
California to Introduce 'Right to Repair' Bill - tambourine_man
https://a13.asmdc.org/press-releases/20180307-eggman-introduces-legislation-create-right-repair-electronics
======
justboxing
> “People shouldn’t be forced to ‘upgrade’ to the newest model every time a
> replaceable part on their smartphone or home appliance breaks,” said Mark
> Murray, Executive Director of Californians Against Waste. “These companies
> are profiting at the expense of our environment and our pocketbooks as we
> become a throw-away society that discards over 6 million tons of electronics
> every year.”

This. Don't know when all this changed ( 80s ?) in the US, but even appliance
repairs are sort of a thing in the past here. If a washing machine or
microwave stops working people simply get a new one.

I was quite amused to see an "Appliance Repair" van parked in my neighborhood
in San Francisco the other day. I started chatting with the guy and turns out
he was from Ukraine and told me that in the former Soviet Union countries,
they never throw away any appliance if it stops working. They repair it. Same
is the case in countries like India (where I was raised), china.

Esp. in India, there are scores of Radio, TV, phone, appliance repair shops in
every city and even in villages.

~~~
reaperducer
Appliance repair is still quite common in the U.S. The notion that white goods
get disposed of as rapidly as they break down is something of an internet-
spread cliche.

Most large property management companies employ a group of repairmen, or have
contracts with several appliance repair companies. If your refrigerator stops
cooling in a large apartment building, the management sends a guy to fix it;
they don't Amazon you a new fridge.

Similarly, if your washing machine breaks, your home warranty company isn't
going to send out a replacement machine until an appliance repairman says the
thing can't be fixed.

I've lived in about a dozen different apartments and houses in almost as many
cities in the last 15 years. I've had my appliances fixed by repairmen at
least five times.

Interestingly, I had two brand-new GE appliances in brand new apartments that
needed to be repaired within their first year of operation. But my current
1999 Maytag washer keeps chugging along without complaint. (Though its
companion dryer has been repaired by a repairman twice — once for a clogged
exhaust hose that caused a small fire, and once for a dead igniter.)

~~~
hmaarrfk
I think the notion that "An apple product cannot be repaired" is also an
internet spread cliche.

I found that it was pretty easy to replace the battery and screen of the last
few cellphones I've owned. Ironically, it was much easier (and cheaper) to
find the necessary parts to repair the apple ones than the cheapo android
phones which often cost as much as the aftermarket parts.

If you consider the cost of specialized labour needed to diagnose the problem,
then repairing quickly becomes unaffordable for a $300-$1000 purchase. This
bill will not stop that.

Appliances are physically larger, and therefore are much more difficult to
dispose of, ship, and get into place. So if you compare the cost of repair, to
the shipping and disposal cost, they probably become equivalent. Goodluck
getting a fridge out of your house without damaging the walls for cheap.

~~~
SOLAR_FIELDS
YMMV, I've ruined an iPhone5 trying to replace the screen. It's doable, but
you have to have a steady hand and a lot of patience.

~~~
pmoriarty
Often the problem with many modern electronics is not doing the repair itself,
but getting the thing back together again or getting it back in to working
order, because quite often these devices are not designed to be repairable by
the consumer.

Witness the widespread use of "security screws", epoxy on chips, cases which
can not be opened without breaking them, and explicit warnings that opening
the device would void your warranty.

There's also the ever greater miniaturization of components and the ever
greater increase in density of parts inside a case. The former often requires
microscopes and other specialized equipment to service them, and the latter
results in parts not fitting back in the case after you've completed your
repair.

It gets even worse when software is involved, where the user is usually at the
mercy of the manufacturer to come up with a software update (if they even ever
choose to do so) or require some specialized equipment and authorization to
even attempt to do their own repair (as is the case with modern automobiles
which have so many computers in them).

------
ihaveajob
In 1980 Richard Stallman found out that he couldn't fix a laser printer they
just installed at MIT. That [and other
events]([https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_Stallman#Events_leadin...](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_Stallman#Events_leading_to_GNU))
led 4 years later to the birth of the GNU project. Maybe the tide is finally
turning, at least in some aspects.

~~~
sudojudo
Reddit markup doesn't work on ycombinator. Use square brackets and a number to
designate the link [0] then put the URL at the bottom of your comment.

[0]
[https://www.reddit.com/r/StallmanWasRight/](https://www.reddit.com/r/StallmanWasRight/)

~~~
ythn
That's just normal markdown... sometimes I wish HN had basic markdown support:
_italics_ , `code`, [link]([http://](http://)), etc.

