Right to repair: Difference between revisions
expanded |
→Use of "warranty void if removed" stickers: expanded section |
||
| (2 intermediate revisions by 2 users not shown) | |||
| Line 7: | Line 7: | ||
==Key principles== | ==Key principles== | ||
The [https://www.repair.org/ Digital Right to Repair Coalition], an independent nonprofit organization dedicated to advocating for right to repair legislation, has outlined the essential components of such laws:<ref name=":0">https://www.repair.org/legislation</ref><blockquote> | The [https://www.repair.org/ Digital Right to Repair Coalition], an independent nonprofit organization dedicated to advocating for right to repair legislation, has outlined the essential components of such laws:<ref name=":0">{{Cite web |title=Working Together to Make Repair-Friendly Public Policy |url=https://www.repair.org/legislation |url-status=live |access-date=3 Apr 2025 |website=repair.org}}</ref><blockquote> | ||
#'''Access to Diagnostic Tools''': The right for consumers and independent repair shops to access the same diagnostic and repair tools that are available to the original manufacturer. | #'''Access to Diagnostic Tools''': The right for consumers and independent repair shops to access the same diagnostic and repair tools that are available to the original manufacturer. | ||
#'''Replacement Parts''': Ensuring that consumers can purchase genuine replacement parts at fair market prices, either directly from the manufacturer or through third-party vendors. | #'''Replacement Parts''': Ensuring that consumers can purchase genuine replacement parts at fair market prices, either directly from the manufacturer or through third-party vendors. | ||
| Line 18: | Line 18: | ||
In states that have enacted Right to Repair laws, the legislation often involves a multi-faceted approach. It's not just about passing the law; it also includes implementing an enforcement mechanism, engaging with manufacturers for compliance, and educating consumers and repair shops about their rights and responsibilities.</blockquote> | In states that have enacted Right to Repair laws, the legislation often involves a multi-faceted approach. It's not just about passing the law; it also includes implementing an enforcement mechanism, engaging with manufacturers for compliance, and educating consumers and repair shops about their rights and responsibilities.</blockquote> | ||
==Industries affected by anti-repair practices== | |||
#'''Agricultural equipment:''' Farmers face significant challenges due to restrictive practices by manufacturers like [[John Deere]], which locks vital repair tools and software behind proprietary systems. While John Deere previously agreed to provide access to repair tools by 2021, it has largely failed to uphold this promise, forcing many farmers to turn to unauthorized software just to perform basic repairs.<ref>{{Cite web |last=Edwards |first=Sarah |date=14 Feb 2014 |title=Right to Repair Farm Equipment: Legislation, Challenges, and Advantages |url=https://www.thomasnet.com/insights/right-to-repair-farm-equipment/ |url-status=live |access-date=3 Apr 2014 |website=Thomas}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web |last=O'Reilly |first=Kevin |date=5 Feb 2021 |title=Deere in the Headlights How software that farmers can't access has become necessary to tractor repair |url=https://pirg.org/resources/deere-in-the-headlights-3/ |url-status=live |access-date=3 Apr 2025 |website=pirg.org}}</ref> Industry groups argue that allowing such access could bypass emissions and safety controls, but this leaves farmers financially dependent on dealers for critical repairs.<ref>{{Cite web |last=Hruska |first=Joel |date=23 Feb 2021 |title=John Deere Fails to Uphold Right to Repair Agreement Signed in 2018 |url=https://www.extremetech.com/electronics/320183-john-deere-fails-to-uphold-right-to-repair-agreement-signed-in-2018 |url-status=live |access-date=3 Apr 2025 |website=Extreme Tech}}</ref> | |||
#'''Consumer electronics:''' Companies are implementing restrictive measures, like serialization and pairing of parts, which prevent the use of third-party components.<ref>{{Cite web |date=3 Nov 2021 |title=Manufacturers Are Restricting Your Repair Options. Here’s How. |url=https://www.carrepairchoice.org/manufacturers-are-restricting-your-repair-options-heres-how/ |url-status=live |access-date=3 Apr 2025 |website=Car Repair Choice}}</ref> This practice raises repair costs and limits options for consumers, reinforcing a disposable culture in electronics. | |||
#'''Medical equipment:''' Hospitals and healthcare providers encounter repair restrictions that delay the maintenance of critical devices. Limited access to diagnostics and proprietary parts exacerbates costs and impacts patient care, with some hospital technicians calling for legislative action to improve repairability.<ref>{{Cite web |last=Wray |first=George |last2=Vanderveer |first2=Erin |date=18 Apr 2024 |title=Fixing Circles: The Right to Repair and the Circular Economy |url=https://www.americanbar.org/groups/tort_trial_insurance_practice/resources/journal/2024-spring/fixing-circles-right-repair-circular-economy/ |url-status=live |access-date=3 Apr 2025 |website=American Bar}}</ref> | |||
