3 ms·

I don’t believe that’s the only logical conclusion. Perhaps there should be some base requirement for people who want to repair something- be it a certification

I don’t believe that’s the only logical conclusion. Perhaps there should be some base requirement for people who want to repair something- be it a certification or insurance requirement. There could definitely be degrees of freedom for repair on specific items, much like there’s a degree of freedom of usage for particular items. The right to own should not necessarily imply a right to repair for all types of items.

chii 8y ago
> The right to own should not necessarily imply a right to repair for all types of items. the right to repair doesn't necessarily mean you have to do it yourself. To me, the right to repair means the right for a 3rd party to completely understand the innards of a piece of equipment. This way, the manufacturer cannot lock you in, nor can they charge exorbinant prices for repairs. It's really and extension of a free-market. Compete on quality and price, rather than by monopoly or coercion.
rmason 8y ago
That's the best approach, certify him to recycle Tesla's. Make him document what he's done and that his repaired cars pass the same sorts of tests that new Tesla's do. Then require him to have insurance so if something goes wrong because of his efforts then he pays the first two million of any settlement. But let him buy new parts though.
- janoc 8y ago
  Yep, that would be the ideal way. OTOH, will never happen because there is no such certification system in place even for new cars (and not only Tesla's). New cars pass the homologation process where a few specimen are subjected to various tests (e.g. crash testing and emission tests) and a lot of paperwork is done by the manufacturer certifying compliance with various regulations. That's not realistic for a repaired car. You can't crash-test a one-off vehicle which is the only way to determine structural soundness of some of the repairs he is doing. That's also why such car "recycling" is generally not done. If anything major in the chassis/body is damaged, the car is usually a total loss - it is not economical or even possible to safely repair it and nobody could guarantee the safety of it. The best he can do is to become an authorized mechanic for Tesla (not sure whether Tesla has such program, never owned one). But then he would likely be legally unable to use salvaged parts in his repairs, only new ones.
zAy0LfpBZLC8mAC 8y ago
Yes, it should imply a right to repair for all types of items. Mind you, right to repair is a separate question from right to use on public streets. The former is between the manufacturer and the owner, the latter is between the owner and the public/the state. There may be additional requirements to be allowed to use a repaired vehicle on public streets, but the important point is that that is none of the manufacturer's business, the requirements are set by the state, not by the manufacturer.
- userbinator 8y ago
  There may be additional requirements to be allowed to use a repaired vehicle on public streets, but the important point is that that is none of the manufacturer's business, the requirements are set by the state, not by the manufacturer. Indeed. This is usually called "roadworthiness" and varies between states. In fact, this is why the whole custom/car modding/hot rod culture can exist --- and from what I've seen, it's not been detrimental to overall safety. The vast majority of deaths come from idiotic/drunk/distracted drivers, not problems with modded/repaired cars.

chii 8y ago

> The right to own should not necessarily imply a right to repair for all types of items. the right to repair doesn't necessarily mean you have to do it yourself. To me, the right to repair means the right for a 3rd party to completely understand the innards of a piece of equipment. This way, the manufacturer cannot lock you in, nor can they charge exorbinant prices for repairs. It's really and extension of a free-market. Compete on quality and price, rather than by monopoly or coercion.

rmason 8y ago

That's the best approach, certify him to recycle Tesla's. Make him document what he's done and that his repaired cars pass the same sorts of tests that new Tesla's do. Then require him to have insurance so if something goes wrong because of his efforts then he pays the first two million of any settlement. But let him buy new parts though.

janoc 8y ago
Yep, that would be the ideal way. OTOH, will never happen because there is no such certification system in place even for new cars (and not only Tesla's). New cars pass the homologation process where a few specimen are subjected to various tests (e.g. crash testing and emission tests) and a lot of paperwork is done by the manufacturer certifying compliance with various regulations. That's not realistic for a repaired car. You can't crash-test a one-off vehicle which is the only way to determine structural soundness of some of the repairs he is doing. That's also why such car "recycling" is generally not done. If anything major in the chassis/body is damaged, the car is usually a total loss - it is not economical or even possible to safely repair it and nobody could guarantee the safety of it. The best he can do is to become an authorized mechanic for Tesla (not sure whether Tesla has such program, never owned one). But then he would likely be legally unable to use salvaged parts in his repairs, only new ones.

zAy0LfpBZLC8mAC 8y ago

Yes, it should imply a right to repair for all types of items. Mind you, right to repair is a separate question from right to use on public streets. The former is between the manufacturer and the owner, the latter is between the owner and the public/the state. There may be additional requirements to be allowed to use a repaired vehicle on public streets, but the important point is that that is none of the manufacturer's business, the requirements are set by the state, not by the manufacturer.

userbinator 8y ago
There may be additional requirements to be allowed to use a repaired vehicle on public streets, but the important point is that that is none of the manufacturer's business, the requirements are set by the state, not by the manufacturer. Indeed. This is usually called "roadworthiness" and varies between states. In fact, this is why the whole custom/car modding/hot rod culture can exist --- and from what I've seen, it's not been detrimental to overall safety. The vast majority of deaths come from idiotic/drunk/distracted drivers, not problems with modded/repaired cars.