5 ms·

Seems like a half-baked idea. What would the rules be for maintaining stocks of replacement parts?

ryukafalz 3y ago
If you still stock them for your own service centers, you sell them to customers too. Provide to your customers the same resources you provide to your internal service staff. If you don't stock them anymore, sure, you don't stock them anymore. (I would also like to see requirements for longer product support cycles, which would go along with this but is somewhat orthogonal to the part availability concern.)
- deleted 3y ago
  [deleted]
- nunuvit 3y ago
  If they're priced reasonably, they'll be scalped. If not, what's the point?
  - ryukafalz 3y ago
    You expect spare parts to be scalped? This isn't like a standalone Xbox that's useful on its own, spare parts are only useful if you have a broken device that needs that particular part, and the upper bound on price is how much the manufacturer will charge for a repair themselves. Seems like a bad deal for scalpers. I don't see people scalping Framework parts for example. They all seem to be available on their site. You seem confident that this is impossible, but it's been done.
    - nunuvit 3y ago
      Sort of. I don't like the idea of mandating that companies sell replacement parts themselves. That's a new idea without any real precedent and it doesn't make sense. Imagine if that was the law. Apple could buy all of one kind of Framework's spare parts. Maybe Framework wants to reserve some so they can continue providing service themselves. Are they allowed to do that? What does the law say about replenishing stock? Is there a time limit or a minimum quantity? Parts are made in huge production runs with long lead times. Are they going to have to pay for a rush order to comply with the law? Can they afford to have only a few thousand made instead of a million? Can they afford a million? If such a law existed, there would be scalpers because there would be adversarial artificial scarcity. Either there's a steep penalty that's worth exploiting, or it's unenforceable. So no, it hasn't been done.
      - ryukafalz 3y ago
        If it were up to me: > Maybe Framework wants to reserve some so they can continue providing service themselves. Are they allowed to do that? Yes. > What does the law say about replenishing stock? Is there a time limit or a minimum quantity? No. Make a good-faith attempt. The courts can decide what that means in practice. Exempt manufacturers below a certain revenue threshold, to discourage targeting them with spurious lawsuits. Likewise you could define generous thresholds of availability that, if met, can be used to quickly throw out a lawsuit. And: > Apple could buy all of one kind of Framework's spare parts. Ban this. It's clearly anticompetitive. If we wanted to start small, mandate a new conspicuous product label that indicates how long the manufacturer will make replacement parts available. That'd at least raise awareness.
        deleted 3y ago
        [deleted]
        nunuvit 3y ago
        Someone who doesn't like Apple will use social media to tell people to buy up the chips so they'll get sued. Then someone will sue Apple or file a class action lawsuit. Nobody ever makes it through this line of questioning. Right to Repair has options, but mandating sales isn't one of them. I'm going to skip over the boring legal questions and ask something that I find more interesting. Let's say you get your dream bill passed tomorrow. What will happen when products are a single integrated part? Does right to repair fizzle out, or does it force companies to make antiquated shit?
        ryukafalz 3y ago
        > Let's say you get your dream bill passed tomorrow. What will happen when products are a single integrated part? Does right to repair fizzle out, or does it force companies to make antiquated shit? A single integrated part that literally can't be repaired in any way? I find that unlikely. Like I said at the start of the thread, make the chips, schematics, and required software available. Repair shops will figure it out. MacBooks have been trending towards integrated boards for years but they're still what e.g. Louis Rossmann's company works on. Even if repairing it involves SMD rework, it's still possible! Maybe not by a layman, but people specialize. I do think products shouldn't be made intentionally difficult to open nondestructively though. Think screws rather than glue wherever possible. (Thankfully several companies do seem to be trending back in this direction nowadays.)

If you still stock them for your own service centers, you sell them to customers too. Provide to your customers the same resources you provide to your internal service staff. If you don't stock them anymore, sure, you don't stock them anymore. (I would also like to see requirements for longer product support cycles, which would go along with this but is somewhat orthogonal to the part availability concern.)

deleted 3y ago
[deleted]
nunuvit 3y ago
If they're priced reasonably, they'll be scalped. If not, what's the point?
- ryukafalz 3y ago
  You expect spare parts to be scalped? This isn't like a standalone Xbox that's useful on its own, spare parts are only useful if you have a broken device that needs that particular part, and the upper bound on price is how much the manufacturer will charge for a repair themselves. Seems like a bad deal for scalpers. I don't see people scalping Framework parts for example. They all seem to be available on their site. You seem confident that this is impossible, but it's been done.
  - nunuvit 3y ago
    Sort of. I don't like the idea of mandating that companies sell replacement parts themselves. That's a new idea without any real precedent and it doesn't make sense. Imagine if that was the law. Apple could buy all of one kind of Framework's spare parts. Maybe Framework wants to reserve some so they can continue providing service themselves. Are they allowed to do that? What does the law say about replenishing stock? Is there a time limit or a minimum quantity? Parts are made in huge production runs with long lead times. Are they going to have to pay for a rush order to comply with the law? Can they afford to have only a few thousand made instead of a million? Can they afford a million? If such a law existed, there would be scalpers because there would be adversarial artificial scarcity. Either there's a steep penalty that's worth exploiting, or it's unenforceable. So no, it hasn't been done.
    - ryukafalz 3y ago
      If it were up to me: > Maybe Framework wants to reserve some so they can continue providing service themselves. Are they allowed to do that? Yes. > What does the law say about replenishing stock? Is there a time limit or a minimum quantity? No. Make a good-faith attempt. The courts can decide what that means in practice. Exempt manufacturers below a certain revenue threshold, to discourage targeting them with spurious lawsuits. Likewise you could define generous thresholds of availability that, if met, can be used to quickly throw out a lawsuit. And: > Apple could buy all of one kind of Framework's spare parts. Ban this. It's clearly anticompetitive. If we wanted to start small, mandate a new conspicuous product label that indicates how long the manufacturer will make replacement parts available. That'd at least raise awareness.
      - deleted 3y ago
        [deleted]
      - nunuvit 3y ago
        Someone who doesn't like Apple will use social media to tell people to buy up the chips so they'll get sued. Then someone will sue Apple or file a class action lawsuit. Nobody ever makes it through this line of questioning. Right to Repair has options, but mandating sales isn't one of them. I'm going to skip over the boring legal questions and ask something that I find more interesting. Let's say you get your dream bill passed tomorrow. What will happen when products are a single integrated part? Does right to repair fizzle out, or does it force companies to make antiquated shit?
        ryukafalz 3y ago
        > Let's say you get your dream bill passed tomorrow. What will happen when products are a single integrated part? Does right to repair fizzle out, or does it force companies to make antiquated shit? A single integrated part that literally can't be repaired in any way? I find that unlikely. Like I said at the start of the thread, make the chips, schematics, and required software available. Repair shops will figure it out. MacBooks have been trending towards integrated boards for years but they're still what e.g. Louis Rossmann's company works on. Even if repairing it involves SMD rework, it's still possible! Maybe not by a layman, but people specialize. I do think products shouldn't be made intentionally difficult to open nondestructively though. Think screws rather than glue wherever possible. (Thankfully several companies do seem to be trending back in this direction nowadays.)