Apple Must Explain Why It Doesn't Want You To Fix Your Own iPhone, California Lawmaker Says (vice.com)

A California state lawmaker says she hopes to make Apple explain specifically why it has opposed and lobbied against legislation that would make it easier for you to repair your iPhone and other electronics. Motherboard reports: Last week, California assemblymember Susan Talamantes-Eggman announced that she plans to introduce right to repair legislation in the state, which would require companies like Apple, Microsoft, John Deere, and Samsung to sell replacement parts and repair tools, make repair guides available to the public, and would require companies to make diagnostic software available to independent shops. Public records show that Apple has lobbied against right to repair legislation in New York, and my previous reporting has shown that Apple has privately asked lawmakers to kill legislation in places like Nebraska. To this point, the company has largely used its membership in trade organizations such as CompTIA and the Consumer Technology Association to publicly oppose the bill. But with the right to repair debate coming to Apple's home state, Talamantes-Eggman says she expects the company to show up to hearings about the bill.

"Apple is a very important company in the state of California, and one I have a huge amount of respect for. But the onus is on them to explain why we can't repair our own things and what damage or danger it causes them," Talamantes-Eggman told me in a phone interview. Talamantes-Eggman told me that the bill she plans to introduce will apply to both consumer electronics as well as agricultural equipment such as tractors. Broadly speaking, the electronics industry has decided to go with an "authorized repair" model in which companies pay the original device manufacturer to become authorized to fix devices.

Comments

Dead simple

[r00t_of_all_evils]

If you buy a phone and fix it for 10 years, Apple doesn't make any money off of you for 10 years.

Re: Dead simple

[Luthair]

Yup, cars have far more dangers than cellphones and yet it was decided many years ago that we didn't need car manufacturers to nanny us.

Re:Dead simple

[tlhIngan]

You can repair it now, but you void the warranty. Don't like the manufacturer's rules, buy something else. It's that simple.

Anyone who's worked a customer service desk knows this - warranty fraud is rampant.

We're not talking about the lame ass buy-a-new-product return-old-product-inside-it trick, but customers lie through their teeth. You can have a laptop that's fallen into the pool, or bathrub, or whatever, and is dripping water all over the return counter, and the customer will say there is no water damage.

And most people are incompetent. Just think about your time fixing software issues. Now figure out what happens when you unleash them to fix hardware problems too. The old butterknife screwdriver is the least of your problems.

Think about it - a site like iFixit - probably the biggest pusher for right to repair, doesn't really want you do it. I mean, if they did, why don't they warrant their products? You buy it, you try to fix it, it doesn't work, why can't you return it? It's almost as if they know if they sell you a cable to fix your iPhone, you're going to return them the damaged one and claim they shipped you a bad one.

And it doesn't cover even things like security - TouchID and FaceID sensors are paired with the phone so people don't swap them. Why? Because if you swap them, you could swap them with "evil" versions of the sensors that record (and transmit) your fingerprint and facial data to a third party who may use it to log into your phone when you're not around. Since this is specialized tech, you can assume it would be a state agency that does this. That would be the deepest of ironies - the FBI uses the law to force Apple to make it so they can break in.

And what about stuff that's safety related? If you replace the battery yourself and it causes the phone to catch on fire, is Apple responsible? Even an official first party battery can be problematic with a fat-fingered person prodding it with their butterknife screwdriver.

I'm guessing we'll see the return of the "warranty void if broken" sticker. Because right now, there's an IQ test in place for people fixing their stuff. And if you think it's ridiculous, well, you haven't seen what the public can do. If you fix computers for a living, you know exactly the people who are going to try to fix their stuff.

