So what are the downsides these companies think exist? Logistics/cost of making it available, proprietary info/tools leaking, something else? Or is it just lost revenue from their service people handling it and consumers not buying a new model sooner?
It's primarily lost revenue, as well as a default reaction to oppose any new rules governing their business.
This bill would mean that manufacturers need to sell parts, sell tools, make diagnostic software available for sale, release circuit schematics, and provide repair manuals available for free. It also requires diagnostic software function without an active internet connection.
Because in a lot of cases it does. It's a totally rational position on their part, which is why we shouldn't humor it. A good function for government is to artificially suppress naturally perverse incentives.
If I can fix my phone for $100 I won't buy a new one for $1000. It's clear why they oppose people fixing their own stuff.
Apple & John Deer are the most famous examples but lots of companies lobby against your right to repair things you own and just as importantly have access to the schematics and parts that you would need to do so.
I think there’s this secondary thing, which you see a lot in the USB-C discussion, which is a corporate culture of “the government doesn’t get to tell us what to do”. The opening of the floodgates on this kind of thing could lead them to being told to do other things.
This is kind of the end state of weird tech libertarianism. Instead of thinking “let’s build cool things along with society” it’s “let’s have this whole universe controlled by us where we can remake everything to our needs”.
Of course they don’t want legislatures dictating how they do things, but this legislative push is happening due to their initial reluctance to do anything. There was an alternate universe available, but a refusal to acknowledge the existence of people who can indeed coerce rhetoric behavior leads to this kind of self own.
Here’s what I can think of. Not saying it’s valid, just justifications past “we love money”.
You can’t have an easy to repair iPhone 14. It is what it is. It can be redesigned to be easier to repair, with less glue and more screws and such.
But then it won’t be an iPhone 14 as we know it today. It would probably have to be thicker, etc. And what if customers don’t like those changes?
There are actual repair issues too. Right now there is a simple rule: we (or somewhere authorized) repairs it, or it’s not our problem. How do you adjudicate what’s a problem with the device and what a user broke trying to repair it for warranty purposes? They don’t have to today.
How much does it cost to keep making those parts as required? Do we need to raise prices to cover that? What if the prices of the components are too high and people sue saying we’re trying to discourage them?
If we have to keep making them should we redesign the phones less to keep down our legal supply requirements by reusing parts longer?
What if they go through with all this and almost no one does? Redesigns, new parts, guides, all that stuff. And 0.2% of people do it. That feels like a waste.
What if an Apple goes through all this. Do they make a “NY” version? Again maybe many people don’t buy it. Or do do what people probably want and make the NY the US or world version? All of those have different costs. Should NY be able to dictate a specific path? Is that fair?
What if someone owns the non-NY version but tries to repair their phone with official parts? Is it covered or not? What if they were in NY at the time?
What if CA passes a different, or worse incompatible, right to repair law? Then what?
What if NY required changes make the device unsuitable to some other country due to some odd law, but Apple only wants to make one phone (they do).
What if Google does it and Samsung says “screw that, drive to NJ”? But now Google’s phones are at a disadvantage because they’re thicker/more expensive/whatever?
I think that would be a lot easier on companies if it was a federal law. Obviously that won’t happen first, a state law is much more likely.
There are a lot of possible details. They’re not insurmountable. The answer to some may be “too bad”. But it’s not “there’s no downsides”.
How is Kathy supposed to see the billboard when she's in the back of a tinted chauffeured limo writing in her daily planner how she plans to pilfer the state each day?
I'm a little confused about what's going on here. I looked up the legislative process in NY to find out what provisions NY state has for passing bills into law, and according the NY Senate website, the governor has 10 days to veto a law, after which it automatically becomes law even if she doesn't sign it. If the legislature is out of session when she gets the bill, she then has 30 days to sign it or it is automatically vetoed.
Either way, after 7 months, she shouldn't be still sitting on this bill. It should have either automatically become law or have been vetoed, depending on circumstance.
And if it did pass with that big of a majority, it shouldn't be too difficult to get a veto override, which only takes a 2/3 majority vote of the full legislature.