Edit: looks like _italics_ works...

~~~
JumpCrisscross
> _sometimes I wish HN had basic markdown support: italics, `code`,
> [link](http\: //)_

I like seeing the URL (or at least the domain) before I click. Hovering over
is annoying, particularly on mobile.

------
acomjean
We have this in Massachusetts for cars (car diagnostic info can't be a car
company secret):

It was passed by referendum (Voters voted on the law, not
legislators...Although when they saw it was going to pass they passed a
similar law).

Here is a summary from the referendum: [1] "A YES VOTE would enact the
proposed law requiring motor vehicle manufacturers to allow vehicle owners and
independent repair facilities in Massachusetts to have access to the same
vehicle diagnostic and repair information made available to the manufacturers’
Massachusetts dealers and authorized repair facilities."

[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Massachusetts_Right_to_Repair_...](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Massachusetts_Right_to_Repair_Initiative)

~~~
Bizarro
From what you quoted, that seems like a reasonable bill. It just levels the
playing field for everybody.

Not sure about this California bill though. The devil is always in the
details.

~~~
acomjean
Details are important. But usually I find there is always a constituency that
opposes things and claims doom if anything changes: In Mass especially because
of cynical attitude and proximity to more free wheeling neigbor states (RI and
NH are like the wild west of the Northeast). We're a small state but we have
enough people that businesses want to be here. California is big enough that
business will change to do business there. For cars, "california emissions"
was on all the cars they sold here because car companies don't want the hassle
of two kinds of vehicles.

Also the legislators here will likely change things if they're dragging down
the state (We hope...)

we get a summary of ballot questions:

here is the Con argument for the right to repair: "This measure could lead to
the release of sensitive personal information, make vehicle hacking easier,
and threaten safety and fuel efficiency innovation. Increased safety threats –
including theft – are why law enforcement opposes the measure." [1]
[http://www.sec.state.ma.us/ele/ele12/ballot_questions_12/que...](http://www.sec.state.ma.us/ele/ele12/ballot_questions_12/quest_1.htm)

We've had this law for a while and none of it seems to be a problem.

Some other things I remember strong opposition to that now seem like non-
issues: 1) Bottle deposits (Grocery stores won't exist!) 2) No smoking in
restaurants and bars (They'll all go to NH or RI) 3) Cambridge bring your own
bag ordinance (nobody will buy anything here again).

------
nopacience
California always a step ahead.

I remember opening watches and other electronics at circa 199x.

Even 10, 15 years ago most electronics used standard cables and standard
screws and anyone was able to open, see whats inside and maybe replace 1 or 2
things.

Now it seems the industry moved to a path of making things break fast and hard
to replace anything. Resulting in expansive repairs that will push users to
purchase a new item that is cheaper than replacing 1 part. Some companies even
weld RAM or processor into the motherboard.

The world has limited resources. In the last 60, 70 years after ww2 and
industrial revolution, the population has grown a lot and making thing un-
repairable will worsen world limited resources. Some day world will run out of
required materials.

Some companies create a specific cable that can only be used on their devices.
So if one breaks, the owner cannot use his old one because it is incompatible
with that new model.

Standarization of cables would good to have also.

Nice move california!

~~~
ocdtrekkie
Given that California "joins 17 other states who have introduced similar
legislation, which includes: Washington, Massachusetts, Vermont, New York,
Hawaii, Illinois, Iowa, Kansas, Minnesota, Missouri, North Carolina, Nebraska,
New Hampshire, New Jersey, Oklahoma, Tennessee, Virginia"...

It seems they're not exactly a "step ahead", just trying to keep pace with
Nebraska. ;)

~~~
deadmetheny
Nebraska is surprisingly up to date with its digital frontier laws, weirdly
enough.

~~~
mullen
Farmers want to repair their own stuff.

