17 ms·

Apple Sued an iPhone Repair Shop Owner in Norway and Lost

476 points by dsr12 9y ago

dpkonofa 9y ago
This will get canned on the appeal, guaranteed. The article is a bit misleading because they're not going after him because he's doing aftermarket repairs. They're going after him because he's claiming that the repaired devices are using genuine parts from Apple, which even have the Apple logo on them, yet they weren't purchased from Apple. This is my biggest complaint with the "Right to Repair" movement. They're constantly conflating what Apple is fighting against (counterfeit parts and being compelled to provide documentation and manuals without oversight) with the valid complaint of users not being legally allowed to repair their own devices. Apple has never been against that and isn't fighting that. They're fighting the fact that these bills, every single one of them, wants to force Apple to provide instructions and parts for repair shops that aren't Apple authorized for which they can't verify or guarantee the quality fo the repair. That's a completely understandable position and yet people keep falsely claiming that it's simply about Apple wanting to keep people from repairing their own stuff. That's not it at all and it's doing a disservice to the "Right to Repair" movement to continue to do so.
- barrkel 9y ago
  The article flatly contradicts your claims.
  - dpkonofa 9y ago
    The website of the company that the article is about does not. They state (and it's archived since they've changed it since the court case) that they use genuine Apple parts for their repairs. Edit - https://web.archive.org/web/20160327050030/http://www.pckompaniet.no:80/index.php/reparasjon-iphone-ipad/ https://web.archive.org/web/20160327050030/http://www.pckomp...
- eagsalazar2 9y ago
  How can you or other 3rd parties repair devices if Apple won't sell parts or provide manuals and it sues people who claim to be able to do such things on your behalf? I think it is fair that apple withhold an "apple certified" designation but everything else beyond that is them trying to squash 3rd party repairs so that they can maintain a monopoly on that work, prevent you from upgrading memory, etc and ultimately keep you on the upgrade treadmill. You really don't think that is the case?
  - deleted 9y ago
    [deleted]
  - dpkonofa 9y ago
    >Apple won't sell parts or provide manuals and it sues people who claim to be able to do such things on your behalf This is objectively not true. Apple is not against selling parts or manuals. That's the entire point of an Apple Authorized Repair center. Anyone can get certified by Apple if they can demonstrate that the repairs are done to the level that Apple specifies. What the "Right to Repair" bills are asking for is that Apple provides the manuals for free. Why is that justifiable, fair, or right in any sense if doing so could (and materially would) harm their business? As for the second claim, Apple has never, ever sued someone simply for repairing their devices as a third-party. They've only sued people who claimed to use genuine Apple parts that weren't or people who stole manuals and schematics that are reserved for authorized repair centers.
- atonse 9y ago
  It's not that simple. Until literally 3 days ago I held exactly your same view "why don't they just become Apple authorized repair shops?" Well, apparently Apple actually restricts the repairs you can do. For example, if you have water damage, you aren't allowed to just fix the actual components (capacitors, etc) that blew, you have to replace the whole board, resulting in much higher costs and eWaste for customers. (This is from Louis Rossmann, a well known YouTuber who fixes MacBooks). You are basically restricted to mostly replacing boards and things like that, not fixing individual chips. For a company that toots their horn about being Green, their policies sure generate a ton more waste than necessary. And I say this as someone who almost exclusively owns Apple stuff. I am holding out with my 2015 MBP dearly for the next iteration of their laptop keyboards that don't require a $500 repair because of a spec of dust. All this has made me a STRONG proponent of the right-to-repair movement. If Apple actually cared more about less flashy and sexy parts about being green, they'd make these parts readily available.
  - deleted 9y ago
    [deleted]
  - urda 9y ago
    Louis Rossmann, who openly admitted to using illegally obtained schematics and internal documents from Apple? I wouldn't be throwing that name around as a talking point at all in this discussion. The reason why Apple doesn't want any Joe-schmoe just yanking and replacing caps and other components is simple: quality control. I can barely count on two hands people I would be comfortable working on the innards of a PC, let alone my phone and even then let alone desoldering and soldering new components onboard. Apple isn't doing this because they don't want people to repair their stuff, but because for most consumers it isn't feasible without ruining the rest of the product. These are small, compact, and complicated devices. It's not like swapping out some RAM or a GPU on a desktop rig at all. So yes, replace the whole board and recycle the old (as Apple does with most of their parts).
    - nightcracker 9y ago
      > Louis Rossmann, who openly admitted to using illegally obtained schematics and internal documents from Apple? Are you seriously trying to discredit a man for doing exactly what he's fighting for? It's like trying to discredit a politician that's pushing for the abolition of jaywalking by saying that he jay walks himself. No shit - that's the whole point.
- bambax 9y ago
  > the valid complaint of users not being legally allowed to repair their own devices. Apple has never been against that and isn't fighting that. Hmm, what? Apple is actively fighting that by making devices incredibly difficult to tear appart, not selling replacement parts, and, yes, suing every mom-and-pop repair shop.
  - zaroth 9y ago
    The “difficult to tear apart” thing I would give incredible leeway to. It’s very hard to demand a device is physically constructed a certain way without unintentionally harming innovation. Besides, people have differing opinions on what constitutes “ difficult to tear apart”. I’ve replaced batteries on all my iPhones and while it’s a delicate procedure it’s not particularly difficult, takes just a few minutes, and I’ve never damaged a phone in the process. I remember how much vitriol there was against Apple for not having hot swappable batteries, but I’m sure glad they went that route, and that they were able to lead the market in that choice. But for the rest of it, they should definitely have to provide parts, manuals, and attacking the independent repair shops is wrong unless the shop is actually misleading their customers.
  - dpkonofa 9y ago
    >suing every mom-and-pop repair shop. This is blatantly false. Please link 1 instance where Apple sued a mom-and-pop repair shop for anything other than they were claiming they were an authorized repair center or used genuine parts and didn't.
- deleted 9y ago
  [deleted]
- hhw 9y ago
  But the article states quite clearly that he is NOT claiming to use genuine parts. “PCKompaniet has never removed the coverup of the Apple logo on the screens that have been imported and has no interest in doing so. PCKompaniet does not pretend or market itself as Apple authorized and does not give any indication that the repair comes with an Apple warranty.” Unless you have evidence of the contrary, your argument is not applicable to this case.
  - woobar 9y ago
