3 ms·
I'm not a lawyer. Would this make it harder to invoke California's Songs-Beverly Act for device replacement? (California's Lemon Law) Previously, you could b
by throwaway914 3y ago
I'm not a lawyer. Would this make it harder to invoke California's Songs-Beverly Act for device replacement? (California's Lemon Law)
Previously, you could buy an appliance >$100 and if it broke in 5-7 years you could ask for service or parts to repair it. If the company cannot produce that, they would be required by law to replace the "thing" with an equivalent or newer product. This looks like the 7 year requirement is on things still being sold.
If companies must retain 7 years of parts now, this kinda closes the loop on getting new stuff in a Planned Obsolescence world. :p
I'll happily take a win for Right to Repair.
- ZoomerCretin 3y agohttps://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billTextClient.xhtml?bill_id=202320240SB244 https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billTextClient.xhtm... (k) This section shall not apply if the manufacturer provides an equivalent or better, readily available replacement electronic or appliance product at no charge to the customer.
- throwaway914 3y agoBefore this, you could take advantage of their poor planning and not keeping parts or offering repair service. Now they're required by law - as long as the product is still being sold. I liked getting new stuff freely :-)