#'''Home appliances:''' Many household devices, such as refrigerators and washing machines, are increasingly difficult to repair because of proprietary parts and software locks. Advocates argue that this trend contributes to unnecessary e-waste and financial strain on households.{{CitationNeeded}} | |||
#'''Automobiles:''' The automotive industry has historically restricted repairs by limiting access to diagnostic tools and proprietary systems. Massachusetts’ Right to Repair law has been a key legislative victory, enabling consumers and independent mechanics to access the tools needed for vehicle repairs.{{CitationNeeded}} | |||
==Anti-repair practices== | ==Anti-repair practices== | ||
| Line 25: | Line 33: | ||
====Access to tools and parts==== | ====Access to tools and parts==== | ||
Many manufacturers restrict access to parts and tools, making them only available to their own dealers’ repair shops. This practice locks independent shops out of repairs and enables manufacturers to set artificially high prices. Most manufacturers don’t publish the related instructions, already created for their internal use. Withholding repair documentation makes DIY repairs more difficult and more dangerous.<ref>https://www.repair.org/restricting-access</ref> In some cases, repair isn't even an option, leaving consumers to purchase another device. | Many manufacturers restrict access to parts and tools, making them only available to their own dealers’ repair shops. This practice locks independent shops out of repairs and enables manufacturers to set artificially high prices. Most manufacturers don’t publish the related instructions, already created for their internal use. Withholding repair documentation makes DIY repairs more difficult and more dangerous.<ref>{{Cite web |title=Restricting Access to Parts, Tools, and Documentation |url=https://www.repair.org/restricting-access |url-status=live |access-date=3 Apr 2025 |website=repair.org}}</ref> In some cases, repair isn't even an option, leaving consumers to purchase another device. | ||
==== Blocking and locking third party parts ==== | ====Blocking and locking third party parts==== | ||
Some manufacturers are actively blocking third party parts from being used in repairs in different ways:<ref>https://www.repair.org/parts</ref> | Some manufacturers are actively blocking third party parts from being used in repairs in different ways:<ref>{{Cite web |title=Blocking and Locking Third-Party Parts |url=https://www.repair.org/parts |url-status=live |access-date=3 Apr 2025 |website=repair.org}}</ref> | ||
* '''Persistent Alerts''': Discouraging third party parts by showing intrusive “unable to verify” warnings, making users feel like their device is compromised. A notable example are [[Apple]] practices with third party battery and screen replacements.<ref>https://support.apple.com/en-us/102658?cid=mc-ols-iphone_rear_system-article_ht212878-ios_ui-06012022</ref> | *'''Persistent Alerts''': Discouraging third party parts by showing intrusive “unable to verify” warnings, making users feel like their device is compromised. A notable example are [[Apple]] practices with third party battery and screen replacements.<ref>{{Cite web |title=About iPhone Parts and Service History |url=https://support.apple.com/en-us/102658?cid=mc-ols-iphone_rear_system-article_ht212878-ios_ui-06012022 |url-status=live |access-date=3 Apr 2025 |website=[[Apple]]}}</ref> | ||
* '''Software Lockouts''': Replacing a part will result in an error message that can only be cleared with manufacturer's exclusive software. For example, this happens in [[John Deere]] tractors. | *'''Software Lockouts''': Replacing a part will result in an error message that can only be cleared with manufacturer's exclusive software. For example, this happens in [[John Deere]] tractors. | ||
==== Pairing parts to the motherboard<ref name=":1">https://www.repair.org/</ref> ==== | ====Pairing parts to the motherboard<ref name=":1">{{Cite web |title=Pairing Parts to the Motherboard |url=https://www.repair.org/ |url-status=live |access-date=3 Apr 2025 |website=repair.org}}</ref>==== | ||
One way of deterring repairs is to match components to the motherboard of the device. Replacing one faulty part with another will not be welcomed by the central board. Replacing the faulty part is possible only if one finds a matched part for a new central board, increasing the cost and complexity of repair. [[Apple authorized service provider program|Apple's Self Repair initiative]] ties parts to a serial number of a device, preventing independent repair and end-of-life refurbishment in a significant way. Manufacturers generally can re-code those parts for new ones. Software pairing for that purpose is used by their own authorized repair facilities. | One way of deterring repairs is to match components to the motherboard of the device. Replacing one faulty part with another will not be welcomed by the central board. Replacing the faulty part is possible only if one finds a matched part for a new central board, increasing the cost and complexity of repair. [[Apple authorized service provider program|Apple's Self Repair initiative]] ties parts to a serial number of a device, preventing independent repair and end-of-life refurbishment in a significant way. Manufacturers generally can re-code those parts for new ones. Software pairing for that purpose is used by their own authorized repair facilities. | ||