    > But the article states quite clearly that he is NOT claiming to use genuine parts. Not trying to pick side in this argument, but a quick search on webarchive[1] shows that this page (https://www.pckompaniet.no/reparasjon-iphone/ https://www.pckompaniet.no/reparasjon-iphone/) used to have this blurb: 'Kun orginale deler blir brukt her hos oss!' That google translates as 'Only original parts are used here!' [1] https://web.archive.org/web/20160327050030/http://www.pckompaniet.no:80/index.php/reparasjon-iphone-ipad/ https://web.archive.org/web/20160327050030/http://www.pckomp...
  - bluGill 9y ago
    The problem for Apple is if you sell badly repaired phone, the buyer has no way of knowing it was badly repaired and will blame Apple for any failures.
    - dpkonofa 9y ago
      This is exactly it. Note that Apple has yet to go after or sue someone simply for repairing an Apple device. That's never been the case yet. They've only sued people who claim to use genuine parts that don't, people who have used stolen service manuals, or companies that claim to do authorized repairs but don't.
- opencl 9y ago
  Where do you see any indication that this man was claiming to use genuine Apple components? I see nothing of the sort on his website[1]. The article specifically says that he made no claims of being authorized by Apple or using genuine Apple components and the court agreed with him. There was an Apple logo, on an internal component, which was covered up, because (at least according to the seller) they actually are Apple parts that had been refurbished. Now maybe they actually are counterfeit parts and the seller was lying, but there is zero evidence of this and the repairman certainly wasn't intentionally selling counterfeits or lying about anything. [1] https://www.pckompaniet.no/reparasjon-iphone/ https://www.pckompaniet.no/reparasjon-iphone/
  - ryguytilidie 9y ago
    I feel like I see this on the internet more and more lately. Paragraph one starts with some shoddy, made up evidence where they mock some idea and then you look for the start of paragraph 2 to figure out what they're really getting themselves upset about: "This is my biggest complaint with the "Right to Repair" movement." So yeah, have a problem with some group, reorganize information to make that group look bad and pretend like this thing you made up is a great illustration of the grudge you had against some people. But my question is, why?
    - ericabiz 9y ago
      > Why? Because he’s a former Apple employee: https://www.linkedin.com/in/dpkonofa https://www.linkedin.com/in/dpkonofa
      - dpkonofa 9y ago
        Why does that have any affect on my point? The article has been changed since it was originally posted. The original article had the guy claiming he was using genuine Apple parts which was stated right on the company's website (they've changed it since the case went to court): https://web.archive.org/web/20160327050030/http://www.pckompaniet.no:80/index.php/reparasjon-iphone-ipad/ https://web.archive.org/web/20160327050030/http://www.pckomp...
- ksk 9y ago
  Well, heres hoping it doesn't get canned. >This is my biggest complaint with the "Right to Repair" movement. They're constantly conflating what Apple is fighting against (counterfeit parts and being compelled to provide documentation and manuals without oversight) with the valid complaint of users not being legally allowed to repair their own devices Your complaint seems rather imagined to me. Where are they "constantly conflating"? I don't see that here. https://repair.org/ https://repair.org/
  - dpkonofa 9y ago
    >Your complaint seems rather imagined to me. Please show me a source where Apple sued someone (either an individual or a third-party repair center) simply for repairing their own device or a user's device on behalf of that user. You won't find it because that's not what Apple's complaint is here. People are conflating Apple's refusal to provide manuals and replacement parts without cost (and outside of their certification program) with the idea that Apple is trying to prevent people from repairing their own devices. That's not true in the slightest and it's straight-up misinformation.
    - ksk 9y ago
      >Please show me a source where Apple sued someone (either an individual or a third-party repair center) simply for repairing their own device or a user's device on behalf of that user. You won't find it because that's not what Apple's complaint is here. That would be inefficient and a waste of their money in most cases. >People are conflating Apple's refusal to provide manuals and replacement parts without cost (and outside of their certification program) with the idea that Apple is trying to prevent people from repairing their own devices. Apple uses various methods - Updates that brick repaired phones, and copyright/patent law to block others from supplying parts. Here they can choke the repair shops much more easily. I don't want to be forced to go to Subaru to repair my car either. I prefer to have an option of which tires to buy, which oil to use, which stereo I use, etc. I also don't want the car to be welded together to the point where nobody can repair it. YMMV. Sometimes the good guys win. https://9to5mac.com/2017/02/25/iphone-warranty-third-party-screen/ https://9to5mac.com/2017/02/25/iphone-warranty-third-party-s... http://money.cnn.com/2017/04/06/technology/apple-australia-lawsuit-error-53-iphone-brick/index.html http://money.cnn.com/2017/04/06/technology/apple-australia-l... >the idea that Apple is trying to prevent people from repairing their own devices. People don't want to repair the phones themselves. They want to use services available in almost every other consumer industry to service their phones. Apple insists that they should be the sole arbiter of who is and isn't allowed to do that. People are trying to fight Apple on that. And thats what its all about. Apple does produce some very high quality products and I have enjoyed many of them over the years. That doesn't make them a saint on all fronts. Fairs fair, Praise where praise is due, and criticism when they do something purely out of greed/control.
- cptskippy 9y ago
  > They're constantly conflating what Apple is fighting against (counterfeit parts and being compelled to provide documentation and manuals without oversight) with the valid complaint of users not being legally allowed to repair their own devices. Apple has never been against that and isn't fighting that. Apple is setting up an environment where counterfeiting is practically necessary by hindering legitimate repairs using non counterfeit non genuine parts. Apple doesn't allow those who aren't Authorized Repair Centers to purchase genuine replacement parts or to have access to service manuals. I'm not aware of another OEM that does this. I can go to HP, Dell, Samsung, MSI, Acer, or LG and purchase genuine parts or download service manuals. Apple posts service manuals online but they go out of their way to lock them behind a login so that only Authorized users can see them. Apple has bricked iPhones during iOS upgrades if those devices weren't using genuine Apple displays. Apple has bricked iPhones during iOS upgrades if you replaced the touch ID, regardless of whether it was a genuine part or not. The iPhone X camera module is a separate part form the display yet if you replace the display genuine or not while keeping the original camera module, it stops working for facial authentication. Apple disabled the ability to adjust the brightness of your Macbook's display if it wasn't genuine. Hey maybe it doesn't want to damage non genuine displays... so what's the difference between a genuine and non genuine part? The EEID that Apple programs into them. A counterfeit display in this case is simply one that was purchase from Apple's supplier, LG, and programmed with Apple's EEID not by Apple.
