Originally published at: FTC Comes Out in Favor of Right to Repair - TidBITS
The US Federal Trade Commission has published a report that strongly supports right to repair measures and slams device makers for spurious arguments, manufactured hazards, and economic harm.
The only problem I have with Right to Repair measures, is that some have their own agendas to want it passed. The irony is that some want to monopolize repairs in that you buy ātheirā tools and use ātheirā site for videos and documentations with possible subscription plans.
I think a company, letās say Apple in this case, should sell its own OEM tools and let AppleID accounts have access to pdfs and repair docs. Some of Appleās ATLAS and GSX training videos/pdfās are spot on, and rightly so. (I have to say, I am biased, having been an AAMT for several years).
So, I guess we see if we will get access to parts/tools. Do you think Apple will still have Vintage and Obsolete categories, or will they no longer only allow parts to California? Interestingā¦
Youāre not wrong that there are self-interested players involved, but itās companies like iFixit and repairmen like Louis Rossman, who I generally consider the good guys. Not to mention all the farmers who can no longer repair their own equipment.
I also agree there are a lot of devils in the details on right to repair. For instance, would Apple have to make major changes to their designs so you could easily open them?
1 Like
Everyone has an agenda. :-) The question is if the end result is good or bad for society and the environment.
I think all parties would be happy if the industry (including Apple) would consent to:
- Make schematics and documentation (e.g. case opening/closing procedures) available for a reasonable price (e.g. $1000/yr subscription) so repair shops can get official information instead of having to scrounge it from questionable sources. Doesnāt need to be free, but low enough that an independent repair shop can reasonably afford it.
- Offer to sell replacement parts (especially unique chips that canāt be purchased elsewhere) to independent repair shops. Again, no need for them to be free and no need to let the shops perform warranty replacement (although that would be nice). Just make the parts available for a reasonable price.
- Allow repair shops access to the tools needed to cryptographically pair parts with devices. Again, no need to make these available to the public, just set reasonable terms that allow legitimate repair shops access.
If the industry would do these three things, I think most of us would be willing to table the rest for some later discussion.
1 Like
Though itās a very different industry, since the development of connected cars thereās a lot going on with data access to automotive manufacturersā repair services and independent shops. It was only through right to repair legislation in the US that independent shops became available almost a century ago. Massachusetts recently passed a right to repair law covering connected cars, and data security is a very big issue here. The automotive data thatās to be collected is supposed to be just mechanical, not anything personal. There are also questions about sharing historical data, and overall data security.
āThe Commonwealth will still need to answer many questions about the kinds of data that must be provided and the types of consent that must be obtained. A platform provider will need to be sourced, and there will be many questions about how a provider should be selected, who should pay to create the platform, and how its operating costs should be covered. There will also be questions about who qualifies as a ārepair shopā and represents a legitimate user of the telematics data stored on the independent platform.ā
Something else to think aboutā¦what if local repair shops start sharing info they gathered to better target ads in Facebook, Google, etc.?
While I donāt want companies doing stupid, petty, and unnecessary things to prevent the ability to repair your own stuff, thing pentalobe screws, I am concerned that advancements might be held back. I canāt repair my car like I could 40 years ago, but it is much, much, much more reliable.
And the discussion on farmers and tractors makes people I know in ag laugh hard. They describe how poorly much farm equipment they service is maintained by farmers, including basic cleaning. And how farmer will bring a harvesterās dissembled transmission to the dealer, expecting the dealer to fix it under warrantee.
1 Like
Many good points here but I am definitely on the general side of āright of repairā because, most of the time, the manufacturer arguments seem insincere or unjustified, and, many otherwise repairable valuable products have to be trashed. I am a big DIYāer and have used iFixit plenty and have long supported their efforts.
The law should be nuanced so it doesnāt constrain what products can be made but it should force repairability where not unduly restrictive - admittedly, not an easy law to write.
Finally, Iāll believe āright to repairā has happened only when I see it.
1 Like
I certainly hope no local repair shop would be able to garner enough data for it to be valuable in that regard. 
