1997 Toyota Camry Le Sedan V6 One Owner, Cali Car, Clean Carfax/autocheck, Great on 2040-cars

Auto blog

Audi, Toyota land on MIT's list of 50 Most Disruptive Companies

MIT Technology Review, a magazine all about innovation, has announced its list of the 50 most disruptive companies in 2013, and both Audi and Toyota made the cut. While the term "most disruptive" may carry a negative connotation in most uses (especially in the classroom), the acknowledgement in this case is an accolade, signifying that the company is at the forefront of its industry. In a nutshell, a disruptive company is a business whose innovations force other businesses to alter their strategic direction.
Audi made the list for "pushing autonomous cars closer to fruition with a laser-scanning road detector that fits in a vehicle's front grille," and Toyota for "expanding its dominance of the hybrid-car market with its new plug-in version of the Prius." Click on the image above to be taken to the original graphic at MIT Technology Review, where clickable colored squares reveal information about each of the 50 winners, compiled from a variety of industries.

Toyota issues stop sale on 6 key models over seat fabrics; recall possible? [UPDATE]

Toyota has issued a stop-sale order on six of its core models due to concerns about the flammability of certain seat fabrics. The issue rests not with the cloth and leather covers themselves, but with a piece of seat heater beneath them that fails to meet US Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards for flame retardancy.
There have been no reports of fires or injuries from the affected cars, which include some of Toyota's biggest volume sellers. 2013 and 2014 Camry, Camry Hybrid, Avalon and Sienna models equipped with heated seats are included in the stop-sale, as are 2014 Tundra pickups and Corolla sedans. The exact number of vehicles with the non-compliant materials are still being tabulated, according to The Detroit Free Press.
According to a Toyota spokesman, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration has been notified, although it remains to be seen if a recall will be issued. Outside of a full recall, though, it's unclear how Toyota will deal with vehicles equipped with the flammable materials that have already found homes.

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.