6 ms·
> Without these certifications, you are not an independent repair provider and manufacturers can refuse to allow you to do anything. If this is true, it doesn'
by throw10920 3y ago
> Without these certifications, you are not an independent repair provider and manufacturers can refuse to allow you to do anything.
If this is true, it doesn't seem like it's actually "right to repair" at all.
- delfinom 3y agoYep this law is just a giant handout to the industry. I wouldn't be surprised if they use this law to now sue "uncertified" repair shops.
- ZanyProgrammer 3y agoYes, it's such a giant handout that Apple came out against it.
- throw10920 3y agoThe implicit claim being made in this sarcastic comment is that it's not possible for a law to be detrimental to one company while unfairly favoring another. Which, of course, is obviously false when you think about it.
- digging 3y agoWhich major tech companies would it be good for while being bad for Apple? Keeping in mind that the owner of a device is also allowed to repair without certification.
- throw10920 3y agoWhere did I say "major"?
- afavour 3y agoThe OP said "a giant handout to the industry". If you're trying to make a point that excludes all the major players in the tech industry then by all means go ahead but it isn't the conversation you joined.
- CamperBob2 3y agoI imagine the parable of Brer Rabbit and the Briar Patch is largely lost on today's audiences. More's the pity.
- idiotsecant 3y agoWhat mechanism in this law do you propose allows them to sue repair shops?
- AaronM 3y agoI read things differently. Several sections clearly reference the owner of a device. For example under section C part i (C) Makes parts available directly or through an authorized service provider to: (i) An independent repair provider or an owner at costs and on terms that are equivalent to the most favorable costs and terms at which the original equipment manufacturer offers the parts to an authorized service provider and that: the word owner shows up 17 times in the bill, and seems to give the same rights to an owner, that an authorized repair shop has.
- userbinator 3y agoThe subtle point in that sentence might be "provider OR an owner", as opposed to "provider AND an owner".
- rolph 3y agohttps://yt.artemislena.eu/watch?v=4AyjKgz9tKg https://yt.artemislena.eu/watch?v=4AyjKgz9tKg [video]
- rtkwe 3y agoThe law there is defining two categories manufacturers need to provide the parts to, changing it to AND would mean owners would have to be certified repair people to be covered.
- filoleg 3y agoNot trying to take a dig at your comment, but for others struggling to parse (as much as I was) what it was trying to say, here is the trick that helped me - place a comma right before “changing” or treat that word as the start of a new sentence.
- olliej 3y agoThere was an entire lawsuit about the presence or absence of an Oxford comma in some law, possibly even in Oregon? [edit: boo it was Maine! Happily "Oxford comma lawsuit" is sufficient search term: https://www.npr.org/2017/03/23/521274657/the-10-million-lawsuit-that-hinges-on-an-oxford-comma https://www.npr.org/2017/03/23/521274657/the-10-million-laws...]
- pierat 3y agoWell, it's the same state that won't "permit" a non-certified engineer from recording and noting the time on a stoplight is outside of law. (Note: he won a first amendment lawsuit, and the state body used his formula in the end) https://ij.org/press-release/oregon-engineer-makes-history-with-new-traffic-light-timing-formula/ https://ij.org/press-release/oregon-engineer-makes-history-w... So yeah, when I see verbiage about certifications like this as a barrier to repair electronics, it's pure protectionism and the state impeding actual ownership rights over whatever this crap is. (Put bluntly, my hardware is mine. If I want to take it to someone else for repair, that's 100% on me and my property rights to decide that. 'CerTiFicAtIoN', especially with the shit company or govt in question should have no say on who can or cant fix MY hardware.)
- AaronM 3y agoIf you read the bill, they clearly differentiate between a service provider and an owner. The bill does not require an owner to be certified to purchase parts, manuals, tools or make repairs. It does require the manufacture to make those things available to both.
- QuercusMax 3y agoSo in theory I could buy the manuals, tools, and spare parts, and bring them to Chuck over there who runs an unaccredited repair shop? That doesn't seem awful.
- zarzavat 3y agoThe contention is whether or not you can fix someone else’s device without a certification. If you can only fix your own device then that’s useless to 90% of people who are not technically adept enough to do it. When I want to get a battery replaced I take my device to the repair shop and they replace the battery. I don’t ask them if they are “certified”. If they break something the liability is on them. Every single repair shop I’ve ever been to offers a warranty on their repair.
- TylerE 3y ago
- chalst 3y agoIt also could be misused by Apple.
- godelski 3y agoThey're just saying you need like a CompTIA certificate and you can't just be some rando. But mind you, it also includes anything YOU own, so if someone is able to act on your behalf that's good enough too. Getting one of those certs to set up shop isn't that hard. Probably just to prevent people from mass ordering parts and redistributing.
- cortesoft 3y agoThe very next sentence says: > You can be just an average person repairing your own device, in which case the manufacturer must work with you.