8 ms·
Gov. Polis Signs Bill Mandating That Consumers Have Options to Fix Electronics
- Multicomp 2y agoI was wondering if this would be carved up with exceptions, but it's actually rather strong comparable to what state laws we have had so far per [1] > Like the repair rules passed in Minnesota last year, Colorado’s law notably covers data center and business-to-business equipment, only without Minnesota’s vague exclusion for “critical infrastructure” equipment. > There are some exclusions, like game consoles (due to lobbying from game console manufacturers over piracy concerns), medical devices, ATVs, and motor vehicles, which are also typical for repair rules introduced in other states like California and New York. Like Oregon’s right-to-repair law, Colorado’s HB24-1121 explicitly prohibits electronics manufacturers from using “parts pairing” to prevent replacement components from working unless approved by company software. [1] https://www.theverge.com/2024/5/29/24166894/colorado-right-to-repair-law-electronics-devices-parts-pairing https://www.theverge.com/2024/5/29/24166894/colorado-right-t...
- bberenberg 2y agoSo what does this mean for Apple devices? They will have to back away from pairing? If yes, then it should work everywhere? Or will they agree to pay whatever fines in CO to avoid changing this elsewhere? Is there another option I should be thinking about?
- g_p 2y agoMy guess is they will retain "parts pairing" from a technical perspective, but frame it as an anti theft measure, and focus on preventing use of stolen device parts. Perhaps they'll relax the restrictions on "non first party" components (likely you'll lose some functionality that aftermarket parts don't actually support), but use pairing to lock out parts from stolen phones. I suspect that part of their strategy is to try to make stolen iPhones less attractive to thieves, and effective parts pairing would likely reduce the market for stolen phones stripped for parts. Of course, if you can "blank" off a stolen part to appear as an unofficial one, that doesn't work! That idea is therefore likely to face challenges. The challenge will be what is really meant by parts pairing - to some extent if you want to do some features securely (say touch ID), you probably want to pair the reader to the secure enclave with a shared AES key and similar. There could be tooling to reset and re-establish that pairing on an unlocked device. Legislation often struggles to define exactly what is required though, so it will certainly be interesting to see how Apple responds.
- bigstrat2003 2y ago> My guess is they will retain "parts pairing" from a technical perspective, but frame it as an anti theft measure, and focus on preventing use of stolen device parts. Isn't that just what they already do? Apple has consistently framed the parts pairing as being about theft deterrence. I don't believe them for a second (and nor should anyone), but that is certainly what they claim.
- mozman 2y agoThey also use the United States Customs to seize repair part shipments to undermine independent repair operations. Louis Rossman has some excellent videos on this.
- willseth 2y agoWhat do you believe then?
- freedomben 2y agoI'm not GP, but I agree entirely with them. I believe apple is doing it to maximize the value of official parts, and to make it as hard as possible for people to do self-repairs and for third party shops to do repairs. They want you fully in their walled garden, and that includes their retail stores. I don't doubt at all that they see the theft deterrence as a significant benefit. I wouldn't even doubt that internally they justify many of their actions based on theft deterrence. However, if it was only about theft deterrence, I would expect to see some things be a little bit different. If they actually supported customers repairing their devices, or third-party stores, there would be differences in how they approach this. We have plenty of history of Apple's behavior to know how they feel about self-repair and third-party stores, without even considering the theft deterrent actions. How utterly and incredibly serendipitous for Apple, that they are able to solve the problem of theft, and it just so happens to also accomplish a ton of their other goals that they have been working on for a long time!
- willseth 2y ago
- Nifty3929 2y agoI assume they will just price their repair parts accordingly. Maybe this will drive 3rd party development of compatible parts, and then consumers will decide to pay for the Apple OEM part or the knock-off.
- gjsman-1000 2y agoApple has already announced they are killing parts pairing as it is currently implemented. They will, however, block the use of parts which came from a parent device marked as stolen. https://www.macrumors.com/2024/04/11/apple-to-allow-used-parts-for-repairs/ https://www.macrumors.com/2024/04/11/apple-to-allow-used-par...
- dumbo-octopus 2y agoThis makes perfect sense and is a Good and Right thing to do. It properly devalues stolen goods while allowing a third party repair shop industry to exist that purchases "for parts" broken devices from some users and more cheaply repairs others' using said parts. The main thing potentially missing is there has to be a way that the shop can verify the given device's parts are not marked stolen prior to purchasing it "for parts"...
- batch12 2y agoThat seems like a hard problem for a phone that won't boot. You'd only be able to verify the device's serial from the labels. To validate each component you'd have to take the device apart.
- SkyPuncher 2y agoThat seems like a completely reasonable trade off. Phones that don’t boot are pretty much worthless right now anyways.
- deleted 2y ago[deleted]
- freeone3000 2y agoStolen phones are blacklisted by serial and IMEI2, so the label will cover the vast majority of cases (unless they’re putting stolen parts inside of a legitimately purchased case…?)
- deleted 2y ago[deleted]
- j-bos 2y agoWhat's the reasoning for excluding motor vehicles when aftermarket mods have always been a staple of car culture?