  - dpkonofa 9y ago
    >Apple doesn't allow those who aren't Authorized Repair Centers to purchase genuine replacement parts or to have access to service manuals And why shouldn't they be allowed to do that? They're not stopping anyone from reverse engineering the parts. They're not stopping anyone from doing the repairs and documenting them otherwise. I don't understand why anyone thinks that Apple should be compelled to willfully aid people that could harm their business model and their brand and to do it for free, no less.
    - cptskippy 9y ago
      > And why shouldn't they be allowed to do that? They are perfectly in their right to do that, it's just shitty. > They're not stopping anyone from doing the repairs Actually they are by bricking devices later for having non genuine parts or unauthorized repairs. > I don't understand why anyone thinks that Apple should be compelled... Who said anything about compelling them to do anything? I just said they were dicks. And how would allowing people to service their own machine hurt Apple's brand anymore than people currently making unauthorized repairs? Giving them access to genuine parts would just increase the likelihood that the repairs work.
- crististm 9y ago
  Where do you get the idea that Apple or anyone else for that matter can dictate the after market service level? The appropriate move is that everybody on the market to deliver the schematics of the device to the purchaser, not to the service shops. And while we're at it (since as you said, Apple is not fighting the right to repair) provide also the complete source code with all the private keys they use to brick repaired devices into oblivion. You might want to reconsider your position on defending idiotic corporate behavior against individuals.
  - dpkonofa 9y ago
    >The appropriate move is that everybody on the market to deliver the schematics of the device to the purchaser Why? Why is that appropriate when that's not the case for any other product or service that you can own? There's nothing to reconsider if I don't find their behavior idiotic.
    - crististm 9y ago
      That's a simple one: because they already deliver manuals to the service shops of their choice. With regard to your circular reasoning: it goes nowhere. You should know that all devices used to come with service manuals and some still do today.
      - dpkonofa 9y ago
        They used to come with service manuals because they were a collection of simple mechanical parts. Devices nowadays are far more complicated and intricate than the types of things you're referring to.
        crististm 9y ago
        There is the part where service manuals exist today. Apple just don't give them to you. I sense a fairy tale infinite complexity in todays devices from your post. You know that people built them
- jkoebler 9y ago
  From the article (which I wrote, happy to answer questions) ... this is quoted in the court decision i.e., was written by a judge not by the defendant: "PCKompaniet does not pretend or market itself as Apple authorized and does not give any indication that the repair comes with an Apple warranty.”"
  - dpkonofa 9y ago
    The PCKompaniet web site states that they use genuine Apple parts. Edit: https://web.archive.org/web/20160327050030/http://www.pckompaniet.no:80/index.php/reparasjon-iphone-ipad/ https://web.archive.org/web/20160327050030/http://www.pckomp...
- wuliwong 9y ago
  > the court decision states. “PCKompaniet has never removed the coverup of the Apple logo on the screens that have been imported and has no interest in doing so. PCKompaniet does not pretend or market itself as Apple authorized and does not give any indication that the repair comes with an Apple warranty.” You are incorrect. The Apple logos were covered up and the court findings state that they were never uncovered. I didn't see anywhere in this article where they say the owner was making claims about using genuine Apple parts. But I do agree, it seems the right to repair stuff is not great. Repair whatever you want but don't force Apple to help you.
NullPrefix 9y ago
>Apple sues PCKompaniet I assume Kompaniet is Company in Norwegian. >Apple sues PC Company
ksk 9y ago
I worry they're going to come after us programmers next. Only "authorized" programmers will get the access code required to change anything. Microsoft, Apple, Dell, etc will control the access codes. "Programming is hard, and these untrained self-taught programmers can mess up your machine, they might install malware, or they might be hackers, or they might overclock your CPU and damage it, or they might use the system for terrorism. Really, they should only be allowed to access the machine if they were appropriately trained by us."
- Someone1234 9y ago
  Isn't this exactly how iOS works currently? You literally cannot develop for it without signing an Apple contract (even non-App store apps require a user account/agreement).
  - mattsfrey 9y ago
    Technically that's just them locking you out of their distribution platform, I don't think they'd have a legal case against you though. People sell apps outside of the app store and haven't suffered any recourse from apple, at least not that I know of. EDIT: I guess you do have to technically agree to their terms to use the SDK and such, but if one were to get a hacked copy or whatever I think it'd be legal. They can definitely make it very hard to dodge their terms though.
    - shkkmo 9y ago
      How would a hacked copy make it more legal. Wouldn't using their software without a license also be illegal?
      - mattsfrey 9y ago
        I mostly just meant you wouldn't be breaking laws technically to go around them via reverse engineering. To your second statement that's actually a good point, it could be. I mean in general overall it's going to be pretty outrageous to try and legitimately develop going around apple entirely, so the OP's point is valid de facto, just saying in principle they can't lock people out in the absolute sense under current law.
mattsfrey 9y ago
"Apple does not ‘own’ the product after they have sold it" I think this is the crux of the issue. The guy was importing refurbished parts with the logos covered even. They weren't counterfeits. How does a manufacturer have the right to sue for copyright infringement when it's just end users reselling authentic parts? The owner even states he in no way markets them as OEM parts. Frankly I think it's pretty obvious apple is just trying to squeeze every cent out of these phones and it's a really bad hat to wear.
- Clubber 9y ago
  Yes, this certainly isn't good optics. I would think Apple would be smarter than have something like this in the paper.
- comboy 9y ago
  I don't think they want to squeeze every cent. I think they just care about the brand. They want people who bought iphone to have the best experience they prepared for them. Even if you buy some used iphone. If somebody buys some used iphone and it acts weird or the build quality seems imperfect because some parts were replaced, then this person may spread opinion that iphones suck. I'd guess that's their reasoning. But I'm not on their side here. I think they should be allowed to design products to make repairs as hard as possible if they want to, but once I buy it I should be able to do whatever I want with it. Plus there's not that much great experience to protect lately..
  - geezerjay 9y ago
    > They want people who bought iphone to have the best experience they prepared for them. It's quite obvious that, to put it mildly, that's wishful thinking inspired by a heavily rose-tainted view of Apple. Meanwhile, Apple is known for their extreme price gouging complemented with extreme actions to stop even their very own customers from even repairing their broken products, let alone upgrade them to a usable state.
