tundra and Tacoma vehicles, some of its most popular models. The affected vehicles contain seat heaters that might not meet government flammability standards. Toyota says in the waiver that "the chance of fire or flame induced by a malfunctioning seat heater is essentially zero," according to The Detroit News. The automaker notes the part makes up less than one percent of the seat's weight.
Initial reports of the problem arose in late January when Toyota issued a stop-sale order for 2013 and 2014 model year versions of those vehicles. The automaker says that there have no been reports of fires or injuries in the affected cars, and the problem was discovered during testing by the South Korean government, according to The Detroit News.
We've reached out to Toyota for comment on this development and are awaiting a reply. We'll update this post if and when we hear back.

Australia may offer money to keep Toyota making cars there

In the wake of last month's announcement that Ford will cease automotive and engine production in Australia after 2016, many are wondering what the country's other automakers will do. Holden has already confirmed it will stay the course despite Ford's exit.
Much of the GM subsidiary's reason for sticking around has to do with a deal made last year between Holden and the Australian government. In order to secure a GM investment of $1 billion and a commitment to keep manufacturing in Australia through 2022, the government threw in an extra $215 million. According to Australia's Minister for Innovation and Industry, Greg Combet, the government is now in talks with Toyota for a similar deal.
Toyota operates one plant in Australia, the Altona manufacturing and engine plant in Victoria. The facility produces the Camry, Camry Hybrid and Australasia-only Aurion for both the local market and export. The report from GoAuto indicates that negotiations with the Australian government would include adding production of a third, all-new model at Altona, possibly the new RAV4, because it shares many parts with the Camry.

Ford fights back against patent trolls

Some people are just awful. Some organizations are just as awful. And when those people join those organizations, we get stories like this one, where Ford has spent the past several years combatting so-called patent trolls. According to Automotive News, these malicious organizations have filed over a dozen lawsuits against the company since 2012. They work by purchasing patents, only to later accuse companies of misusing intellectual property, despite the fact that the so-called patent assertion companies never actually, you know, do anything with said intellectual property. AN reports that both Hyundai and Toyota have been victimized by these companies, with the former forced to pay $11.5 million to a company called Clear With Computers. Toyota, meanwhile, settled with Paice LLC, over its hybrid tech. The world's largest automaker agreed to pay $5 million, on top of $98 for every hybrid it sold (if the terms of the deal included each of the roughly 1.5 million hybrids Toyota sold since 2000, the company would have owed $147 million). Including the previous couple of examples, AN reports 107 suits were filed against automakers last year alone. But Ford is taking action to prevent further troubles... kind of. The company has signed on with a firm called RPX, in what sounds strangely like a protection racket. Automakers like Ford pay RPX around $1.5 million each year for access to its catalog of patents, which it spent nearly $1 billion building. "We take the protection and licensing of patented innovations very seriously," Ford told AN via email. "And as many smart businesses are doing, we are taking proactive steps to protect against those seeking patent infringement litigation." What are your thoughts on this? Should this patent business be better managed? Is it reasonable that companies purchase patents only to file suit against the companies that build actual products? Have your say in Comments.