My experience here is old, but I grew up on a family farm with elderly equipment (like from the 1930s through the 1950s) that we maintained ourselves. Parts were readily available, and it was doable. I canāt speak for modern mega farmers with super expensive machines, but we certainly would never have taken something to a dealer (even if there had been a dealer for what we used) for the simple reason that it would take too long. It was bad enough when the baler would break on a Saturday and weād have to rush to the parts store before it closed so we could fix it and finish making hay on Sunday.
I was super happy when I was able to buy a 1959 Ford Powermaster 841 tractor from a friend. I use it for snow plowing, brush hogging, and general landscape maintenance. His name is Max (after the dog in The Grinch Who Stole Christmas). And yes, I do all the maintenance myself, with help from my father. Thereās a ton of information for these old tractors online, along with numerous vendors selling parts.
Iām conflicted. My sense is that Apple does things that make repair difficult, but also make their devices sturdier, more reliable, and smaller. I personally like the latter more than I find the former important, but I also recognize that there are companies that abuse the privilege and people who donāt agree with my views.
1 Like
Itās not an either-or decision.
Apple can sell their current designs without change and simply make schematics, manuals, parts and tools (all of which, they already have for their internal use right now) available to repair shops for a reasonable price and that would satisfy most of the complaints from independent repair shops.
Other issues, like designing products for the purpose of making repair easy, would be a nice bonus, but itās not a top priority and I donāt think anybody wants to put force of law behind such a desire.
I donāt agree that āsatisfy most of the complaints from private repair shops ā would actually do much to calm the issue down. Ifixit isnāt the one thatās getting congresspeople involved
āForce of lawā
I think thatās exactly what a lot of people do in fact want to do.
If people actually are demanding government-mandated product designs, I havenāt heard it from anyone. And nobody anywhere would be happy with the result.
And this is in addition to the fact that no such law could ever possibly be Constitutional.
In the US, what few digital privacy regulations there are do not apply to small local companies. But regulation is a big concern for larger organizations, which could trickle down to the small guys:
And if a small shop can access data about where itās customers shop, restaurants they frequent, etc., at least in the US, thereās nothing stopping them. Hyper local ads on social media are very inexpensive and easy to buy.
For about as long as I can remember, and I aināt a spring chicken, Iāve often heard complaints about small local electronics shops, as well as automotive aftermarket, that was not manufacturer sanctioned or guaranteed. Quality control over small local repair shops would probably a big expense that would significantly impact Appleās bottom line.
Iāve seen lots of people arguing for, eg, mandated replaceable battery designs, so I disagree that people arenāt asking for such things.
And this is in addition to the fact that no such law could ever possibly be Constitutional
Uh, the government successfully mandates a lot of design requirements for all sorts of products (airbags, anti-lock brakes, safety features on everything under the sun) so Iām unsure how it would be unconstitutional?
But nobody is expecting Apple to guarantee the work of an independent shop.
Just like nobody expects Chevrolet to guarantee work done by Gusās Garage.
Sure, there are and always will be bad shops. But that doesnāt translate to some moral obligation to destroy the entire independent repair industry - which seems to be their argument.
They say āwe canāt let you do work because not everybody is perfectā. Well, I hate to burst their bubble, but theyāre not perfect either. There are plenty of stories of Apple botching repair jobs as well. Does this mean we should outlaw their repair facilities as well?
Government can make the argument about safety standards because they (allegedly) save lives.
Good luck making the same argument for phone battery replacement when weāre only talking about inconvenience, not peopleās lives.
Could you specify exactly what constitutional issue youāre invoking? Inconvenience is not a protected right.
Appleās iOS only has a 27% global market share:
Samsung, just like Apple, does not authorize or enable any unqualified Joe Schmoe or Jane Schmane shop or personal repairs:
Personally, Iād rather have a slimmer, lighter mobile device, and If special screws and gluing accomplishes this, Iām AOK with it. If repairing a mobile device is that important, then donāt buy an Apple or Samsung.
And about destroying the repair industry, Apple has a global independent and third party repair program that is continuing to expand globally:
I had some very unsatisfactory experiences with Radio Shack in the pre Apple Store era, and I donāt know anyone who was sad to see them go. And there are a lot of Apple Authorized Service Providers. Here in the NYC metro area there are Apple Authorized third party repair providers of all sizes, and a lot more of them than there are Apple Stores.