    - rmev 9y ago
ivoras 9y ago
After watching things like this (Louis Rossmann), https://youtu.be/FeUBdMU2qA0 https://youtu.be/FeUBdMU2qA0 , if I ever buy an Apple product I'll basically treat it as unrepairable.
- etatoby 9y ago
  I watch Louis Rossman too. There's something about his straightforward and self-made-man attitude that strongly resonates with me. Plus it's usually very informative.
  - beenBoutIT 9y ago
    In an ideal world Louis Rossman would have a weekly show on PBS.
- jammi 9y ago
  Yeah, but still their laptops are much more durable than the competitors'; https://i.imgur.com/eKq8ZCG.png https://i.imgur.com/eKq8ZCG.png Someone who repairs a single brand of products will have a skewed image of the big picture. He'll basically only receive items too damaged to be repairable by others, but he has no data on whether he receives 1/million or 1/2 whatever and makes the assumption every single one of them are like the ones he receive. I've watched Rossmann's every video for a couple of years on my youtube subscriptions until he started with his political opinion and investment recommendation talks. It's a guy who thinks his opinion is the infallible fact and that there are no other possible explanations, and it undermines his professional opinions as well. I've done repairs on my own Apple products once they've been out of warranty and it's not as bad as he makes it sound. Parts are easily accessible either as China-clones or working spare parts from dismantled products, because almost every model of anything Apple makes are made for a very long time and in large volumes. You'll have a much harder time finding something like a spare motherboard for a 5 year old random Acer laptop and such. Apple does carry service parts for a long time for their products as well and they're accessible to the authorized service providers, but the pricing is very steep and not really worth it unless it's the only option you have, or if it's paid by insurance.
wildchild 9y ago
Apple is a scam.
linuxftw 9y ago
Every time someone purchases an Apple product, they are endorsing their practices, whether wittingly or unwittingly. Time and time again, we have observed that patents are a tool of the haves to prevent competition from the have-nots. While this case may have been about 'trademark' infringement, it's clear that if patents didn't exist one could procure genuine replacement parts that don't 'infringe' on Apple's trademarks (which in this case is obviously a dubious assertion). Every time a 'tech person' buys and espouses Apple products (and other patent encumbered products), others less educated in technology suffer. Reach for free and open source alternatives whenever viable, and try to educate others on the important compromises they have to make when it comes to freedom. We could lose free software and any resemblance to right to repair or open hardware in a generation if we're not careful.
- freedomben 9y ago
  I agree with you completely, but sadly I think time has proven that generally speaking (there's exceptions, you and I for example) people will choose the path of least resistance regardless of principles. This is true in other aspects of life, such as politics (who voted for, in their words "the lesser of two evils" instead of 3rd party last election?)
- beenBoutIT 9y ago
  Wherever she or he is, the next 'Steve Jobs/Steve Wozniak' is not an Apple fan and has zero interest in ever working at Apple.
- nexz 9y ago
  >Every time someone purchases an Apple product, they are endorsing their practices, whether wittingly or unwittingly. Well, it's either that or Android... so yes I think I'll stick with Apple. I am also sad that there's no alternative, but what can I do? I already bought a WP when I had some hope they could succeed but they never did. :(
agumonkey 9y ago
in case you never saw them, Louis Rossman has many videos about apple products. I can accept a bit of excentric design when you're pushing the boundaries of style and thinness but some things are just mindblowingly flabbergasting (fragile keyboard and rivetted to chassis; as repairable as a renaissance painting)
- mehrdadn 9y ago
  That guy is freaking awesome. Smart, to the point, insightful, and with lots of integrity. Definitely worth hearing what he has to say.
  - agumonkey 9y ago
    I personally find him annoying after some time but he does have lots of knowledge.
Reason077 9y ago
"Norway’s customs officials had seized a shipment of 63 iPhone 6 and 6S replacement screens on their way to Henrik’s shop from Asia and alerted Apple; the company said they were counterfeit." Wow, talk about snitches! Has anyone notified Apple about amazon.com? Pretty sure they're selling 'counterfeit' iPhone screens too.
- kristofferR 9y ago
  I doubt Amazon would be allowed to do their pro-counterfeit practices for very long in Norway. Perhaps that's one of the reasons they don't have a presence here yet. The Norwegian custom officials are evil heinous people anyway though, they've recently begun confiscating test kits (even though they're legal) and reporting it to the police. Thank god Norway is decriminalizing soon.
- beenBoutIT 9y ago
  Apple determined 90% of the Apple chargers sold on Amazon were fakes, but it seems to only be going after individual sellers as opposed to Amazon. http://www.patentlyapple.com/patently-apple/2016/10/apple-sues-mobile-star-for-selling-counterfeit-power-adapters-and-charging-cables-through-amazon.html http://www.patentlyapple.com/patently-apple/2016/10/apple-su...
  - ikeboy 9y ago
    I know multiple instances where Apple made false claims about infringement - I wouldn't trust that figure unless I see independent evidence. I myself would estimate 10-30% of chargers sold are counterfeit, I see some sellers that are obviously selling fakes but 90% seems extremely unlikely.
thefurman 9y ago
Just stop buying apple products, please?
- rootusrootus 9y ago
  Who should I buy from instead?
alkonaut 9y ago
There are two different futures: one in which manufacturers gives this up. Another in which every part is cryptographically signed to not be possible to counterfeit. You might think people would stop buying products from those who do the latter. But no.
ricksnyke 9y ago
IANAL but the appeal isn't going to fly. In the states this guy would probably be homeless by now tho :o
rootusrootus 9y ago
I agree with Apple going after someone for the counterfeits, I don't agree that it makes sense that they go after the retailer. Unless he is knowingly making fraudulent claims that he is using authentic Apple hardware, in which case it seems entirely appropriate to send him a cease-and-desist demanding that he disclose he is using knock-offs. If the parts are branded fraudulently with apple logos and such, they should go after the supplier for that.
- tim333 9y ago
  Yeah though the the parts in this article were "refurbished screens" rather than counterfeits. Talking of counterfeits, I wish the replacement part manufacturers would put their own brand on like the Floureon battery I've got in this macbook rather than saying genuine Apple when they are not like all the iphone battery replacements I've come across.
deleted 9y ago
[deleted]
userbinator 9y ago
By becoming “authorized,” repair companies have to pay Apple a fee (and buy parts from the company at a fixed rate.) They are also restricted from performing certain types of repairs ...and likely upgrades too: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=16780181 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=16780181

