Washington Bill Makes It Illegal To Sell Gadgets Without Replaceable Batteries (vice.com)

Jason Koebler writes: A bill that would make it easier to fix your electronics is rapidly hurtling through the Washington state legislature. The bill's ascent is fueled by Apple's iPhone-throttling controversy, which has placed a renewed focus on the fact that our electronics have become increasingly difficult to repair.

Starting in 2019, the bill would ban the sale of electronics that are designed "in such a way as to prevent reasonable diagnostic or repair functions by an independent repair provider. Preventing reasonable diagnostic or repair functions includes permanently affixing a battery in a manner that makes it difficult or impossible to remove."

Comments

Cars not included

[DalM]

"NEW SECTION. Sec. 5. (1) Nothing in this section applies to 30 motor vehicle manufacturers, any product or service of a motor 31 vehicle manufacturer, or motor vehicle dealers." Cars and tractors are still not included. Still got to go through the dealer for service.

On removeable batteries

[Baron_Yam]

The last time this came up on Slashdot, the objection to forcing replaceable batteries was that having fixed batteries allows for unusual battery shapes and less concern regarding seals so that engineers can design thinner phones.

You know what? Not good enough. If it's so important to have such a thin phone, then the manufacturers need to be required by law to take back their product at the end of its life cycle and REcycle.

I'd argue this would be an expensive but good idea anyway, because 'the environment' isn't just a thing for tree-huggers, we all need it.

Re: wording

[bigwheel]

From TFS: "Preventing reasonable diagnostic or repair functions includes permanently affixing a battery in a manner that makes it difficult or impossible to remove."

There is some ambiguity, but the intent seems pretty obvious.

IMO, this legislation is something we've needed for a long time. Musical birthday cards should get a pass. But expensive consumer electronics should not be treated as disposable items.

Re: wording

[Gr8Apes]

Musical birthday cards should get a pass.

If this legislation causes the end of musical birthday cards, it would be the most effective law passed this year.

Re: wording

[FatdogHaiku]

But with replaceable batteries musical birthday cards could enter a whole NEW ERA!!!
With e-ink, cards could be used many times. Just think of changing the cover art to a new JPG or even GIF. Next we allow the card licensee to sing and record or buy downloaded music from the card store. Of course your card will have internet access to assure no pirated content was used in the "redeployment" of the card... can't have you singing any Stevie Wonder hits without paying for them. But you could piggyback on the Internet of Cards by placing current sports scores or a favorite news feed on the back or even inside.
Sure, in awhile Apple will produce the Must Have iCards (and change them every six months) but two thirds of us can just keep handing the same cards back and forth every year.

/sarcasm (I Hope)

Re: wording

[Jason Levine]

A few years ago, my son's android tablet was having battery issues. It was 2 years old so the vendor wasn't supporting it. They offered to take it for about $60, examine it, and let me know what was happening to it. Then, I could choose to fix it (for more money though they "graciously" would deduct that $60 initial payment from the cost) or I could have it sent back. They couldn't guarantee that it wouldn't arrive back factory reset with all of my son's game data erased.

I found the battery online for about $15 and tools to do the repair for about another $10. Unfortunately, I needed to use the tools to pry the case open and I just couldn't get it done. I went to a repair shop and they were able to pry it open and replace the battery with the one I bought for $25. Even though I "wasted" money on the tools, I still got the tablet fixed for less than what the manufacturer wanted.

Re: wording

[Archangel Michael]

which is all consumers are asking for.

I'm assuming you're basically talking about Cell Phones, if you are not, please take the rest as issues I have with this law anyways.

1) If Consumers DEMANDED replaceable batteries in phones (or other devices) they would be BUYING them. If your choice was between iPhone 8 and something like an LG V20, they would abandon iPhones for LG. The problem is, that they want an iPhone first, battery second. THEY made the choice, and voted with their money. If Apple was losing BILLIONS to people who WANT removable batteries as a PRIMARY feature, they would make an iPhone with Removable Battery.

2)If Consumers DEMANDED replaceable batteries over other features like Water Proof/Resistant devices, then they would be BUYING them. Since it is makes devices MORE expensive to have WaterProof and Replaceable batteries than one or the other, and people are choosing lesser expensive single option devices (Waterproof, no replaceable battery vs replaceable battery and don't drop in the pool) the the market has spoken.

3) In almost ALL categories, there ARE options for having those features, while giving up others, and the relative price points for each are such that the Market is making cost/feature analysis as part of their buying choices is already available.

Conclusion: A law like the one proposes removes choice and replaces it with draconian rules that the Market has ALREADY rejected with the voting dollars. This is the problem with the whole "There ought to be a law" people, is that they want what they want, but are UNWILLING to do it for themselves. This is the choice of the Consumer, not the state.