I was confused by the same thing for a long time—everything I read seemed to say that once the legislature is out of session, the waiting period should be over within 30 days.
But a staffer for the governor explained to me: The 10 days to veto / 30 days to sign window only begins after she's called the bill to her desk. There's a weird limbo space between the legislature and the governor's office; if she doesn't call up a bill, it dies at the end of the year.
14 comments
[ 1.9 ms ] story [ 16.5 ms ] threadedit: gender (thanks sbaiddn)
This bill would mean that manufacturers need to sell parts, sell tools, make diagnostic software available for sale, release circuit schematics, and provide repair manuals available for free. It also requires diagnostic software function without an active internet connection.
Apple & John Deer are the most famous examples but lots of companies lobby against your right to repair things you own and just as importantly have access to the schematics and parts that you would need to do so.
https://pirg.org/articles/who-doesnt-want-the-right-to-repai...
This is kind of the end state of weird tech libertarianism. Instead of thinking “let’s build cool things along with society” it’s “let’s have this whole universe controlled by us where we can remake everything to our needs”.
Of course they don’t want legislatures dictating how they do things, but this legislative push is happening due to their initial reluctance to do anything. There was an alternate universe available, but a refusal to acknowledge the existence of people who can indeed coerce rhetoric behavior leads to this kind of self own.
You can’t have an easy to repair iPhone 14. It is what it is. It can be redesigned to be easier to repair, with less glue and more screws and such.
But then it won’t be an iPhone 14 as we know it today. It would probably have to be thicker, etc. And what if customers don’t like those changes?
There are actual repair issues too. Right now there is a simple rule: we (or somewhere authorized) repairs it, or it’s not our problem. How do you adjudicate what’s a problem with the device and what a user broke trying to repair it for warranty purposes? They don’t have to today.
How much does it cost to keep making those parts as required? Do we need to raise prices to cover that? What if the prices of the components are too high and people sue saying we’re trying to discourage them?
If we have to keep making them should we redesign the phones less to keep down our legal supply requirements by reusing parts longer?
What if they go through with all this and almost no one does? Redesigns, new parts, guides, all that stuff. And 0.2% of people do it. That feels like a waste.
What if an Apple goes through all this. Do they make a “NY” version? Again maybe many people don’t buy it. Or do do what people probably want and make the NY the US or world version? All of those have different costs. Should NY be able to dictate a specific path? Is that fair?
What if someone owns the non-NY version but tries to repair their phone with official parts? Is it covered or not? What if they were in NY at the time?
What if CA passes a different, or worse incompatible, right to repair law? Then what?
What if NY required changes make the device unsuitable to some other country due to some odd law, but Apple only wants to make one phone (they do).
What if Google does it and Samsung says “screw that, drive to NJ”? But now Google’s phones are at a disadvantage because they’re thicker/more expensive/whatever?
I think that would be a lot easier on companies if it was a federal law. Obviously that won’t happen first, a state law is much more likely.
There are a lot of possible details. They’re not insurmountable. The answer to some may be “too bad”. But it’s not “there’s no downsides”.
Robert C.
I'm a little confused about what's going on here. I looked up the legislative process in NY to find out what provisions NY state has for passing bills into law, and according the NY Senate website, the governor has 10 days to veto a law, after which it automatically becomes law even if she doesn't sign it. If the legislature is out of session when she gets the bill, she then has 30 days to sign it or it is automatically vetoed.
Either way, after 7 months, she shouldn't be still sitting on this bill. It should have either automatically become law or have been vetoed, depending on circumstance.
And if it did pass with that big of a majority, it shouldn't be too difficult to get a veto override, which only takes a 2/3 majority vote of the full legislature.
But a staffer for the governor explained to me: The 10 days to veto / 30 days to sign window only begins after she's called the bill to her desk. There's a weird limbo space between the legislature and the governor's office; if she doesn't call up a bill, it dies at the end of the year.
Over 1k bills passed the NY legislature this year, and the governor waited until after the election to call up over 400 of them. Here's a NY Post article about it: https://nypost.com/2022/11/03/hochul-delays-action-on-420-ho...