476 points by dsr12 9y ago

This will get canned on the appeal, guaranteed. The article is a bit misleading because they're not going after him because he's doing aftermarket repairs. They're going after him because he's claiming that the repaired devices are using genuine parts from Apple, which even have the Apple logo on them, yet they weren't purchased from Apple. This is my biggest complaint with the "Right to Repair" movement. They're constantly conflating what Apple is fighting against (counterfeit parts and being compelled to provide documentation and manuals without oversight) with the valid complaint of users not being legally allowed to repair their own devices. Apple has never been against that and isn't fighting that. They're fighting the fact that these bills, every single one of them, wants to force Apple to provide instructions and parts for repair shops that aren't Apple authorized for which they can't verify or guarantee the quality fo the repair. That's a completely understandable position and yet people keep falsely claiming that it's simply about Apple wanting to keep people from repairing their own stuff. That's not it at all and it's doing a disservice to the "Right to Repair" movement to continue to do so.

barrkel 9y ago
The article flatly contradicts your claims.
- dpkonofa 9y ago
  The website of the company that the article is about does not. They state (and it's archived since they've changed it since the court case) that they use genuine Apple parts for their repairs. Edit - https://web.archive.org/web/20160327050030/http://www.pckompaniet.no:80/index.php/reparasjon-iphone-ipad/ https://web.archive.org/web/20160327050030/http://www.pckomp...
eagsalazar2 9y ago
How can you or other 3rd parties repair devices if Apple won't sell parts or provide manuals and it sues people who claim to be able to do such things on your behalf? I think it is fair that apple withhold an "apple certified" designation but everything else beyond that is them trying to squash 3rd party repairs so that they can maintain a monopoly on that work, prevent you from upgrading memory, etc and ultimately keep you on the upgrade treadmill. You really don't think that is the case?
- deleted 9y ago
  [deleted]
- dpkonofa 9y ago
  >Apple won't sell parts or provide manuals and it sues people who claim to be able to do such things on your behalf This is objectively not true. Apple is not against selling parts or manuals. That's the entire point of an Apple Authorized Repair center. Anyone can get certified by Apple if they can demonstrate that the repairs are done to the level that Apple specifies. What the "Right to Repair" bills are asking for is that Apple provides the manuals for free. Why is that justifiable, fair, or right in any sense if doing so could (and materially would) harm their business? As for the second claim, Apple has never, ever sued someone simply for repairing their devices as a third-party. They've only sued people who claimed to use genuine Apple parts that weren't or people who stole manuals and schematics that are reserved for authorized repair centers.
atonse 9y ago
It's not that simple. Until literally 3 days ago I held exactly your same view "why don't they just become Apple authorized repair shops?" Well, apparently Apple actually restricts the repairs you can do. For example, if you have water damage, you aren't allowed to just fix the actual components (capacitors, etc) that blew, you have to replace the whole board, resulting in much higher costs and eWaste for customers. (This is from Louis Rossmann, a well known YouTuber who fixes MacBooks). You are basically restricted to mostly replacing boards and things like that, not fixing individual chips. For a company that toots their horn about being Green, their policies sure generate a ton more waste than necessary. And I say this as someone who almost exclusively owns Apple stuff. I am holding out with my 2015 MBP dearly for the next iteration of their laptop keyboards that don't require a $500 repair because of a spec of dust. All this has made me a STRONG proponent of the right-to-repair movement. If Apple actually cared more about less flashy and sexy parts about being green, they'd make these parts readily available.
- deleted 9y ago
  [deleted]
- urda 9y ago
  Louis Rossmann, who openly admitted to using illegally obtained schematics and internal documents from Apple? I wouldn't be throwing that name around as a talking point at all in this discussion. The reason why Apple doesn't want any Joe-schmoe just yanking and replacing caps and other components is simple: quality control. I can barely count on two hands people I would be comfortable working on the innards of a PC, let alone my phone and even then let alone desoldering and soldering new components onboard. Apple isn't doing this because they don't want people to repair their stuff, but because for most consumers it isn't feasible without ruining the rest of the product. These are small, compact, and complicated devices. It's not like swapping out some RAM or a GPU on a desktop rig at all. So yes, replace the whole board and recycle the old (as Apple does with most of their parts).
  - nightcracker 9y ago
    > Louis Rossmann, who openly admitted to using illegally obtained schematics and internal documents from Apple? Are you seriously trying to discredit a man for doing exactly what he's fighting for? It's like trying to discredit a politician that's pushing for the abolition of jaywalking by saying that he jay walks himself. No shit - that's the whole point.
bambax 9y ago
> the valid complaint of users not being legally allowed to repair their own devices. Apple has never been against that and isn't fighting that. Hmm, what? Apple is actively fighting that by making devices incredibly difficult to tear appart, not selling replacement parts, and, yes, suing every mom-and-pop repair shop.
- zaroth 9y ago
  The “difficult to tear apart” thing I would give incredible leeway to. It’s very hard to demand a device is physically constructed a certain way without unintentionally harming innovation. Besides, people have differing opinions on what constitutes “ difficult to tear apart”. I’ve replaced batteries on all my iPhones and while it’s a delicate procedure it’s not particularly difficult, takes just a few minutes, and I’ve never damaged a phone in the process. I remember how much vitriol there was against Apple for not having hot swappable batteries, but I’m sure glad they went that route, and that they were able to lead the market in that choice. But for the rest of it, they should definitely have to provide parts, manuals, and attacking the independent repair shops is wrong unless the shop is actually misleading their customers.
- dpkonofa 9y ago
  >suing every mom-and-pop repair shop. This is blatantly false. Please link 1 instance where Apple sued a mom-and-pop repair shop for anything other than they were claiming they were an authorized repair center or used genuine parts and didn't.
deleted 9y ago
[deleted]
hhw 9y ago
But the article states quite clearly that he is NOT claiming to use genuine parts. “PCKompaniet has never removed the coverup of the Apple logo on the screens that have been imported and has no interest in doing so. PCKompaniet does not pretend or market itself as Apple authorized and does not give any indication that the repair comes with an Apple warranty.” Unless you have evidence of the contrary, your argument is not applicable to this case.
- woobar 9y ago
  > But the article states quite clearly that he is NOT claiming to use genuine parts. Not trying to pick side in this argument, but a quick search on webarchive[1] shows that this page (https://www.pckompaniet.no/reparasjon-iphone/ https://www.pckompaniet.no/reparasjon-iphone/) used to have this blurb: 'Kun orginale deler blir brukt her hos oss!' That google translates as 'Only original parts are used here!' [1] https://web.archive.org/web/20160327050030/http://www.pckompaniet.no:80/index.php/reparasjon-iphone-ipad/ https://web.archive.org/web/20160327050030/http://www.pckomp...
- bluGill 9y ago
  The problem for Apple is if you sell badly repaired phone, the buyer has no way of knowing it was badly repaired and will blame Apple for any failures.
  - dpkonofa 9y ago
    This is exactly it. Note that Apple has yet to go after or sue someone simply for repairing an Apple device. That's never been the case yet. They've only sued people who claim to use genuine parts that don't, people who have used stolen service manuals, or companies that claim to do authorized repairs but don't.
opencl 9y ago
Where do you see any indication that this man was claiming to use genuine Apple components? I see nothing of the sort on his website[1]. The article specifically says that he made no claims of being authorized by Apple or using genuine Apple components and the court agreed with him. There was an Apple logo, on an internal component, which was covered up, because (at least according to the seller) they actually are Apple parts that had been refurbished. Now maybe they actually are counterfeit parts and the seller was lying, but there is zero evidence of this and the repairman certainly wasn't intentionally selling counterfeits or lying about anything. [1] https://www.pckompaniet.no/reparasjon-iphone/ https://www.pckompaniet.no/reparasjon-iphone/
- ryguytilidie 9y ago
  I feel like I see this on the internet more and more lately. Paragraph one starts with some shoddy, made up evidence where they mock some idea and then you look for the start of paragraph 2 to figure out what they're really getting themselves upset about: "This is my biggest complaint with the "Right to Repair" movement." So yeah, have a problem with some group, reorganize information to make that group look bad and pretend like this thing you made up is a great illustration of the grudge you had against some people. But my question is, why?
