Yes, I have this crazy idea that when you “buy” something, you own it, not rent it.
26 thoughts on “The Right To Repair”
Well, yeah, you own it, but it isn’t so obvious to me that the manufacturers have to make public their passwords and software that allow repair.
You can bet the people lobbying for this want the manufacturer to assume liability for the repairs, too. Right now, there are people who want to sue Apple because their iPhones no longer work after they performed unauthorized repairs to the Touch ID (fingerprint) sensor using third-party parts.
(The reason Apple doesn’t want third parties modifying fingerprint-ID sensors is left as a question for the student.)
As I understand it, the phones work fine, until Apple released a software update that bricked them.
Imagine if your car manufacturer released a software update that bricked your car if you used third-party oil. Would you be claiming it was your fault for not buying oil from the manufacturer, or steaming mad because they’d bricked your car?
“Because a modified sensor breaks the entire security system” for $500.
And, no, the comparison with “buying third party oil” for a car doesn’t work. It’s not like Apple charges any more than the third parties for a screen repair anyway, remember.
(I’ve gotten quotes from Apple on an iPhone w/ sensor screen replacement, and it was actually a little LESS than the third-party repair places charge.
They’re just convenient and quick.)
“Apple is being mean by not letting third parties muck with the core of the system’s authentication and security system that lets people maybe use your credit card” doesn’t convince me as a computer guy or as a consumer.
So, is it your phone, or Apple’s?
And I’m really glad I turned my fingerprint sensor off, if hacking the sensor is all it takes to break their security.
If the phone still belongs to Apple, then your money still belongs to you.
There’s a lot of reforming of the Digital Millennium Copyright Act as well as the regular copyright act that needs to be done. The digital robber barons have been running amok both economically and politically. The idea of copyright and patents was to stimulate innovation by rewarding it. Turning the businessmen who bought the IP into a out of control world wide oligarchy wasn’t the idea.
= Windows 10.
Okay, I’m with you on reforming copyright terms.
I can understand and at least mostly agree on DMCA reform.
But what does Windows 10 have to do with either of them?
People always try and find a way around. The XDA forums have been a lot of help over the years.
Actually, when you buy something with a contract, you’re making an agreement. When you don’t like the contract, you have the right to buy something else.
If enough people do that, the producers may start making their contracts more palatable. Maybe they’ll price the product differently to make up for what they feel they’re losing.
You shouldn’t really have the right to buy something with a contract, at an agreed price, and then demand that government void that contract for you.
Of course, I could be in the minority. Bernie Sanders is pretty popular, and I’m sure his minions feel differently.
How about the guys who bought old ICBM silos? Would the government be required to sell them the parts needed to make them operational again? Including the necessary launch codes?
Or would this be another law that only applies to the little people?
The silos didn’t come with the missiles.
There’s no launch codes for a concrete hole in the ground.
require manufacturers to sell repair parts to independent repair shops
So, when you buy something, you own it — but when manufacturers buy something, they don’t own it?
I can hardly wait until guys show up at Ford, requiring them to sell parts for the Model T.
Things will get really interesting when those guys who buy the F-16 and F/A-18 hulks start “requiring” Boeing and Lockheed to sell the parts needed to repair them.
I wonder how this will work with pets and livestock. If your dog needs a new kidney, is the breeder required to supply you with one?
I think the position would be that if a manufacturer sells repair parts to repair firms they license and control, they should sell repair parts to anyone else, too. A GM authorized dealer shouldn’t be the only person who can buy GM parts.
For things that have gone out of production its a moot point because nobody makes or sells the parts anymore.
A possible precedent is an old and important lawsuit from the motion picture industry where the major patent holders all pooled together is the Motion Picture Patents Company, requiring buys to sign a contract saying they’d only use a particular brand of film. The court ruled that you can’t require your customers to only make transactions with a particular third party.
“For things that have gone out of production its a moot point because nobody makes or sells the parts anymore.”
Third-party suppliers may well be building those parts. When I drove a twenty-year-old car that had been out of production most of that time, a group of owners would get together now and again and remanufacture some of the parts that were hard to find, and no longer made.