------
coaxial
One of the many reason that I love my 2013 ThinkPad. The service manual is
freely available, every single part is serviceable with a bit of know-how, and
second hand spare parts are plentiful. It's also built like a tank and hard to
break to begin with. You can pick one up for 200-300$ in very good condition.

~~~
organsnyder
I just ordered a T480 to replace my aging T410. The T410 is still functional,
but has been crashing as of late. I'm planning to repair it (I suspect RAM,
HD, or CPU heat), but I decided it was time to upgrade to something faster and
lighter. Over the time I've owned it, I've replaced the keyboard twice and the
battery at least once, and I've upgraded hard drives (it now has 768GB of SSD)
and RAM (maxed out at 8GB, IIRC).

I hope I'll be able to maintain the 7-year refresh cycle with my T480; newer
ThinkPads are less beefy, but they still have similar levels of
maintainability, so I should be able to fix anything that breaks.

I am very much looking forward to the screen upgrade—even the best screen
available for the T410 was mediocre at best. I've heard good things about the
WQHD IPS screen I'm getting on the T480 (not quite as good as a MBP, but leaps
and bounds better than my T410).

------
malchow
Ugh. Another bill whose largest effect, to be understood only 10 or more years
from now, will be to make sure that very large companies stay very large and
very small companies have a hard or impossible road to growth.

\-- Someone who likes repairability as much as the next guy.

~~~
kbenson
> will be to make sure that very large companies stay very large and very
> small companies have a hard or impossible road to growth.

Do you mind connecting the dots on this? Apparently you think it's self
evident why it would have those effects on companies, but it's not, at least
to me.

~~~
Cshelton
Not OP, but I believe he means the following:

As a small company/startup, right now, you design, make, and sell a product.
It may just be you or a small team. The design of your product may be
complicated, but the usability from the user perspective may be simple AND
FOOLPROOF. There are no other considerations generally other than the product
works, and people like it and my margins are good.

With more regulation, like requiring the right to repair, the task above just
became a lot more difficult. You now have to design a product that can be
repairable, which can be more expensive from your design/production side. You
have to make sure there is documentation to go with that for consumers to
repair every aspect of your product, an incredible amount of time. And then
you have to have a way to "rescue" a user if they really screw up the product
and "brick" in in a sense. This will add to the total cost and the time it
takes to go to market and/or iterate on the product. Small companies in many
ways, can't afford this. not to mention being in compliance of the regulations
and the additional cost/time that will take.

On the other hand, a larger company will have no issue complying with these
regulations as far as documentation, user support, return and fix issues, etc.
Making sure consumers have the tools available to "repair" the products as
well. Because larger companies have economies of scale, both with supplies,
manufacturing, and labor costs, it is much less of a burden for them than a
small company barely trying to survive.

~~~
snuxoll
I haven't read the text of this bill, but the push for Right to Repair isn't
that companies need to design their products differently - but they need to
provide documentation and components so people other than the manufacturer can
perform repairs on them.

Apple doesn't repair logic boards, if you have a bad backlight controller on
your MacBook Pro and it's out of warranty you can expect to pay $700+ for a
logic board replacement - repair shops can replace the backlight controller
for a much more reasonable fee.

Right now Apple products are the most popular market for these 3rd party
repair shops exactly because Apple charges so damned much for out-of-warranty
repairs, and they work in a legal gray area because Apple won't give out board
schematics or sell replacement components. Without schematics troubleshooting
issues ranges from anywhere to a pain to impossible, without parts anything
that can't be readily sourced from a manufacturer (thankfully they use bog-
standard Texas Instrument controllers for the LCD backlight that you can buy
reels of, but other components like the SMC, GPU, etc. you are pulling off
boards that were dumped from the factory or if you can somehow find "new" ones
the chances that they are DOA is dubious since they're often factory rejects).

Nobody wants to make life more difficult for companies designing their
products, the Right to Repair crowd just wants to be able to fix their own
devices provided they have the skills to do so.

~~~
RandallBrown
Providing that documentation and the components is a non-zero cost.

~~~
wfo
Technically it costs bandwidth and electricity I suppose to make information
available...

Not suing people for repairing or tinkering with your hardware is also a
"cost" I suppose if you want to phrase it that way, because of the lost
revenue you would have gotten from locking down the market and only providing
overpriced replacements yourself. It's a cost in the same way that a law
against stealing purses imposes a "non-zero cost" on all of us, since we don't
have that potential source of revenue available to us anymore...