  - ericabiz 9y ago
    > Why? Because he’s a former Apple employee: https://www.linkedin.com/in/dpkonofa https://www.linkedin.com/in/dpkonofa
    - dpkonofa 9y ago
      Why does that have any affect on my point? The article has been changed since it was originally posted. The original article had the guy claiming he was using genuine Apple parts which was stated right on the company's website (they've changed it since the case went to court): https://web.archive.org/web/20160327050030/http://www.pckompaniet.no:80/index.php/reparasjon-iphone-ipad/ https://web.archive.org/web/20160327050030/http://www.pckomp...
ksk 9y ago
Well, heres hoping it doesn't get canned. >This is my biggest complaint with the "Right to Repair" movement. They're constantly conflating what Apple is fighting against (counterfeit parts and being compelled to provide documentation and manuals without oversight) with the valid complaint of users not being legally allowed to repair their own devices Your complaint seems rather imagined to me. Where are they "constantly conflating"? I don't see that here. https://repair.org/ https://repair.org/
- dpkonofa 9y ago
  >Your complaint seems rather imagined to me. Please show me a source where Apple sued someone (either an individual or a third-party repair center) simply for repairing their own device or a user's device on behalf of that user. You won't find it because that's not what Apple's complaint is here. People are conflating Apple's refusal to provide manuals and replacement parts without cost (and outside of their certification program) with the idea that Apple is trying to prevent people from repairing their own devices. That's not true in the slightest and it's straight-up misinformation.
  - ksk 9y ago
    >Please show me a source where Apple sued someone (either an individual or a third-party repair center) simply for repairing their own device or a user's device on behalf of that user. You won't find it because that's not what Apple's complaint is here. That would be inefficient and a waste of their money in most cases. >People are conflating Apple's refusal to provide manuals and replacement parts without cost (and outside of their certification program) with the idea that Apple is trying to prevent people from repairing their own devices. Apple uses various methods - Updates that brick repaired phones, and copyright/patent law to block others from supplying parts. Here they can choke the repair shops much more easily. I don't want to be forced to go to Subaru to repair my car either. I prefer to have an option of which tires to buy, which oil to use, which stereo I use, etc. I also don't want the car to be welded together to the point where nobody can repair it. YMMV. Sometimes the good guys win. https://9to5mac.com/2017/02/25/iphone-warranty-third-party-screen/ https://9to5mac.com/2017/02/25/iphone-warranty-third-party-s... http://money.cnn.com/2017/04/06/technology/apple-australia-lawsuit-error-53-iphone-brick/index.html http://money.cnn.com/2017/04/06/technology/apple-australia-l... >the idea that Apple is trying to prevent people from repairing their own devices. People don't want to repair the phones themselves. They want to use services available in almost every other consumer industry to service their phones. Apple insists that they should be the sole arbiter of who is and isn't allowed to do that. People are trying to fight Apple on that. And thats what its all about. Apple does produce some very high quality products and I have enjoyed many of them over the years. That doesn't make them a saint on all fronts. Fairs fair, Praise where praise is due, and criticism when they do something purely out of greed/control.
cptskippy 9y ago
> They're constantly conflating what Apple is fighting against (counterfeit parts and being compelled to provide documentation and manuals without oversight) with the valid complaint of users not being legally allowed to repair their own devices. Apple has never been against that and isn't fighting that. Apple is setting up an environment where counterfeiting is practically necessary by hindering legitimate repairs using non counterfeit non genuine parts. Apple doesn't allow those who aren't Authorized Repair Centers to purchase genuine replacement parts or to have access to service manuals. I'm not aware of another OEM that does this. I can go to HP, Dell, Samsung, MSI, Acer, or LG and purchase genuine parts or download service manuals. Apple posts service manuals online but they go out of their way to lock them behind a login so that only Authorized users can see them. Apple has bricked iPhones during iOS upgrades if those devices weren't using genuine Apple displays. Apple has bricked iPhones during iOS upgrades if you replaced the touch ID, regardless of whether it was a genuine part or not. The iPhone X camera module is a separate part form the display yet if you replace the display genuine or not while keeping the original camera module, it stops working for facial authentication. Apple disabled the ability to adjust the brightness of your Macbook's display if it wasn't genuine. Hey maybe it doesn't want to damage non genuine displays... so what's the difference between a genuine and non genuine part? The EEID that Apple programs into them. A counterfeit display in this case is simply one that was purchase from Apple's supplier, LG, and programmed with Apple's EEID not by Apple.
- dpkonofa 9y ago
  >Apple doesn't allow those who aren't Authorized Repair Centers to purchase genuine replacement parts or to have access to service manuals And why shouldn't they be allowed to do that? They're not stopping anyone from reverse engineering the parts. They're not stopping anyone from doing the repairs and documenting them otherwise. I don't understand why anyone thinks that Apple should be compelled to willfully aid people that could harm their business model and their brand and to do it for free, no less.
  - cptskippy 9y ago
    > And why shouldn't they be allowed to do that? They are perfectly in their right to do that, it's just shitty. > They're not stopping anyone from doing the repairs Actually they are by bricking devices later for having non genuine parts or unauthorized repairs. > I don't understand why anyone thinks that Apple should be compelled... Who said anything about compelling them to do anything? I just said they were dicks. And how would allowing people to service their own machine hurt Apple's brand anymore than people currently making unauthorized repairs? Giving them access to genuine parts would just increase the likelihood that the repairs work.
crististm 9y ago
Where do you get the idea that Apple or anyone else for that matter can dictate the after market service level? The appropriate move is that everybody on the market to deliver the schematics of the device to the purchaser, not to the service shops. And while we're at it (since as you said, Apple is not fighting the right to repair) provide also the complete source code with all the private keys they use to brick repaired devices into oblivion. You might want to reconsider your position on defending idiotic corporate behavior against individuals.
- dpkonofa 9y ago
  >The appropriate move is that everybody on the market to deliver the schematics of the device to the purchaser Why? Why is that appropriate when that's not the case for any other product or service that you can own? There's nothing to reconsider if I don't find their behavior idiotic.
  - crististm 9y ago
    That's a simple one: because they already deliver manuals to the service shops of their choice. With regard to your circular reasoning: it goes nowhere. You should know that all devices used to come with service manuals and some still do today.
    - dpkonofa 9y ago
      They used to come with service manuals because they were a collection of simple mechanical parts. Devices nowadays are far more complicated and intricate than the types of things you're referring to.
      - crististm 9y ago
        There is the part where service manuals exist today. Apple just don't give them to you. I sense a fairy tale infinite complexity in todays devices from your post. You know that people built them
jkoebler 9y ago
From the article (which I wrote, happy to answer questions) ... this is quoted in the court decision i.e., was written by a judge not by the defendant: "PCKompaniet does not pretend or market itself as Apple authorized and does not give any indication that the repair comes with an Apple warranty.”"
- dpkonofa 9y ago
  The PCKompaniet web site states that they use genuine Apple parts. Edit: https://web.archive.org/web/20160327050030/http://www.pckompaniet.no:80/index.php/reparasjon-iphone-ipad/ https://web.archive.org/web/20160327050030/http://www.pckomp...
wuliwong 9y ago
> the court decision states. “PCKompaniet has never removed the coverup of the Apple logo on the screens that have been imported and has no interest in doing so. PCKompaniet does not pretend or market itself as Apple authorized and does not give any indication that the repair comes with an Apple warranty.” You are incorrect. The Apple logos were covered up and the court findings state that they were never uncovered. I didn't see anywhere in this article where they say the owner was making claims about using genuine Apple parts. But I do agree, it seems the right to repair stuff is not great. Repair whatever you want but don't force Apple to help you.