But you can’t do that now, when so many parts are running copyrighted firmware, so you’d be breaking the law by building replacements, unless you write your own software instead.
And that’s assuming you can still find the computer hardware it runs on, or an equivalent device.
People do make third-party ECUs for modern and recent engines.
You just black-box it; you don’t need access to the native software or copyrighted code to replace the entire thing.
Which is why “but the DMCA hurts right to repair!” thing doesn’t convince me much – it only hurts the non-right to have an easy tweak to the existing guts.
Replace the entire unit and there’s no issue.
(“What if they encrypt the entire car’s comm busses?”
“They SHOULD because they’re horribly insecure. And then you can replace ALL of them if you don’t like it.”
There’s no right to “cheap and easy repair of stuff just because you bought it and would prefer that”, sorry.
And I say this as someone who likes modifying and tweaking stuff, and working on cars.
“What I might like” and “a right that the State’s power should enforce on everyone” are not the same thing.)
Boeing and Lockheed still produce parts for the F-16 and F/A-18. Good luck trying to buy them.
SpaceX still produces Dragon capsules but won’t sell to anyone who’s competing with NASA, as Dennis Tito found out.
How about printer’s ink and paper? US mints shouldn’t be the only people who can buy US currency paper, eh?
This is not about the “right to repair,” even if supporters spin it that way. It’s about a group of people who want to use government to force other people to work for them, on terms which they dictate. That’s called involuntary servitude. I think there’s something in the Constitution about that.
I think I should have the right to repair my car or whatever widget I purchased. It used to be that the company merely said it voided your warranty. But given the DMCA and its multiple misuses by merely attempting nearly any fix you can be perceived as circumventing the law.
Remember the case about inkjet cartridges a couple of years back? I guess you are one of those in favor of the inkjet manufacturers. Those guys lost the case and that is why we even have a refill industry now.
I was under the impression that General Dynamics shuttered the production line for the F16 in 2012 and scrapped the tooling. The F18 is still in production, at least for the moment.
They did? What about the F-16l for Israel and that other one for the Emirates? The ones with conformal tanks? Refurbs?
Years ago, when I was fresh into the aerospace industry, I ran into non-standard bolts for the first time. These things had crazy socket patterns that could be wrenched only with the bolt manufacturer’s proprietary wrench heads. In this case, the bolts were used because they had unusually good properties, and were in sensitive locations – so that no one without the proper tools could mess with them.
That gave me the idea to start a car company that would sell cars for $100. But they would be put together with a very special type of fastener: each fastener would have a different thread pitch, and direction, and diameter, and bolt head, and there would be hundreds per car. None would come even close to any standard fasteners, nor to any of the other fasteners on the car (even if in a symmetric location). Each would require a different wrench, and each wrench would sell for $1,000. And each fastener would sell for at least $10.
The home mechanic would never buy the tools, but the cars would swamp the market so that the repair shops would have to buy them. After making $1 grillion, I would retire and open a restaurant so exclusive that no one was ever allowed in – even the staff.
ROFL!!!!!!!!!!!
Yeah, those proprietary bolt and screw heads are becoming commonplace in general merchandise as well.
I recently had a valve fail on an espresso maker. I went to take it apart, and found anti-tamper screws with a weird hex pattern plus a raised nub in the center. I had to drill out and do some grinding on a hex bit to make it fit, and that took more time than the actual repair of the valve did.
Since then, I found a bit set (from China, found at harbor freight) of all sorts of these “security” drivers. Cost me all of $6. It’s come in handy quite a few times.
That’s a Torx screw. They’re all over the place on my Jeep.
There’s a part of me that wants to be sympathetic to those who wish to repair. There’s also a part of me that understands that it isn’t always so simple.
Imagine an industry where the purchaser wants to get the product at near cost. The manufacturer agrees as long as they get exclusive rights to the aftermarket repair and spare parts sales business. Since this may be the only way the manufacturer can recover development and overhead costs (not to mention profit) the competition is definitely not welcome and, in some cases, may force the manufacturer to reveal processes that were developed at great cost.
Most people don’t start businesses to lose money.