I repaired my iPhone5

[Anonymous Coward]

I had an iPhone5 with an expanded battery that pushed the display out of its case. For $50, I bought a display, battery and "repair kit" from eBay. After watching an internet video 3 times, I was able to repair it, breaking the camera in the process. For another $5, I got a camera from eBay & replaced the broken camera. I was able to use it for a number of years before the charging connector failed. I'm still thinking about repairing it.
    As a degreed EE, though, who has worked for some of the high-tech firms (not Apple), I can kind of understand Apple's position. Suppose the battery I bought from eBay had shorted & burned up the phone. Suppose I left a metal fragment in there which shorted one of the I/O pins when I needed to call 911. A repair shop which has nothing to do for a few days might figure out a software mod which causes problems later, etc. Years ago, computers became too complex for component repair and companies went to board repair. With cellphones today, even board repair is difficult -- the best route for a company like Apple is to offer a pretty good trade-in value for a new phone.

Re:I repaired my iPhone5

[Anonymous Coward]

I can kind of understand Apple's position. Suppose the battery I bought from eBay had shorted & burned up the phone. Suppose I left a metal fragment in there which shorted one of the I/O pins when I needed to call 911.

Can't-make-a-911-call example is a joke compared to what might happen if I don't bother to tighten the lug nuts on the wheel that I'm allowed to change on my car. All the dead and injured people on the highway are why you want to call 911.

Yet we're still allowed to repair cars.

Pretty much the only way you're going to have a phone failure be as bad as the routine auto repair risks that we already accept, is to take that phone on a plane and have an overly-rapid battery discharge. So use such an example next time.

My ideal phone upgrade

[llamalad]

Can I get an iphone that's more durable and has a removable battery?

I'm willing to accept it being double the weight and thickness; I bet with the extra structure they can also improve its durability and let me keep my damned headphone jack.

The chances of such legislation passing

[Streetlight]

The chances of such legislation passing the California, or any other state legislature, depends on how many legislators Apple has bought. I'm sure Apple's out shopping now.

Everyone's forgetting DRM

[Sloppy]

Everyone is aware of the planned obsolescence angle, but nobody seems to have noticed that particular irony of California (i.e. the state containing Hollywood) being the one asking for a right to repair. Lots of hardware makers are either in bed with content companies, or are one. As long as DRM is still legal, this results in an unavoidable conflict of interest.

DRM is always what these companies are really talking about, whenever they use the word "security." They mean they want to keep the machine's master's interests secure against the great adversary: the machine's owner.

DRM and right-to-repair are fundamentally incompatible. You can't implement DRM and also be owner-maintainable, because from an owner's point of view, DRM implementations are bugs (or malware, depending on how strict you want to be about the implementor's intent), and bugs need to be fixed.

I think California will cave in on this, and their legislators will eventually realize that it's necessary that people have adversarial relationship with their computers. The only way this can be avoided, is if DRM ceases to be a thing. And the only way that's going to happen, is if it's outlawed.

Expect this bill to die, for much more inflexible reasons than wanting to protect planned obsolescence. They simply can't allow people to be in charge of their own computers. It's not happening.

Having the right to repair purchased items.

[GregMmm]

I had to think about this for a while, but it all points back to Apple wanting to sell phones. After I've had my phone for say 3 years why can't I try and fix it? It's not a warranty problem, that's expired. Important point is the phone is mine, not the selling company. I throw the BS flag on the idea it's to keep the integrity of their product. I know, it would be better for me to walk around with a cracked screen on my phone, cause that's great advertisement. Buy this phone, it breaks. And lastly as a couple of people have commented, there is usually multiple detailed youtube videos available on exactly how to do it.

Personally I'm sick of people telling me what do to with my stuff. I'm curious by nature and I've fixed a lot of broken stuff. It's what drive a number of us nerd types. Can I fix this, or better yet, how can I make this better.

This just seems to be all about the money.

"Right to repair" is a terrible name

[Solandri]

It implies we don't have the right to do what we want with the products we own, unless the state gives us that right. Nobody that right to us - it is ours by virtue of the fact that we own the device.

What this really is is a law to prohibit companies from using manufacturing process and designs which deliberately impede the owner's ability to tinker with a product. And Apple products are not the most egregious violator. It's printers with chipped ink cartridges which refuse to operate unless you buy a new cartridge from that specific manufacturer. (Software is worse, but it gets a pass because you typically buy a software license, not the software itself.)