The Right To Repair Bill in the US.

[3dbinCanada]

I stumbled across this in another forum and thought it would be interesting to turn it into a poll. Canada has adopted a similar bill but the wording became muddled so it may reduce the effectiveness of the act/bill.

Right to Repair 2023 Legislation

Right to repair legislation is directed at the ability of consumers to repair their own products instead of going back to the original manufacturer for service. Right to repair legislation includes bills addressing specific products, like wheelchairs, and those targeting broader categories, such...

www.ncsl.org

To facilitate discussion, please give a reason for you're vote.

 

[3dbinCanada]

I answered maybe because it may force manufacturers to design and build items in such a way that parts and or processes can be shared by other companies to make a repair instead of throwing out the whole assembly. I look at AVR's as an example and compare them to seperate stereo pre and power amps. Pre and power amps at least back in the day were relatively simple compared to the computational processors found inside today's AVRs. Components in the stereo pre/power amps were and still are for the most part readily available so getting them repaired is relatively easy. Further more substitutes can be found for components that are no longer being manufactured. Loose a computational processor on an AVR and the whole AVR is deemed non repairable by even the manufacturer who built it. The AVR goes off to the landfill. Wouldn't be better if the AVR manufacturer would design it in such a way that the computational processor was built on a separate card that is wired into the AVR. Instead of throwing out the whole AVR, replace the computational processing card only.

 

[Peter Loeser]

Great poll question. I love the idea of being able to repair electronics, or really anything, rather than throwing away. Unfortunately it would require a significant, fundamental change to the way consumer products are designed, manufactured, and marketed. Modular designs with replaceable components are just more expensive, and sadly most manufacturers/consumers don't seem to be interested in that.

My vote is maybe. I think there are still good applications for this even within consumer electronics. Some already do it... upgrade modules etc for expansion, new formats, etc. There is just so much momentum toward the "throw away" culture, and most people seem to lazy or uninterested in troubleshooting or fixing. It would be tough to sway the general public toward paying more for serviceable devices.

 

[3dbinCanada]

Great poll question. I love the idea of being able to repair electronics, or really anything, rather than throwing away. Unfortunately it would require a significant, fundamental change to the way consumer products are designed, manufactured, and marketed. Modular designs with replaceable components are just more expensive, and sadly most manufacturers/consumers don't seem to be interested in that.

My vote is maybe. I think there are still good applications for this even within consumer electronics. Some already do it... upgrade modules etc for expansion, new formats, etc. There is just so much momentum toward the "throw away" culture, and most people seem to lazy or uninterested in troubleshooting or fixing. It would be tough to sway the general public toward paying more for serviceable devices.

Thanks Peter. I think it was our generation that came up with the "throw away" culture and that our kids are more into the recycle reuse culture. Hopefully they will continue to push and keep the momentum going in that direction. Reuse/recycle can easily be stretched into repairable as well.

 

[Sonnie Parker]

I voted maybe as well. Seems like a good idea. I was just thinking about the MartinLogan speakers I own. If they had not been under warranty, I could not have replaced the cabinets because ML does not offer the cabinets as a replaceable part, although everything is detachable from the cabinet. Granted, these cosmetic issues do not make the speaker unusable, but if you want the cabinet to look new, you'd have to have it refinished. Probably not the best example, but what came to mind. I can see other electronics benefitting from being able to repair them. Some manufacturers are making their products modular so various sections are replaceable. I just don't know if forcing manufacturers to do this is a wise decision in all cases. It would most like drive prices up.

 

[JStewart]

I voted maybe.

In principle it sounds good, but I agree with Sonnie and Peter in their reservations.

I can also see it limiting consumer choice and providing another barrier to entry to the marketplace.

 

[JStewart]

By the way, If you want fewer AVRs in the landfills then ban HDMI and new codecs. Problem solved.

On a serious note, perhaps the problem could be approached differently. What if manufacturers of products were required to repair free of charge anything failed within, for example, 3 years of purchase, including shipping? Think there might be more of an effort to build things better in the first place?

 

[henryeng]

I voted maybe as well. Seems like a good idea. I was just thinking about the MartinLogan speakers I own. If they had not been under warranty, I could not have replaced the cabinets because ML does not offer the cabinets as a replaceable part, although everything is detachable from the cabinet. Granted, these cosmetic issues do not make the speaker unusable, but if you want the cabinet to look new, you'd have to have it refinished. Probably not the best example, but what came to mind. I can see other electronics benefitting from being able to repair them. Some manufacturers are making their products modular so various sections are replaceable. I just don't know if forcing manufacturers to do this is a wise decision in all cases. It would most like drive prices up.

All of my products use thru-hole components and all ICs are mounted in sockets. And I’ve ordered my ESL13s!

 

[gatestick]

By the way, If you want fewer AVRs in the landfills then ban HDMI and new codecs. Problem solved.

On a serious note, perhaps the problem could be approached differently. What if manufacturers of products were required to repair free of charge anything failed within, for example, 3 years of purchase, including shipping? Think there might be more of an effort to build things better in the first place?

This has been a thing in the automotive world for a long time. The manufacturers are constantly getting around it somehow. I can't really think of anything in a car that is repaired and not just replaced in a modern car. Also there is usually specific programming to the specific vehicle for any modules that need replaced. Technology is great when it works. Not so much when it doesn't. Most modules must come from the dealership and they generally only support vehicles for 7 years with the electronic parts. Used or remanufactured crappy parts become the only option.

 

[Tim Dawson]

I voted yes in that this seems clear - the ability to get repair at a lower cost will always reduce disposal. Parts availability is a non-issue, since the entire point of right to repair laws is parts availability to anyone, not just internal. This says nothing about part pricing, or deprogramming users from the fictional mindset that things cannot be repaired.