> Now the author has shifted "right to repair" to mean mandatory first-party device support and design requirements around repair-ability. I'm sure mandatory f

> Now the author has shifted "right to repair" to mean mandatory first-party device support and design requirements around repair-ability. I'm sure mandatory first-party device support is better for the manufacturer than giving people the idea they should be able to control what software runs on their device. I wonder if that stance is a lack of imagination on the author's part or something more deliberate.