监管层面也需同步发力。应加快完善《汽车数据安全管理若干规定（试行）》等法规，明确数据归属权 与使用权边界；建立独立于车企的第三方数据监管平台，对事故数据实施强制存证与公正解读；加大对 数据垄断行为的惩戒力度，让傲慢者付出代价。 张亚周的胜利，是消费者权益对技术傲慢的一次艰难突围。它提醒所有智能车企：技术没有特权，傲慢 终将反噬。唯有将用户权益置于技术之上，以谦逊之心拥抱透明与责任，行业才能真正驶向安全与信任 的未来。 本版专栏文章仅代表作者个人观点 特斯拉"车顶维权"女车主张亚周历经四年诉讼，终于迎来法院判决特斯拉提供事故前半小时完整行车数 据的胜利。这一判决不仅为张亚周个人争取到了应有的权利，更如一道强光，刺穿了智能汽车行业长期 笼罩的技术傲慢迷雾，为整个行业敲响了警钟。 智能汽车时代，数据已成为车辆运行的"数字指纹"，记录着驾驶行为、系统状态乃至事故真相。然而， 部分车企却将数据视为私有领地，以技术复杂性为借口，以隐私保护为盾牌，筑起高高的数据壁垒。特 斯拉在张亚周案中的态度，正是这种技术傲慢的典型映射：面对车主对刹车失灵的质疑，企业以"数据 未见异常"单方面定调，拒绝提供完整数据，甚至将维权者推向舆论对 ...

Core Viewpoint - The court ruling in favor of Zhang Yazhou, the Tesla owner, highlights the need for transparency in the smart automotive industry and challenges the prevailing "technical arrogance" that has led to data monopolization by companies like Tesla [1][2][3] Group 1: Legal and Ethical Implications - The court's decision mandates Tesla to provide complete driving data from the half-hour before the accident, emphasizing consumer rights and accountability in the face of corporate data withholding [1][2] - This case serves as a judicial precedent that counters the notion that technological advancement justifies information monopolization, reinforcing that consumer rights should not be undermined by technical barriers [2][3] Group 2: Industry-Wide Concerns - The issue of "brake failure" controversies in the smart automotive sector reflects a broader problem where companies deny responsibility while consumers struggle to prove their claims, perpetuating a cycle of distrust [2][3] - The ruling urges the smart automotive industry to recalibrate its ethical standards, advocating for data transparency and the establishment of standardized data interfaces for consumer access [3] Group 3: Regulatory Recommendations - There is a call for regulatory bodies to enhance existing regulations, such as the "Automotive Data Security Management Regulations," to clarify data ownership and usage rights [3] - Establishing independent third-party data oversight platforms is recommended to ensure fair interpretation and storage of accident data, alongside stricter penalties for data monopolization practices [3]