NullPrefix 9y ago

>Apple sues PCKompaniet I assume Kompaniet is Company in Norwegian. >Apple sues PC Company

ksk 9y ago

I worry they're going to come after us programmers next. Only "authorized" programmers will get the access code required to change anything. Microsoft, Apple, Dell, etc will control the access codes. "Programming is hard, and these untrained self-taught programmers can mess up your machine, they might install malware, or they might be hackers, or they might overclock your CPU and damage it, or they might use the system for terrorism. Really, they should only be allowed to access the machine if they were appropriately trained by us."

Someone1234 9y ago
Isn't this exactly how iOS works currently? You literally cannot develop for it without signing an Apple contract (even non-App store apps require a user account/agreement).
- mattsfrey 9y ago
  Technically that's just them locking you out of their distribution platform, I don't think they'd have a legal case against you though. People sell apps outside of the app store and haven't suffered any recourse from apple, at least not that I know of. EDIT: I guess you do have to technically agree to their terms to use the SDK and such, but if one were to get a hacked copy or whatever I think it'd be legal. They can definitely make it very hard to dodge their terms though.
  - shkkmo 9y ago
    How would a hacked copy make it more legal. Wouldn't using their software without a license also be illegal?
    - mattsfrey 9y ago
      I mostly just meant you wouldn't be breaking laws technically to go around them via reverse engineering. To your second statement that's actually a good point, it could be. I mean in general overall it's going to be pretty outrageous to try and legitimately develop going around apple entirely, so the OP's point is valid de facto, just saying in principle they can't lock people out in the absolute sense under current law.

mattsfrey 9y ago

"Apple does not ‘own’ the product after they have sold it" I think this is the crux of the issue. The guy was importing refurbished parts with the logos covered even. They weren't counterfeits. How does a manufacturer have the right to sue for copyright infringement when it's just end users reselling authentic parts? The owner even states he in no way markets them as OEM parts. Frankly I think it's pretty obvious apple is just trying to squeeze every cent out of these phones and it's a really bad hat to wear.

Clubber 9y ago
Yes, this certainly isn't good optics. I would think Apple would be smarter than have something like this in the paper.
comboy 9y ago
I don't think they want to squeeze every cent. I think they just care about the brand. They want people who bought iphone to have the best experience they prepared for them. Even if you buy some used iphone. If somebody buys some used iphone and it acts weird or the build quality seems imperfect because some parts were replaced, then this person may spread opinion that iphones suck. I'd guess that's their reasoning. But I'm not on their side here. I think they should be allowed to design products to make repairs as hard as possible if they want to, but once I buy it I should be able to do whatever I want with it. Plus there's not that much great experience to protect lately..
- geezerjay 9y ago
  > They want people who bought iphone to have the best experience they prepared for them. It's quite obvious that, to put it mildly, that's wishful thinking inspired by a heavily rose-tainted view of Apple. Meanwhile, Apple is known for their extreme price gouging complemented with extreme actions to stop even their very own customers from even repairing their broken products, let alone upgrade them to a usable state.
  - rmev 9y ago

ivoras 9y ago

After watching things like this (Louis Rossmann), https://youtu.be/FeUBdMU2qA0 https://youtu.be/FeUBdMU2qA0 , if I ever buy an Apple product I'll basically treat it as unrepairable.

