If the right to repair movement succeeds fully, OP would have had access to the complete source code and hardware schematics of this device, and the fix for his flashing lights probably would have been a 5 line shell script that someone else had already put on github.
> would have had access to the complete source code and hardware schematics
Forcing every company to open source their products is a pipe dream. This is never going to happen.
Even if one country passed such a law, manufacturers would move their production to a different country. The products would then be imported and redistributed as foreign products, circumventing the law.
If there's the option between a HDMI capture card for $50 with crappy support that tells me in broken English to ignore functionality I've paid for that doesn't work, vs one for $100 that has available documentation and surely a worldwide army of motivated nerds to support it forever and add functions I would have never imagined possible, I know which one I'm choosing.
People would have said the same 100 years ago about forcing food companies to reveal their ingredients list. Yet now it is required in almost every country, and doesn't appear to have been that detrimental to the food industry.
Hardware schematics and full source code doesn't tell you everything about how a piece of hardware is made either.
How was the hardware tested? How was it calibrated? How was it assembled?
An ingredients list tells 90% of the story about how food is made, and in most cases an expert could guess the remaining 10% to get a decent result. Likewise, hardware design+code tells 90% and an expert could figure out the remaining 10%.
The government could totally require all consumer products have published source code. (published source code != a license for others to use the code)
To what level would the "source code" have to be published? Chip-level? Should I expect HDL code that allows me to reproduce the microcontroller?
If not, expect a bunch of gadget companies to pay cypress or whoever to make "custom" chips with their firmware burned in. After all, what's the difference at that point between HDL and firmware?
If yes, expect most companies to simply refuse, and not authorize their chips for sale in the US. International IP / licensing agreement would make it literally impossible for them to comply without being sued into oblivion by the Taiwanese company they licensed the IP from.
I think stuff like design files and source code should be held in escrow by the government. If you continue to provide replacement parts to customers, the information remains protected. Once you stop providing reasonably priced replacements ("reasonably priced" = less than the cost of the product), the information gets published so others can reproduce it.