Safe manufacturers should be required to post all safe combinations and how to back door open and repair and reset the combinations on any safe.
Well, yeah, you own it, but it isn’t so obvious to me that the manufacturers have to make public their passwords and software that allow repair.
You can bet the people lobbying for this want the manufacturer to assume liability for the repairs, too. Right now, there are people who want to sue Apple because their iPhones no longer work after they performed unauthorized repairs to the Touch ID (fingerprint) sensor using third-party parts.
(The reason Apple doesn’t want third parties modifying fingerprint-ID sensors is left as a question for the student.)
As I understand it, the phones work fine, until Apple released a software update that bricked them.
Imagine if your car manufacturer released a software update that bricked your car if you used third-party oil. Would you be claiming it was your fault for not buying oil from the manufacturer, or steaming mad because they’d bricked your car?
“Because a modified sensor breaks the entire security system” for $500.
And, no, the comparison with “buying third party oil” for a car doesn’t work. It’s not like Apple charges any more than the third parties for a screen repair anyway, remember.
(I’ve gotten quotes from Apple on an iPhone w/ sensor screen replacement, and it was actually a little LESS than the third-party repair places charge.
They’re just convenient and quick.)
“Apple is being mean by not letting third parties muck with the core of the system’s authentication and security system that lets people maybe use your credit card” doesn’t convince me as a computer guy or as a consumer.
So, is it your phone, or Apple’s?
And I’m really glad I turned my fingerprint sensor off, if hacking the sensor is all it takes to break their security.
If the phone still belongs to Apple, then your money still belongs to you.
There’s a lot of reforming of the Digital Millennium Copyright Act as well as the regular copyright act that needs to be done. The digital robber barons have been running amok both economically and politically. The idea of copyright and patents was to stimulate innovation by rewarding it. Turning the businessmen who bought the IP into a out of control world wide oligarchy wasn’t the idea.
= Windows 10.
Okay, I’m with you on reforming copyright terms.
I can understand and at least mostly agree on DMCA reform.
But what does Windows 10 have to do with either of them?
People always try and find a way around. The XDA forums have been a lot of help over the years.
Actually, when you buy something with a contract, you’re making an agreement. When you don’t like the contract, you have the right to buy something else.
If enough people do that, the producers may start making their contracts more palatable. Maybe they’ll price the product differently to make up for what they feel they’re losing.
You shouldn’t really have the right to buy something with a contract, at an agreed price, and then demand that government void that contract for you.
Of course, I could be in the minority. Bernie Sanders is pretty popular, and I’m sure his minions feel differently.
How about the guys who bought old ICBM silos? Would the government be required to sell them the parts needed to make them operational again? Including the necessary launch codes?
Or would this be another law that only applies to the little people?
The silos didn’t come with the missiles.
There’s no launch codes for a concrete hole in the ground.
require manufacturers to sell repair parts to independent repair shops
So, when you buy something, you own it — but when manufacturers buy something, they don’t own it?
I can hardly wait until guys show up at Ford, requiring them to sell parts for the Model T.
Things will get really interesting when those guys who buy the F-16 and F/A-18 hulks start “requiring” Boeing and Lockheed to sell the parts needed to repair them.
I wonder how this will work with pets and livestock. If your dog needs a new kidney, is the breeder required to supply you with one?
I think the position would be that if a manufacturer sells repair parts to repair firms they license and control, they should sell repair parts to anyone else, too. A GM authorized dealer shouldn’t be the only person who can buy GM parts.
For things that have gone out of production its a moot point because nobody makes or sells the parts anymore.
A possible precedent is an old and important lawsuit from the motion picture industry where the major patent holders all pooled together is the Motion Picture Patents Company, requiring buys to sign a contract saying they’d only use a particular brand of film. The court ruled that you can’t require your customers to only make transactions with a particular third party.
“For things that have gone out of production its a moot point because nobody makes or sells the parts anymore.”
Third-party suppliers may well be building those parts. When I drove a twenty-year-old car that had been out of production most of that time, a group of owners would get together now and again and remanufacture some of the parts that were hard to find, and no longer made.
But you can’t do that now, when so many parts are running copyrighted firmware, so you’d be breaking the law by building replacements, unless you write your own software instead.
