This research begins with a simple but essential question: In predictive vehicle maintenance, where should raw data from a car be stored? Some argue that it makes sense to keep it within the vehicle, managed directly by its control units. Others prefer sending it to a backend system for evaluation by larger models. We found that this decision cannot be made based solely on technical reasoning. The legal conditions surrounding personal data, cybersecurity, product responsibility, and AI-based systems in the European Union carry equal weight in shaping feasibility. These regulations not only impose constraints but also actively influence the design and application of such technologies in real-world scenarios. The findings suggest that legal barriers frequently limit implementation more than current technical capabilities. Addressing these constraints early in the design process is crucial, as they define not only what types of data processing are permitted but also how predictive maintenance services can be delivered to users. To support responsible development, this study proposes a legal-technical framework tailored to the European regulatory landscape. It aligns predictive maintenance systems with key European Union regulations, including the GDPR, Cybersecurity Act, Cyber Resilience Act, and AI Act.

No description provided

The production and sales figures for electric vehicles are showing a steady upward trend, clearly indicating the growing importance of sustainability goals. A unique historical situation has developed in the US: the owner of the leading electric car manufacturer (Tesla), Elon Musk, has taken an active role in political life. Amid a rising trend in electric vehicle (EV) adoption aligned with global sustainability goals, the political activism of Musk has provoked public backlash, including acts of vandalism and aggression toward Tesla vehicles. Using a multidisciplinary approach, the study explores (1) the psychological underpinnings of object-directed violence, (2) the legal classification of politically motivated vandalism, and (3) the broader market implications of corporate politicization. Our findings confirm that object-directed aggression stems from displaced frustration, especially when individuals feel politically powerless or morally outraged. Our analysis revealed that most Tesla-related vandalism will likely be prosecuted as property crimes. Although U.S. officials have labeled some acts as domestic terrorism or hate crimes, legal thresholds are generally not met. Our interdisciplinary model suggests that the politicization of Tesla has broader implications. Tesla’s symbolic status in the electric vehicle market means that attacks on it risk triggering a decline in public trust toward electric mobility.