- tbeseda 2y agoMaybe safety. But also CO is a pretty high emissions state at the moment and many mods can contribute to that.
- patrick451 2y agoOne of the many drawbacks of EVs is their lack of repair-ability and modability compared to ICE counterparts. This bill could be been an good way to change that.
- throwaway48476 2y agoEV's are mechanically much simpler that ICE and need less repair. The problem is all the computers which is really an all modern cars problem people blame on EV's.
- smolder 2y agoI think you nailed it. The voting population generally disapproves of 'car culture'. Foolish trends like removing catalytic converters and running super loud exhausts for single digit horsepower gains or hooning on public roads don't do its image any favors. But the most basic reason is just that the industry lobby that wants to lock down cars is much stronger than the independent/shade tree mechanic lobby that doesn't.
- pooper 2y ago> Foolish trends like removing catalytic converters and running super loud exhausts for single digit horsepower gains or hooning on public roads don't do its image any favors. And there is so much more. One of my pet peeves was idiots lifting their trucks but doing nothing with their headlights or worse getting "brighter" headlights. It is possible to be stuck in traffic and be practically blinded by the truck behind you in your mirrors.
- mozman 2y agoMedical devices and aircraft are the only legitimate exceptions - everything else should be repairable.
- dghlsakjg 2y agoMedical devices and aircraft should NEVER be the exemptions. Those are two category of product that have one of the longest lives of consumer goods, and have serious external guardrails and regulations around their safety. There are MANY 50 year old aircraft flying around still, the average GA fleet age is 35+. Part of that is that replacement parts are approved by the FAA, and not the OEM. If the FAA says I can use an Garmin transponder in my Cessna, Cessna can't brick my plane even if they have a deal with Icom. There are still aftermarket parts being sold for models that were discontinued in the 1950s. Imagine if we had to throw away every old airplane when the manufacturer went bust. Medical devices are the same, if a third party manufacturer is selling an FDA approved replacement battery for an older hearing aid, I would be pissed if the manufacturer bricked my device for not using their battery. Or even worse, how mad would you be if the original manufacturer, and the secret signing key for their batteries, went out of business and you didn't even have the option of an expensive OEM battery.
- Supermancho 2y ago> Medical devices and aircraft should NEVER be the exemptions. > "if a third party manufacturer is selling an FDA approved replacement battery for an older hearing aid," The FDA and FAA are massive bureaucracies that are not going to get into the business of regulating electronics. Practically, medical devices and aircraft should be exempt, as things are today. Suggesting legislation should be written otherwise, is negligent at best and malicious at worst.
- dghlsakjg 2y ago> The FDA and FAA are massive bureaucracies that are not going to get into the business of regulating electronics The FAA has been in the business of regulating electronics for more than half a century. They are also in the business of certifying that replacement parts meet the same standards even when not endorsed by the manufacturer. There is a reason that a 1970 Cessna can have a modern avionics suite.
- rustcleaner 2y ago>There are some exclusions We must not allow exceptions, it must be every single universal machine!
- teuobk 2y agoWhile well-intentioned, I wonder if this will lead to something like the "sesame" debacle[1], in which is becomes far cheaper and easier for companies to deliberately design digital devices so as to be absolutely unrepairable -- even by the manufacturers themselves -- rather than provide parts and instructions for 3rd parties to effect repairs. [1] https://reason.com/2022/12/23/why-is-sesame-suddenly-in-everything/ https://reason.com/2022/12/23/why-is-sesame-suddenly-in-ever...
- runlevel1 2y agoThere's always some risk of a cobra effect. However, I'd rather we try something reasonable and have to reverse it than to not try anything at all.
- enriquec 2y agolaws don't tend to get reversed very often, while unintended consequences are compounding
- hi-v-rocknroll 2y agoDesign For Manufacturing + Design For Obsolescence != Design For Durability + Design For Repair + Design For Low TCO Recall how the GDR's unbreakable beer mugs failed to sell in the West and became lost to time because restaurant vendors insisted on selling "cheap", inferior, fragile products breaking regularly to ensure profits.
- IncreasePosts 2y agoPeople already steal beer mugs...buying very expensive ones that don't break would just be a target for thieves requiring you to replace them even more frequently than glass ones.
- hi-v-rocknroll 2y ago(East) German restaurants and beer halls didn't and don't have that problem. Some of them still have them.
- runlevel1 2y agoText of the law and votes here: https://leg.colorado.gov/bills/hb24-1121 https://leg.colorado.gov/bills/hb24-1121 Direct link to the text as signed (pdf): https://leg.colorado.gov/sites/default/files/2024a_1121_signed.pdf https://leg.colorado.gov/sites/default/files/2024a_1121_sign...