| Line 47: | Line 55: | ||
In the case of parts that aren't used in other devices, this can cause repair prices to shoot up, since there isn't an incentive for repair shops to have this part readily available. Using phones as an example, Phone A and Phone B are both from the same manufacturer, and are physically indistinguishable. However, on the inside Phone A uses a completely different screen connection than Phone B, and Phone B has a completely different battery shape than Phone A. The parts are no longer interchangeable between the phones, and more parts need to be stocked as a result. As well, the repair shop takes a risk on keeping a stock of parts that may or may not sell because they are exclusive to a certain phone. This can also lead to people not wanting to have their phone repaired, since they will be without their phone for a week or two while the shop waits for a part to ship. | In the case of parts that aren't used in other devices, this can cause repair prices to shoot up, since there isn't an incentive for repair shops to have this part readily available. Using phones as an example, Phone A and Phone B are both from the same manufacturer, and are physically indistinguishable. However, on the inside Phone A uses a completely different screen connection than Phone B, and Phone B has a completely different battery shape than Phone A. The parts are no longer interchangeable between the phones, and more parts need to be stocked as a result. As well, the repair shop takes a risk on keeping a stock of parts that may or may not sell because they are exclusive to a certain phone. This can also lead to people not wanting to have their phone repaired, since they will be without their phone for a week or two while the shop waits for a part to ship. | ||
==== Designing unrepairable products<ref | ====Designing unrepairable products<ref>{{Cite web |title=Designing Unrepairable Products |url=https://www.repair.org/ |url-status=live |access-date=3 Apr 2025 |website=repair.org}}</ref>==== | ||
Manufacturers often make design choices that precludes or discourages repair. They have proprietary screw heads, so that they need special tools to use. Batteries are epoxied in with industrial-strength adhesive, so regular maintenance is more complicated than it should be. Pieces are soldered into clunky assemblies, so you must replace, e.g., an entire top case to replace a single key on a keyboard. | Manufacturers often make design choices that precludes or discourages repair. They have proprietary screw heads, so that they need special tools to use. Batteries are epoxied in with industrial-strength adhesive, so regular maintenance is more complicated than it should be. Pieces are soldered into clunky assemblies, so you must replace, e.g., an entire top case to replace a single key on a keyboard. | ||
| Line 53: | Line 61: | ||
These stickers, commonly found on electronic devices and appliances, are intended to prevent consumers from tampering with products, often in relation to repairs or modifications. However, their use has raised concerns about whether they unfairly limit consumer rights, particularly their right to repair, and circumvent warranties. | These stickers, commonly found on electronic devices and appliances, are intended to prevent consumers from tampering with products, often in relation to repairs or modifications. However, their use has raised concerns about whether they unfairly limit consumer rights, particularly their right to repair, and circumvent warranties. | ||
Under U.S. consumer protection law, particularly the {{wplink|Magnuson–Moss Warranty Act}}, manufacturers are prohibited from voiding warranties solely due to the removal of labels, including "warranty void if removed" stickers.<ref>https://www.ftc.gov/news-events/news/press-releases/2018/04/ftc-staff-warns-companies-it-illegal-condition-warranty-coverage-use-specified-parts-or-services</ref> This rule aims to ensure that consumers have the right to repair or modify products without fear of losing warranty coverage. Despite this, many manufacturers continue to use such stickers, and some place them over screws or other components necessary for standard use, leading to potential issues with warranty claims.