------
elihu
"Right to repair" sounds good, but I'd like to know more details.

How much documentation are you required to give users? If a device relies on
programmable hardware, is it really "repairable" if you don't have the source
code? What if there's a security vulnerability in the software, how do you fix
that? If the ICs can be replaced but the original manufacturer stopped selling
them, what then? Do the electronic interfaces between all the components need
to be documented? How do small device manufacturers stay in compliance? Do
end-user repairs void the warranty if the user is just bad at soldering and
screwed up a surface-mount part? If the original design of the product was
defective in some way, do consumers have the right to fix defects, or only to
do repairs that return them to the original condition they were in when
delivered to them?

I think it's possible to craft a good right-to-repair bill that strikes a
reasonable balance between consumer protection and not being overly burdensome
on manufacturers, but I can't tell if this bill does that. The description
(like most descriptions of bills given to the public by their proponents) is
long on all the anticipated positive side effects and short on details of how
it's accomplished.

~~~
chme
> What if there's a security vulnerability in the software, how do you fix
> that?

I would really wish for the 'Right to Repair' to be strong enough so that
producers of all those trash IOT devices, mobile phones etc. would be forced
to provide a guaranteed maintenance period for at least 5 to 10 years or would
have to release all the source code and documentation if they stop updating
their software so that other companies or users can step in.

As a side effect it might also be possible for the consumer to choose the
software separately from the hardware. Because then not only the Hardware
designing company would be the only one that can write Software for it. More
competition and a level playing field would be good for the consumer and
economy as a whole.

------
samcampbell
Here's a relevant video in regards to farmers and their equipment that drove
the impact of the ‘Right to Repair’ bill home for me.

[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F8JCh0owT4w](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F8JCh0owT4w)

------
Osiris
My big pet peeve is non user replaceable batteries in devices (phones,
laptops). It's very well known that Lithium batteries wear out over time. That
means that devices with built-in, glued-in batteries are guaranteed to become
useless once the battery begins to fail.

The battery in my Nexus 6P is about 18 months old and it currently only holds
about 40% of it's original design capacity (known issue with the phone).
Replacing the battery is a very delicate task due to the glue and placement of
the battery and the need to replace the glass and LCD.

~~~
ericabiz
It’s not too difficult for an independent repair shop with the right tools. We
charge $49 to replace a Nexus 6P battery and it takes about an hour. Call some
local phone repair shops near you and get some quotes.

If you happen to be in Austin or Houston, contact me :)

------
tyingq
_”The legislation would require manufacturers of electronics...”_

Seems like there’s a pretty big loophole here in that it’s mandating just
manufacturers, not retailers and resellers. There’s a fair amount of
electronics on eBay and Amazon that are from US resellers of Chinese
manufacturers. Those manufacturers often have no US presence, and so no
compelling reason to care about any of this.

~~~
thomastjeffery
Resellers really aren't the problem.

The problem is manufacturers who "lock-down" their products to _prevent_
repairs using things like proprietary software and DRM.

To make matters worse, Section 1201 of the DMCA makes it illegal to break DRM,
no matter what the reason, effectively making it illegal to do repairs in many
instances.

The "grass-roots" movement for "right to repair" legislation was started in
Nebraska by farmers who are sick of being unable to repair their tractors
without the assistance and permission of John Deere Inc. John Deere tractors
are currently rejecting usable parts because the owner of the tractor cannot
tell the software to use the part.

~~~
tyingq
Right. This is not a general loophole, but a loophole for products where the
manufacturer has no US presence. Because of portals like Amazon and eBay,
there's more of this than you might think.

------
remir
This bill is a step in the right direction.

The Earth has a limited amount of resources, so we should really start
thinking about better resources management because otherwise, we're going to
have serious problem in the future.

~~~
pas
That's not exactly a good way to look at it. The Earth is enormous, and we
have access to plenty of green energy. Wind, solar, nuclear. And with enough
energy every other problem is easy. Including waste processing.

The problem is that too short product lifespans close off a lot of avenues for
long term utility extraction from products. (Second hand markets, donated
stuff.)

~~~
remir
The Earth may be enormous, but that doesn't mean we shouldn't be more careful
about consuming it's resources.