- foreverobama 2y ago[dead]
- hi-v-rocknroll 2y agoWoohoo. CO got "documentation, parts, embedded software, firmware, [and] tools" for multiple product categories. More R2R rights are needed: 1. Either the UL or EPA needs to grade devices for repairability and TCO 2. a. Repair parts and b. phone-home cloud features should be disclosed how long they will remain on the market 3. a. When parts are no longer available (NLA), it should be legal to produce compatible replacements including circumventing DRM, b. when cloud features are no longer available officially, API endpoint(s) shall be modifiable to point to other servers 4. Schematics should be made available for electronic products from businesses with 500+ employees 5. It should be illegal to brick parts and devices based on their age, the current time, or by model, or for installing third-party parts
- FireBeyond 2y ago> CO got "documentation, parts, embedded software, firmware, [and] tools" for multiple product categories. I remember when Tesla was first forced to comply with MA's R2R laws. It was like something out of Hitchhiker's Guide... There WAS a website where you could order parts, in theory. Except every single part on the site was either "Unavailable" or "Call Tesla", even down the simplest commodity bolts... There WAS somewhere you could go to look at the documentation / service manuals. You did have to make an appointment, though, and you did have to pay a fee, and there was a time limit, and you couldn't bring any electronic devices with you, only a legal pad and pencil...
- tbrownaw 2y ago> needs to grade devices for repairability and TCO Wouldn't that be more of a Consumer Reports thing?
- ryukoposting 2y agoConsumer Reports is a media company assigning gold stars to products their writers like. The EPA (or FCC, or ____) is a 3-letter with a nominal ability to enforce certain standards among devices presenting their mark. The purported accountability of a EPA/FCC/UL/whatever mark is key here.
- sarahgoldfish 2y ago[dead]
- mongrol 2y agoCool. I didn't know Scotland had a federal police force though.
- MR4D 2y ago"Televisions"??? How on earth do you go about repairing a TV ? I mean, the prices at MicroCenter are already ridiculously cheap. Then again, I suppose it's in the list to prevent manufactures from suing people as opposed to practical repair.
- SkyPuncher 2y agoI’ve done it. I bought a TV off Craigslist for $20. Backlight was dead. Bought a $50 led strip from eBay, pulled the Tv apart and replaced the LED. At the time, this was like an $800 TV I “got” for $70 dollar plus an evening of work. In my opinion, if the screen isn’t physically damaged (like having a WiiMote chucked at it), then it’s basically a plug and play electronic component that needs to be replaced. Besides removing the TV casing, it’s only marginally harder than swapping out components just a gaming PC. It’s essentially just pulling some ribbons, swapping the components, then putting everything back in place.
- hackable_sand 2y agoThat's refreshing. TVs are very popular curbside decorations. I always thought about taking them home and fixing them up but could never convince myself I had the time or patience.
- MR4D 2y agoWow - thanks for the info - I never would have guessed that! So, can you replace the electronics by connecting to a different screen? For instance, from a different model, assuming the same resolution, like say put Samsung electronics together with an LG screen?
- SkyPuncher 2y agoI don't know. In theory, I suspect that there's a _lot_ of standardization going on among products from the same manufacturer, but less so among different manufacturers.
- ryukoposting 2y ago
- quantum_state 2y agoMaybe I am missing something. As an owner of device or equipment, being able to repair is very basic right to the property. Why is it a big deal? Would love to be enlightened.
- syndicatedjelly 2y agoBasic rights often need to be protected
- willseth 2y agoYou can have a right in principle but companies must actively take measures to make parts and documentation available for it to actually be possible to avail yourself of that right. The big deal is over which purposes and to what degree governments should be able to compel companies to offer this to their customers, support resale of used parts, support business that broker parts, etc. There are a lot of messy details and tradeoffs.
- oldpersonintx 2y ago[dead]
- zonnenannna 2y ago[flagged]
- 999900000999 2y agoWould be nice to have a law saying anything with a reasonable expectation of wear must be user replaceable. For example, every modern Mac will turn into e-waste within a decade since that SSD has to wear out. I don't care how high of a quality SSD you use, it just won't last forever. My 2-year-old MacBook Air would be the perfect computer if I could just put a larger SSD in it, but I can't. So I'm already looking at buying a new computer.
- wtallis 2y agoHow many SSDs have you worn out in your personal computers? They've been affordable for over a decade, so I assume you must have exhausted the write endurance on at least one drive, right?
- 999900000999 2y agoI honestly don't keep my computers that long, but from a practical point of view my 256GB SSD in my MacBook isn't really cutting it anymore.
- DaSHacka 2y agoThe abysmal storage capacity inside MacBooks is a somewhat uniquely-Apple issue, its not so oppressive in most other laptops (though, most also use modular storage) Most R2R arguments address hardware wear (like battery/SSD degradation and physically broken parts that need to be replaced) rather than expandability and future-proofing (like increasing the size of your SSD/RAM or installing a faster CPU)
- vivzkestrel 2y agocan we please get a law like this that for games that prevents gaming companies from completely shutting a game past its EOL or forces gaming companies to add LAN to games they intend to shut servers for
- fennecfoxy 2y agoI agree with right to repair where a company should make every effort for a customer to repair their device. But only so long as it doesn't regress technology; someone can replace a battery or screen etc, but I would never expect a regular or even technically inclined person replace a fine pitched BGA in a device. At some point in the future we're going to get to the point where these things become fully integrated: solid state battery, display elements, silicon all printed into one solid glassy chunk.