etatoby 9y ago
I watch Louis Rossman too. There's something about his straightforward and self-made-man attitude that strongly resonates with me. Plus it's usually very informative.
- beenBoutIT 9y ago
  In an ideal world Louis Rossman would have a weekly show on PBS.
jammi 9y ago
Yeah, but still their laptops are much more durable than the competitors'; https://i.imgur.com/eKq8ZCG.png https://i.imgur.com/eKq8ZCG.png Someone who repairs a single brand of products will have a skewed image of the big picture. He'll basically only receive items too damaged to be repairable by others, but he has no data on whether he receives 1/million or 1/2 whatever and makes the assumption every single one of them are like the ones he receive. I've watched Rossmann's every video for a couple of years on my youtube subscriptions until he started with his political opinion and investment recommendation talks. It's a guy who thinks his opinion is the infallible fact and that there are no other possible explanations, and it undermines his professional opinions as well. I've done repairs on my own Apple products once they've been out of warranty and it's not as bad as he makes it sound. Parts are easily accessible either as China-clones or working spare parts from dismantled products, because almost every model of anything Apple makes are made for a very long time and in large volumes. You'll have a much harder time finding something like a spare motherboard for a 5 year old random Acer laptop and such. Apple does carry service parts for a long time for their products as well and they're accessible to the authorized service providers, but the pricing is very steep and not really worth it unless it's the only option you have, or if it's paid by insurance.

wildchild 9y ago

Apple is a scam.

linuxftw 9y ago

Every time someone purchases an Apple product, they are endorsing their practices, whether wittingly or unwittingly. Time and time again, we have observed that patents are a tool of the haves to prevent competition from the have-nots. While this case may have been about 'trademark' infringement, it's clear that if patents didn't exist one could procure genuine replacement parts that don't 'infringe' on Apple's trademarks (which in this case is obviously a dubious assertion). Every time a 'tech person' buys and espouses Apple products (and other patent encumbered products), others less educated in technology suffer. Reach for free and open source alternatives whenever viable, and try to educate others on the important compromises they have to make when it comes to freedom. We could lose free software and any resemblance to right to repair or open hardware in a generation if we're not careful.

freedomben 9y ago
I agree with you completely, but sadly I think time has proven that generally speaking (there's exceptions, you and I for example) people will choose the path of least resistance regardless of principles. This is true in other aspects of life, such as politics (who voted for, in their words "the lesser of two evils" instead of 3rd party last election?)
beenBoutIT 9y ago
Wherever she or he is, the next 'Steve Jobs/Steve Wozniak' is not an Apple fan and has zero interest in ever working at Apple.
nexz 9y ago
>Every time someone purchases an Apple product, they are endorsing their practices, whether wittingly or unwittingly. Well, it's either that or Android... so yes I think I'll stick with Apple. I am also sad that there's no alternative, but what can I do? I already bought a WP when I had some hope they could succeed but they never did. :(

agumonkey 9y ago

in case you never saw them, Louis Rossman has many videos about apple products. I can accept a bit of excentric design when you're pushing the boundaries of style and thinness but some things are just mindblowingly flabbergasting (fragile keyboard and rivetted to chassis; as repairable as a renaissance painting)

mehrdadn 9y ago
That guy is freaking awesome. Smart, to the point, insightful, and with lots of integrity. Definitely worth hearing what he has to say.
- agumonkey 9y ago
  I personally find him annoying after some time but he does have lots of knowledge.

Reason077 9y ago

"Norway’s customs officials had seized a shipment of 63 iPhone 6 and 6S replacement screens on their way to Henrik’s shop from Asia and alerted Apple; the company said they were counterfeit." Wow, talk about snitches! Has anyone notified Apple about amazon.com? Pretty sure they're selling 'counterfeit' iPhone screens too.

kristofferR 9y ago
I doubt Amazon would be allowed to do their pro-counterfeit practices for very long in Norway. Perhaps that's one of the reasons they don't have a presence here yet. The Norwegian custom officials are evil heinous people anyway though, they've recently begun confiscating test kits (even though they're legal) and reporting it to the police. Thank god Norway is decriminalizing soon.
beenBoutIT 9y ago
Apple determined 90% of the Apple chargers sold on Amazon were fakes, but it seems to only be going after individual sellers as opposed to Amazon. http://www.patentlyapple.com/patently-apple/2016/10/apple-sues-mobile-star-for-selling-counterfeit-power-adapters-and-charging-cables-through-amazon.html http://www.patentlyapple.com/patently-apple/2016/10/apple-su...
- ikeboy 9y ago
  I know multiple instances where Apple made false claims about infringement - I wouldn't trust that figure unless I see independent evidence. I myself would estimate 10-30% of chargers sold are counterfeit, I see some sellers that are obviously selling fakes but 90% seems extremely unlikely.

thefurman 9y ago

Just stop buying apple products, please?

rootusrootus 9y ago
Who should I buy from instead?

alkonaut 9y ago

There are two different futures: one in which manufacturers gives this up. Another in which every part is cryptographically signed to not be possible to counterfeit. You might think people would stop buying products from those who do the latter. But no.

ricksnyke 9y ago

IANAL but the appeal isn't going to fly. In the states this guy would probably be homeless by now tho :o

rootusrootus 9y ago

I agree with Apple going after someone for the counterfeits, I don't agree that it makes sense that they go after the retailer. Unless he is knowingly making fraudulent claims that he is using authentic Apple hardware, in which case it seems entirely appropriate to send him a cease-and-desist demanding that he disclose he is using knock-offs. If the parts are branded fraudulently with apple logos and such, they should go after the supplier for that.

tim333 9y ago
Yeah though the the parts in this article were "refurbished screens" rather than counterfeits. Talking of counterfeits, I wish the replacement part manufacturers would put their own brand on like the Floureon battery I've got in this macbook rather than saying genuine Apple when they are not like all the iphone battery replacements I've come across.

deleted 9y ago

[deleted]

userbinator 9y ago

By becoming “authorized,” repair companies have to pay Apple a fee (and buy parts from the company at a fixed rate.) They are also restricted from performing certain types of repairs ...and likely upgrades too: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=16780181 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=16780181