For those who have been avidly following the news over the past few months, you’ve probably heard about movements in support of the right to repair, or are at least familiar with some arguments in support of more consumer rights. If you are like me, and you have a knack for tinkering and fixing electronics or appliances, then this is probably familiar to you. But for those who aren’t familiar with the right to repair, this issue still affects you in many more ways than you think, and supporting the right to repair laws will benefit you tremendously.
So what exactly is the right to repair? To put it simply, the right to repair grants more individual freedom to the consumer, allowing him or her to take liberty in repairing devices they own. This means that the consumer is granted access to the proper OEM (Original Equipment Manufacturer) components, any special tools needed to do the work, and the overall knowledge of how to go about repairing a device all while not being at risk for voiding a warranty. Along with granting rights to the consumer, it also grants these rights to local small businesses who may be able to repair someone’s device if someone isn’t confident in doing it on their own.
However, manufacturers are actively preventing consumers from repairing their own devices in a few ways. The first method, and arguably the most problematic, is planned obsolescence. If you follow the news avidly, then you may have heard of a French lawsuit in 2020 that involved France fining Apple for roughly $27 million for purposefully throttling the performance of older iphones in one of their updates. While Apple’s reasoning for hindering the performance of these older phones, preserving the aging battery in older phones, seemed rather innocent, there were many strings attached that made this action much more substantial.
First, Apple did not notify the owners of these devices that their phones’ performance was being purposefully slowed. On top of that, the owners of these phones had no option to revert to a previous update if they did not want their performance to be hindered. Since batteries do lose a significant amount of performance as they age overtime, the most simple fix to this solution would be to allow the consumer to replace the battery of their older phone so they could regain their original performance of their phone. But this isn’t really an option either, as consumers do not have access to the replacement batteries or knowledge of how to do it themselves. Consequently, they are forced to go directly to Apple and pay more than half the price of a new phone in order to simply replace a battery for a phone that otherwise worked perfectly fine.
The solution to this issue is a very simple one; companies need to design their products to last, and stop designing them with the inherent plan to make them obsolete within a short period of time. Encouraging companies to produce products that will last will not only bring trust to the consumer market, but it will also solve one of the biggest environmental issues that is commonly mentioned in discussions about the right to repair: the creation of e-waste.
The creation of e-waste and waste in general is a direct effect of not allowing consumers to repair their own consumer goods. When consumers are restricted and/or discouraged from repairing their own goods, they are forced to instead throw out their broken device and go in search of buying a new one. This act creates a large amount of unnecessary waste that would otherwise not be an issue if consumers had the right to repair their own devices. This issue also gets significantly worse when you take into account the actions that many companies will take in order to make their products obsolete. Generally, many companies will build devices that last for only two to three years before breaking. Incidentally, this forces consumers to disregard their electronics in order to buy new ones, only to repeat the cycle once more.
One of the last major issues that a right to repair law would address would be the small business aspect that surrounds repairing damaged and broken electronics and machinery. While the main discussion of this article has more or less surrounded the consumer directly repairing their own devices, in actuality, many consumers would much rather take their damaged devices and put them in the hands of individuals that know how to fix these devices professionally. Without the right to repair however, going to third party repair shops is nearly impossible to do because most of these businesses cannot compete with the proprietary methods of repair which are put in place by the first party company. Allowing not only the individual but these small businesses as a whole to operate on broken or damaged products would significantly aid the small business sector of the market.
This issue is the most prevalent in the electric car industry. As of now, many third party mechanics do not have access to the knowledge or parts that are needed to repair electric cars. Since electric cars are incredibly different from traditional combustion engine cars, many of the parts electric cars contain are incredibly unique to the manufacturer. Because of this, many owners of electric cars often have no other option but to go directly to the original manufacturer in order to repair their car. Oftentimes, many of the costs associated with repairing electric cars are incredibly expensive compared to what they should be. Some statistics even show that the costs to repair electric cars are 2.3 times higher than gasoline powered cars, mainly due to the limited amount of access owners have to third party mechanics.
In order for a right to repair law to address all of the issues laid out, it would first need to prevent companies from limiting and preventing consumers and third party businesses from having access to the knowledge and the tools to repair their own devices. Secondly, there would also need to be strict rules in place that would prevent companies from blatantly designing a device to become obsolete within a period of time shorter than a devices expected lifespan. In addition, companies would also be prevented from forcing software updates on consumers that inhibit a device’s performance without the knowledge or consent of the consumer. Lastly, there needs to be special protection for small businesses whose main profit comes from repairing consumer electronics, appliances, and electric vehicles. These companies must be able to operate freely and have the rights needed to repair consumer electronics without fear of being threatened with a legal action from the first party company.
The issue of the right to repair is very complex, and each individual issue must be solved in order to ensure the right to repair is properly implemented. Issues such as e-waste and protection of small businesses creates a much bigger issue overall that is in desperate need of a solution. Not only is the limitation of access to knowledge and parts to repair a device restrictive to a consumer’s individual freedoms, but it also accelerates the production of e-waste in the same way that planned obsolescence does as well. While the issue of the right to repair is an issue that has been making increasing progress in the recent months, we must continue to support the cause and give the right to repair one’s own devices back to the consumer.