And that’s assuming you can still find the computer hardware it runs on, or an equivalent device.
People do make third-party ECUs for modern and recent engines.
You just black-box it; you don’t need access to the native software or copyrighted code to replace the entire thing.
Which is why “but the DMCA hurts right to repair!” thing doesn’t convince me much – it only hurts the non-right to have an easy tweak to the existing guts.
Replace the entire unit and there’s no issue.
(“What if they encrypt the entire car’s comm busses?”
“They SHOULD because they’re horribly insecure. And then you can replace ALL of them if you don’t like it.”
There’s no right to “cheap and easy repair of stuff just because you bought it and would prefer that”, sorry.
And I say this as someone who likes modifying and tweaking stuff, and working on cars.
“What I might like” and “a right that the State’s power should enforce on everyone” are not the same thing.)
Boeing and Lockheed still produce parts for the F-16 and F/A-18. Good luck trying to buy them.
SpaceX still produces Dragon capsules but won’t sell to anyone who’s competing with NASA, as Dennis Tito found out.
How about printer’s ink and paper? US mints shouldn’t be the only people who can buy US currency paper, eh?
This is not about the “right to repair,” even if supporters spin it that way. It’s about a group of people who want to use government to force other people to work for them, on terms which they dictate. That’s called involuntary servitude. I think there’s something in the Constitution about that.
I think I should have the right to repair my car or whatever widget I purchased. It used to be that the company merely said it voided your warranty. But given the DMCA and its multiple misuses by merely attempting nearly any fix you can be perceived as circumventing the law.
Remember the case about inkjet cartridges a couple of years back? I guess you are one of those in favor of the inkjet manufacturers. Those guys lost the case and that is why we even have a refill industry now.
I was under the impression that General Dynamics shuttered the production line for the F16 in 2012 and scrapped the tooling. The F18 is still in production, at least for the moment.
They did? What about the F-16l for Israel and that other one for the Emirates? The ones with conformal tanks? Refurbs?
Years ago, when I was fresh into the aerospace industry, I ran into non-standard bolts for the first time. These things had crazy socket patterns that could be wrenched only with the bolt manufacturer’s proprietary wrench heads. In this case, the bolts were used because they had unusually good properties, and were in sensitive locations – so that no one without the proper tools could mess with them.
That gave me the idea to start a car company that would sell cars for $100. But they would be put together with a very special type of fastener: each fastener would have a different thread pitch, and direction, and diameter, and bolt head, and there would be hundreds per car. None would come even close to any standard fasteners, nor to any of the other fasteners on the car (even if in a symmetric location). Each would require a different wrench, and each wrench would sell for $1,000. And each fastener would sell for at least $10.
The home mechanic would never buy the tools, but the cars would swamp the market so that the repair shops would have to buy them. After making $1 grillion, I would retire and open a restaurant so exclusive that no one was ever allowed in – even the staff.
ROFL!!!!!!!!!!!
Yeah, those proprietary bolt and screw heads are becoming commonplace in general merchandise as well.
I recently had a valve fail on an espresso maker. I went to take it apart, and found anti-tamper screws with a weird hex pattern plus a raised nub in the center. I had to drill out and do some grinding on a hex bit to make it fit, and that took more time than the actual repair of the valve did.
Since then, I found a bit set (from China, found at harbor freight) of all sorts of these “security” drivers. Cost me all of $6. It’s come in handy quite a few times.
That’s a Torx screw. They’re all over the place on my Jeep.
There’s a part of me that wants to be sympathetic to those who wish to repair. There’s also a part of me that understands that it isn’t always so simple.
Imagine an industry where the purchaser wants to get the product at near cost. The manufacturer agrees as long as they get exclusive rights to the aftermarket repair and spare parts sales business. Since this may be the only way the manufacturer can recover development and overhead costs (not to mention profit) the competition is definitely not welcome and, in some cases, may force the manufacturer to reveal processes that were developed at great cost.
Most people don’t start businesses to lose money.
Safe manufacturers should be required to post all safe combinations and how to back door open and repair and reset the combinations on any safe.