BestNetTech is off for the holidays! We'll be back soon, and until then don't forget to 
Apple’s ‘180 On Right To Repair’ Was Widely Overstated
from the watch-what-I-do,-not-what-I-say dept
The consumer quest to be able to affordably repair your own tech is going well, if you hadn’t noticed. Maine just became the fourth state to implement right to repair protections in the wake of laws passed in New York, California, and Minnesota. As that vote (84 percent of Maine voters approved) illustrates, support for the movement is significant and bipartisan.
The laws aren’t perfect; several contain carve outs for the most problematic industries. Lobbyists made sure that New York’s law, for example, exempts medical gear, agricultural gear, vehicles, and home appliances, all arenas where repair monopolies are widespread. Still, the progress activists have made is nothing short of remarkable in a country where consumer protection is often an afterthought.
The Verge has a good piece on the state of the right to repair movement which notes that activists are hoping to take the movement further by targeting stuff like “parts pairing” and software locks:
“Parts pairing refers to how manufacturers tie device functionality to the purchase and use of their in-house parts, tools, and service. Ten to 15 years ago, when a component broke down, it could almost always be replaced with any compatible replacement part. But paired parts have built-in microcontrollers that are programmed to communicate with the main board to authenticate the replacement. If that software handshake doesn’t occur — say, because the repairer used an aftermarket part or didn’t have access to proprietary pairing software — the device might throw up a warning message, or it might cease to function altogether.”
While Apple obtained ample praise for its recent decision to support the California right to repair law, the company generally remains terrible on numerous aspects of right to repair. iFixit, you’ll recall, recently had to downgrade the iPhone 14’s repairability score after users complained Apple was using parts pairing to ensure that independent, affordable repair is either cumbersome as hell or simply impossible.
According to iFixit, the iPhone 15 is even worse:
“Tests on a 15 Pro Max revealed that swapping the screen without using Apple’s System Configuration tool causes Face ID, True Tone, and auto brightness to stop working, while swapping the battery causes a non-genuine part warning message to appear, and the phone stops displaying battery health data.”
Apple likely realized that being overtly hostile to right to repair laws and bullying small independent repair shops wasn’t a good look, so it has shifted its public-facing tactics. Though it seems extremely likely that Apple remains busy, like many companies, lobbying for softer state laws and weak federal right to repair protections in order to pre-empt tougher, more consensus-driven state protections.
Of course the problem is much bigger than just Apple, with many cars, printers, and even chainsaws using software locks to make repair expensive and cumbersome. Still, progress is progress, and getting some of the most wealthy and powerful companies in the world to rethink their environmentally harmful, anti-consumer behaviors remains no small potatoes.
Filed Under: consumer rights, drm, freedom to tinker, parts pairing, right to repair, software locks, state laws
Companies: apple
Comments on “Apple’s ‘180 On Right To Repair’ Was Widely Overstated”
We will let you repair you stuff, its just we will make it take longer and cost more than using out service, while ensuring we make more profit from those repairs.
Lest anyone be confused, this is not a serious suggestion:
Maybe Apple employee’s should only be able to get organ transplants if the source also came from their mother, and she authorized the transplant.
Re:
A Modest Proposal, but on the internet. You never know when someone will not only take you seriously, but try to implement your plan.
Re: Re:
I dunno. I’ve yet to hear of rich people raising poor people’s children for the table.
WAH? It’s almost like apple has been only “right to repair” as a pr gimmick and nothing more.
Glad people are starting to realize that no, the right to repair law is California doesn’t fix what Apple does to block repairing.
Re:
Apologies, but that was apparent from reading the legislation when it was proposed.
Re: Re:
Oh I know. But a ton of people didn’t and probably still won’t want to see the billions Apple invests in hardware and software to prevent repair as anti repair. I mean they made a website and supported a law!
The main source of “confusion” (let say “double language”, just as in politics) is that a phone/any device that can be opened using just a screwdriver is more “reparable” than glued (and so needing a hot air gun), and because there is no more technical or safety reason to not be able to open theses high-tech gadgets (unlike old TV sets and microwaves, even camera with flash, that are still be dangerous, and even battery are now much more safe than ten years ago), we can see no more as only single piece boxes.
Now, once opened (with expecting that we really want to fix it, not tossing it with all the other fine equipment we opened and don’t remember how we’re supposed to reassemble them), changing some parts are much more complicated, not necessary from a physical point (because of soldered memory, etc.) but because this whole world needs to work with invisible software.
And because it’s “technically complicated” (and not physically), the great argument of “not repairable” come again, because we cannot see what’s wrong without looking at source code, and since it’s (eagerly) closed.
So yes, in a sense, Apple supports right to physically repair their products (by professionals mostly), but that’s not even the solution of 10% of the problem.
That’s exactly for this reason that GNU has been created 40 years ago.
2 choices
You make the devices self explode, decommission themselves Upon opening, Like Watches with that Silly SPRING, that flies out and you can never find, and cant figure WHERE THE F’ it came from.
The Other one, is to HAVE and Distribute the ONLY parts available in the USA.(at least make people think so, Even if you Advert them and Never STOCK THEM) Then Over Price all the parts to the point that you will pay More for Parts them a New phone. Then suggest delay in parts, as they are from China, and you can only get them in batches of 10,000, and having an order of 1, TAKES TIME.(to get an order of 10,000 IF EVER)
The second part is the cheap way out and Never pay a Corp to do the repairs in TEXAS again.
Again:
The most important aspect of right to repair is making sure manufacturers and resellers are indemnified from the stupid masses.
You absolutely should have the right to repair your device.
And when your unskilled stupid self punctures the battery pack and melts the skin off your hands trying to replace a phone screen, you have zero right to sue the manufacturer for your own stupidity.
People who write on tech seem to forget that proprietary closed off repair is a very, very, recent development. Not coming about until the late 80s.
Manuals used to have full board schematics and parts list even into the 90s.
But gen Y decided courts are where to go when they bork their tech, and themselves. And we get warnings like do not sleep with running chainsaw and don’t place microwave oven in bathtub.
The only people to blame for closed off repair are the idiots who sued for being idiots.