<ref>https://www.ftc.gov/news-events/news/press-releases/2024/07/ftc-warns-companies-stop-warranty-practices-harm-consumers-right-repair</ref><ref>https://www.pcgamer.com/hardware/ftc-fires-out-warnings-to-asrock-gigabyte-and-zotac-over-warranty-void-if-removed-stickers-in-violation-of-us-law/</ref> | Under U.S. consumer protection law, particularly the {{wplink|Magnuson–Moss Warranty Act}}, manufacturers are prohibited from voiding warranties solely due to the removal of labels, including "warranty void if removed" stickers. Companies cannot require consumers to use specific parts or services to keep warranties unless offered for free or cleared by the [[Federal Trade Commission|FTC]]. Offenders will be enforced by law if they fail to comply within 30 days. This shields consumers from exorbitant fees and enables small businesses to provide competitive products.<ref>{{Cite web |last=Chang |first=Lulu |date=11 Apr 2018 |title=Those ‘warranty void if removed’ stickers are illegal, says the FTC |url=https://www.digitaltrends.com/computing/ftc-warranty-stickers-illegal/ |url-status=live |access-date=4 Apr 2025 |website=digitaltrends}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web |date=10 Apr 2018 |title=FTC Staff Warns Companies that It Is Illegal to Condition Warranty Coverage on the Use of Specified Parts or Services |url=https://www.ftc.gov/news-events/news/press-releases/2018/04/ftc-staff-warns-companies-it-illegal-condition-warranty-coverage-use-specified-parts-or-services |url-status=live |access-date=3 Apr 2025 |website=[[FTC]]}}</ref> This rule aims to ensure that consumers have the right to repair or modify products without fear of losing warranty coverage. Despite this, many manufacturers continue to use such stickers, and some place them over screws or other components necessary for standard use, leading to potential issues with warranty claims.<ref>{{Cite web |date=13 Jul 2024 |title=FTC Warns Companies to Stop Warranty Practices That Harm Consumers’ Right to Repair |url=https://www.ftc.gov/news-events/news/press-releases/2024/07/ftc-warns-companies-stop-warranty-practices-harm-consumers-right-repair |url-status=live |access-date=3 Apr 2025 |website=[[FTC]]}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web |last=Edser |first=Andy |date=4 Jul 2024 |title=FTC fires out warnings to ASRock, Gigabyte and Zotac over 'Warranty void if removed' stickers in violation of US law |url=https://www.pcgamer.com/hardware/ftc-fires-out-warnings-to-asrock-gigabyte-and-zotac-over-warranty-void-if-removed-stickers-in-violation-of-us-law/ |url-status=live |access-date=3 Apr 2025 |website=PCGamer}}</ref> | ||
===Software===<!-- I think this section needs a separate article --> | ===Software===<!-- I think this section needs a separate article --> | ||
| Line 68: | Line 76: | ||
Proprietary filetypes and protocols can make hardware useless if the company who made it closes their business without disclosing the software, protocol, or filetype to the public or surviving entity before doing so. | Proprietary filetypes and protocols can make hardware useless if the company who made it closes their business without disclosing the software, protocol, or filetype to the public or surviving entity before doing so. | ||
==Why anti-repair practices are a problem== | |||
#'''Economic and environmental costs:''' Repair restrictions force consumers to pay excessive fees or replace entire products, contributing to financial burdens and increased e-waste. | |||
#'''Undermining consumer rights''': These practices challenge the basic principle of ownership. By limiting access to tools, parts, and repair guides, manufacturers erode consumers' ability to service the products they own. | |||
#'''Cultural shift toward disposability''': Restrictive repair policies foster a disposable culture, where repairing a product is no longer an option, and purchasing new items becomes the default solution. | |||
==Self-repair programs== | ==Self-repair programs== | ||
In response to the passage of Right to Repair legislation,<ref name=":0" /> | In response to the passage of Right to Repair legislation,<ref name=":0" /> many companies have introduced their own self-repair programs. While these programs are marketed as initiatives to expand repair options, they often come with significant limitations. Below is a list of such companies, along with their related articles:<!-- Don't know if this is the best format to make the list --> | ||
*'''[[Samsung self-repair program restrictions]]''' | *'''[[Samsung self-repair program restrictions]]''' | ||
*[[Apple authorized service provider program|'''Apple authorized service provider program''']] | *[[Apple authorized service provider program|'''Apple authorized service provider program''']] | ||
*'''[[Google asserts the right to seize your phone during a repair]]''' | *'''[[Google asserts the right to seize your phone during a repair]]''' | ||
==What can be done== | |||
To address the challenges of Right to Repair, consumers and lawmakers must act: | |||
#'''Support legislation:''' Policies like Massachusetts’ Right to Repair law and the FAIR Act are essential for securing repair rights across industries.{{CitationNeeded}} | |||
#'''Raise awareness''': Educating the public about the implications of repair restrictions can help build momentum for change. | |||
#'''Choose repairable products:''' Supporting manufacturers that prioritize repairability can encourage better practices across industries. | |||
==References== | ==References== | ||