------
pero
As someone who doesn't live in California, will this bill (indirectly) make
available to me the service manual for my Acer Travelmate?

I've search high and low and absolutely can't get my hands on one.

~~~
maxxxxx
there is a good chance that you will benefit from this step. It's easier for
the manufacturer to make the manual available globally than restricting access
to only Californians.

EDIT: Is it even possible to restrict access to people from a US state? Even
if I wanted to do that I would have no idea how.

~~~
NegativeLatency
Or for someone in CA to make it available outside CA

------
lysp
In Australia I believe around 2011 they made a change to similar law called
the Australian Consumer Law (ACL).

In case of a major issue with a product, you can:

Repair, replace or refund. And it is the buyer's choice - not the company.

In case of a minor issue:

The company must provide a free repair within a reasonable amount of time. If
they don't or can't, you can get it repaired elsewhere and pass on the cost,
or get a replacement, refund or compensation for the drop in value.

Also the best bit is it makes no reference to warranty time period. So a
company cannot say "6 month, 12 month or 24 month warranty" \- if they do,
consumer law overrides that condition. The length of time is intentionally
vague as "the time you'd expect it to last".

If you purchase a 100" TV brand new for $300, because of the cheap price the
warranty may be only a year or so. If you purchase a 50" TV for $4000, you'd
"expect" it to last many years - and people have received full refunds for
their TVs 5+ years after purchase when they have developed a major fault.

This is great, because it forces manufacturers to bare the cost and not plan
intentional obsolescence into their products to force you to upgrade when they
break. It's therefore cheaper for manufacturers to build quality products that
will last.

Reference: [https://www.accc.gov.au/consumers/consumer-rights-
guarantees...](https://www.accc.gov.au/consumers/consumer-rights-
guarantees/repair-replace-refund)

------
olivermarks
I'm a big supporter of this.

I also feel 'right to support' is very important. Copyright law that mandates
proprietary service and technical manuals and software should become public
domain after x years.

As an example, modern cars are virtually unserviceable by mechanics with no
access to proprietary diagnostic software and equipment.

If a company is out of business or their support staff are unfamiliar with old
products, publish everything to help right to repair...

------
DINKDINK
The cost to bring any good to market is a combination of: (1) R&D (technical
and non technical), (2) Manufacturing, (3) Sales (compensation to
intermediaries bringing the product to marketing), (4) Regulatory and
Compliance (5) Consumer labor (6) Externalities

New product prices are:

(1)(2)(3)(4)

Repair-part costs are dominantly comprised of:

(2)(3)(5)

If (2)(3)(5)(6)_oldProduct > (1)(2)(3)(4)(6)_newProduct the market is telling
you your time is better spent doing something else and properly recycling the
equipment.

If the state inflates (4) to get (2)(3)(5)(6)_oldProduct <
(1)(2)(3)(4)(6)_newProduct to be true, all that's been achieved is bureaucracy
has siphoned off value from R&D and less products are produced.

If there are negative, socialized costs associated with consumption
(externalities) there's a justified argument to allocate those costs on the
people who are producing them (recycling tax at time of purchase). Product
Management via regulation is not how you get a vibrant market of inexpensive
products that people want.

~~~
ksk
At one point in history we had a "vibrant market of inexpensive products" by
allowing child labor, slavery, and polluting the air. We're deciding that
there are some things that are not acceptable. Thankfully, more and more
people don't care about "vibrant markets" if it means a landfill of
irrepairable electronics that gets dumped onto some poor country.

In any case, regulating the right to repair opens up new service markets, new
parts supply chains, and a large job market that is local and difficult to
outsource.

~~~
DINKDINK
Are you arguing that opposing regulations that require people to publish
manuals online is equivalent to child slavery? If not I have no idea your
point as I already discussed allocating externalities of pollution.

~~~
ksk
I'm arguing that its good to 'leave money on the table' if that means doing
something positive for the environment or people.

------
confounded
Does anyone know how this affects the DRM circumvention clauses in the
DMCA[1]?

Currently trying to figure out how your stuff works can carry a prison term if
there’s DRM involved.

[1]: [https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-
circumvention?wprov=sft...](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-
circumvention?wprov=sfti1)

------
ythn
If only it were cost-effective to repair cheaper things. Our vacuum recently
stopped working correctly. We only paid $100 for it. Paying someone to repair
it costs around that much after parts and labor. So my options are to fix it
myself or simply buy a brand new one...

