4 ms·

> Article 17 Right to property 1. Everyone has the right to own, use, dispose of and bequeath his or her lawfully acquired possessions. No one may be depriv

> Article 17 Right to property 1. Everyone has the right to own, use, dispose of and bequeath his or her lawfully acquired possessions. No one may be deprived of his or her possessions, except in the public interest and in the cases and under the conditions provided for by law, subject to fair compensation being paid in good time for their loss. The use of property may be regulated by law in so far as is necessary for the general interest. You can do whatever you want with your propery, this is a fundamental and established right of private property. > This is aimed at preventing companies from preventing professional repair services from doing so. If repairmen are able to repair, you can, too. It is already by and large possible for many appliances. I have done it many times, there are websites where you can order many parts and even manuals (e.g. espares.co.uk in the UK). The issue is one of competence and will to do it. It's utopian to think that most people want to repair their own appliances or are able to. It's like for cars. In the (not so) 'olden' days you could buy detailed manuals and parts where available, including from junkyards. Cars were purely mechanical. And yet the vast majority of people were not touching them beyond checking the oil level...

8372049 2y ago
My point is that this law grants rights to professional repairmen/service providers, not to consumers (or anyone else).
- mytailorisrich 2y ago
  We have a right to repair and always had, as said. Individuals have access in the same way as repairmen. It's already possible to source parts for most appliances as an individual. This should make it easier. Indeed, what is the difference between a consumer and a "professional repairman"? None apart from the fact that the latter is expected to have some competency and knowledge on how to get parts (which traditionally means a nondescript supplier in the local industrial area, which you're free to go to as well, there are also websites these days), but there is no magic licence that gives access to secret, restricted warehouses. But the key is that Joe Public is not interested. If something breaks down they call a repairman or buy new. It's unrealistic or utopian to believe that people are interested. It's worded as targetting professionals because it is (somewhat) realistic and, I'm guessing, aimed at using the existing suppliers, not forcing availablity of parts in supermarkets.
  - 8372049 2y ago
    > We have a right to repair and always had, as said. You don't have a right to repair if you can't access the required docs, tools, spare parts or if there are unreasonable conditions if you do so. I know a lot of John Deere customers who don't agree with you, for starters. This is why "right to repair" is a thing at all. > Indeed, what is the difference between a consumer and a "professional repairman"? First, "professional repairman" is someone who offers repair as a service to others, who has it as their trade. You'd think the distinction would be easy to make. It is defined in one of the first articles of the directive. Second, that you are not guaranteed access to documentation, spare parts and so on as a consumer.
    - mytailorisrich 2y ago
      You are confusing right and practicality. "Right to repair" is a gimmicky term for PR. >First, "professional repairman" is someone who offers repair as a service to others, who has it as their trade. Obviously... but you are missing the point. I already explained what I meant by "no difference".

8372049 2y ago

My point is that this law grants rights to professional repairmen/service providers, not to consumers (or anyone else).

mytailorisrich 2y ago
We have a right to repair and always had, as said. Individuals have access in the same way as repairmen. It's already possible to source parts for most appliances as an individual. This should make it easier. Indeed, what is the difference between a consumer and a "professional repairman"? None apart from the fact that the latter is expected to have some competency and knowledge on how to get parts (which traditionally means a nondescript supplier in the local industrial area, which you're free to go to as well, there are also websites these days), but there is no magic licence that gives access to secret, restricted warehouses. But the key is that Joe Public is not interested. If something breaks down they call a repairman or buy new. It's unrealistic or utopian to believe that people are interested. It's worded as targetting professionals because it is (somewhat) realistic and, I'm guessing, aimed at using the existing suppliers, not forcing availablity of parts in supermarkets.
- 8372049 2y ago
  > We have a right to repair and always had, as said. You don't have a right to repair if you can't access the required docs, tools, spare parts or if there are unreasonable conditions if you do so. I know a lot of John Deere customers who don't agree with you, for starters. This is why "right to repair" is a thing at all. > Indeed, what is the difference between a consumer and a "professional repairman"? First, "professional repairman" is someone who offers repair as a service to others, who has it as their trade. You'd think the distinction would be easy to make. It is defined in one of the first articles of the directive. Second, that you are not guaranteed access to documentation, spare parts and so on as a consumer.
  - mytailorisrich 2y ago
    You are confusing right and practicality. "Right to repair" is a gimmicky term for PR. >First, "professional repairman" is someone who offers repair as a service to others, who has it as their trade. Obviously... but you are missing the point. I already explained what I meant by "no difference".