~~~
ryandrake
It’s often just the labor that’s expensive (at least in the US). The parts to
repair most home appliances and electronics tend to be reasonably priced and
available all over the web (my favorite source is eBay—people disassemble old
appliances and sell parts separately). The tricky part is often merely access
to service documentation, which is what most “right to repair” laws seek to
correct.

------
ausjke
1\. for many appliance, repair is way more expensive (including the hours you
spent on calling and scheduling and waiting (forever) for a never-arrived or
always-running-late service guy, I had to just throw it away but just buy a
new one instead. is this a problem of the design(say, make it DIY fixable with
replace-friendly modular design) or something else?

2\. easy to document and repair hardware components, what about failure caused
by software? is factory-reset the only way?

just some random thoughts, lunch time here

------
mvkel
The spirit of this sounds great on paper, but are we not recognizing the
reality that technology innovation necessitates an inability to repair?

It happened in the car world when emissions regulations hit the scene and
vacuum hoses and check engine lights became the norm. Can’t imagine anyone
repairing their own Tesla.

If the answer is to make devices thicker so they can be more easily serviced,
I couldn’t be more against.

------
intrasight
I would think that the insurance/warranty industry would result in
considerable self-regulation. Many people (myself included) purchase 3rd party
warranties, and these warranty companies expect to be able to repair
appliances. Those that couldn't be repaired I would assume would not be
covered, and that signal would get out to the consumer, and then to the
manufacturer.

------
jerkstate
I will have to read the text of this bill before I make any judgements (I
haven't found a link to it, I don't believe the bill has been introduced to
the Assembly yet.) but I have a hard time understanding what they would
legislate. Is it going to be availability of replacement parts? Assembly
methods that make repairability easier? Documentation of signal protocols so
that if Samsung decides to stop making the washing machine controller, I can
make my own?

I've personally repaired a number of home appliances over the past few years
including a LCD TV, a clothes dryer, a remote light switch, a juice machine,
an espresso maker, and a vacuum cleaner, and I've tried and failed to repair a
coffee maker and an electric tea kettle. I've also evaluated a macbook air and
a samsung galaxy phone for repair and found that the replacement parts were
too expensive to justify.

My perspective is that usually the replacement part is available but the parts
cost plus the time/skill to diagnose multiplied by the potential success
factor in repair makes replacement a better option in many cases. I don't have
a whole lot of confidence that the government can solve this problem with
legislation; any rule that would solve repairability issues with your electric
tea kettle would make your phone bulkier, for example. So my guess is it's
going to involve a lot of lobbying by different industries and ultimately end
up toothless, misguided, and ineffective.

Oh well. I guess I'll just keep on replacing fuses and repairing traces.

------
stevecalifornia
My Nexus 6P I purchase 1.8 years ago failed, unable to boot into Recovery
Mode. I called Google and they said it's a known issue and the one-year
warranty expired so...good luck. Called Huwei, they said there is no option
for repair.

A known issue bricks a device that is less than two years old and I had to go
get a replacement. What the fuck.

------
Bizarro
I love the idea of "right to repair", but as usual, _would require
manufacturers of electronics to make diagnostic and repair information, as
well as equipment or service parts, available to product owners and to
independent repair shops._ could have far-reaching negative consequences.

~~~
ryandrake
Such as...

------
shmerl
Can states also locally repeal DMCA-1201?

------
bradleybuda
More regulation making it harder to produce goods in California / sell goods
to consumers. If you want to buy repairable goods, vote with your pocketbook -
don't force your preferences on me.

~~~
FilterSweep
> If you want to buy repairable goods, vote with your pocketbook - don't force
> your preferences on me.

This only stands true in a competitive economy. We live in an oligopoly, where
the highest tech choices are not repairable.

The oligopolists will be able to lobby against the "Right to Repair."

My point is there isn't much ability to have "preferences" (i.e.: nothing to
vote our pocketbook on) in the first place.

~~~
tengbretson
All this proves is that people are unwilling to make a value judgement. To
most consumers, having the "highest tech choice" is more important than having
a repairable device. To really put one's money where their mouth is with
repairability, one would have to show that they value repairability even if it
comes at the expense of other things they value.

~~~
thomastjeffery
It proves that corporations can create small monopolies (over repair of their
products, etc.), and use their economic advantage for more economic advantage,
leading to true monopolies.

I literally cannot vote with my wallet when there is a monopoly. That is the
problem here. This legislation is about preventing a company from claiming a
monopoly over repair of the products they sell.

------
pkaye
I remember many years back California passed a law that restricted what
equipment auto parts stores could loan out to owners to diagnose their car
issues. Maybe they should lift that law also.

~~~
nradov
There is no such law in California.

------
Shivetya
The only concern I have is, as long as companies can exclude portions of a
product whose sole purpose is to protect the privacy of the user data. I am
worried that law enforcement will use this to end run the current situation
mostly with apple products that the secure enclave processor/parts cannot be
altered without loss of data/etc.

as far as repairing tablets and such, any design changes forcing easier to
repair items will have costs baked into the next generation and do these laws
limit how much replacement parts can cost? Because it can take awhile for a
3rd party to make working replacement parts. finally, who certifies such?

------
Scoundreller
On this note, be sure to take the cover off your garage door opener and slab
lithium grease on the gears every 5 years.

The gears are plastic and turn into snow once it dries out.

------
monomyth
interestingly enough this bill does not yet exist:
[https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billSearchClient.xh...](https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billSearchClient.xhtml?session_year=20172018&house=Both&author=Eggman&lawCode=All)

------
amelius
Does this mean that the source code for web services should be free, so a user
can repair it?

------
karmapolic
first world problems. Really good move considering the amount of e-waste that
is generated.

------
ferongr
Why not cars?

~~~
celestialcheese
We already have this for cars. It was passed in 2012 in Massachusetts and
applied throughout the country.
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Massachusetts_Right_to_Repair_...](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Massachusetts_Right_to_Repair_Initiative)

------
rayiner
This is nuts. If people wanted to purchase repairable products, they'd do it.
Clearly the market doesn't care, so all this will do is create needless
litigation and artificially constrain product design.

~~~
gnulinux
No, it would not work that way. If none of the companies produce repairable
machines that also satisfy other constraints of consumers, this problem would
not be satisfied by the market.

~~~
tengbretson
> If none of the companies produce repairable machines that also satisfy other
> constraints of consumers

Thats the point though. If people actually valued repairability, then they
would elevate its importance above other constraints in their purchasing
habits.

~~~
jimktrains2
How does one do that when there is no suitable option?

~~~
rayiner
Companies do lots of focus groups and market research. If there was enough
demand for repairable devices to justify it, some company would see there was
an unserved niche they could serve.

~~~
jimktrains2
So because a small sample of people didn't show overwhelming support for it,
it's not an option for anyone. Yet "vote with your money" is still touted out
as a viable option?

I'm not following this argument.

~~~
tptacek
Sure you are. Why does every phone or car not cost $100,000?

Surely if all the manufacturers acted in their obvious local-maxima best
interests and jacked their prices, you'd have no choice but to take out a
mortgage to get a phone.

The answer is obvious: the first company to defect and charge $1000 for a
phone instead would take over the entire market.

What's the difference between price and features? If repairability is
important to consumers, why is nobody "defecting" from the cartel of non-
repairable vendors to take over the market?

It's not a complicated argument.

~~~
jimktrains2
> It's not a complicated argument.

I love it when people end complicated arguments like this. "It's easy you
dolt! Just eat your soylent and be happy!"

------
LifeLiverTransp
The most embarassing thing, if you really think about it is- all these
repairers and tinkerers- they want to put work into a product- and you deny
them, because of some shortsighted sense of property and a fear of loss of
controll.

Look for example at games pre-steam- these where gated-communitys, walled in
plattforms and gardens. All those modders, where putting in work anyway.

And instead of taking a percentage, and supplying a plattform - we shut them
out.

Cant wait for someone to offer a hardware-steam version for IOT devices and
vehicles. Add a simple scripting language like Lua to that - and suddenly -
one ecosystem to rule them all, thanks to all those tinkering customers, who
basically send you free money.

But hey- lawyers and small sighted software department CEOs will see that it
does not come to that.

