Summary

  • The California state assembly has unanimously passed a bill that would require electronics manufacturers to sell repair tools and parts to consumers and to make repair guides available to the general public.

  • The bill, known as the “Right to Repair” bill, previously passed the state Senate and now has the support of Apple, a longtime opponent of the legislation.

  • If the bill is signed into law by Gov. Gavin Newsom, it would be a victory not just for Californians but for consumers everywhere.

  • California would become the third state to pass right to repair legislation for consumer electronics, after New York and Minnesota passed laws earlier this year.

  • The bill is seen as a victory for consumers and environmentalists, who argue that it will allow people to repair their own devices and reduce electronic waste.

Additional Details

  • The bill was supported by a coalition of consumer groups, environmentalists, and small business owners.

  • The bill’s supporters argued that it would be better for the environments and save them money on repairs.

  • Apple supported bills after having spent millions of dollars against it.

  • @DBT@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    6210 months ago

    I’m really interested in why apple was so much against it before but are for it now. Maybe there’s an obvious reason, maybe not.

    But I’m too tired to google this and dive further in.

        • circuitfarmer
          link
          fedilink
          English
          1410 months ago

          That’s disheartening but I figured it had to be something like that. Ultimately then the danger will be thinking “great, now right to repair is fixed”, plus Apple gets to claim they were altruistic. Ugh.

      • UltraMagnus0001
        link
        fedilink
        English
        410 months ago

        the tools will probably cost as much as the device and the replacement parts will be locked, requiring Apple s expensive tools

      • ditty
        link
        fedilink
        English
        310 months ago

        Apple won’t be forced to change their current business practice if soldering everything to the logic board, security chips disabling devices after repairs unless unlocked with their proprietary software, etc, so it won’t affect their monopolizing of the Apple repair market. They’ll just have to offer logic boards for sale with a one pg PDF showing how to replace the board, and maybe they’ll make the security software fix more available (which would still be huge). But 99% of their users likely wouldn’t do it themselves anyway.

        Either way, this is still a huge step in the right direction though!

    • @saltesc@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      1910 months ago

      When I worked at Apple, much of the repairing wasn’t modular. Simply device replacement at a high fixed cost. They’d then cannibalize the surrendered devices for parts or repair them cheap, then make them replacement devices for the next person to come in. It made huge money.

    • downpunxx
      link
      fedilink
      110 months ago

      possibly because allowing apple and other mfgs the right to DRM all replacement parts?

    • @lobut@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      110 months ago

      Apple was against it because if you have parts, you can build counterfit iPhones and stuff (read about that rationale years ago, take it with a grain of salt). Also, the repair market is quite lucrative forcing customers to buy new devices than actually fixing them. They were doing this with iPods way back in the day with irreplaceable batteries or batteries so pricey, “you may as well buy a new one”.

      No idea why they changed their tune. I could only imagine their revenue streams have leaned more into software now but I’m just an idiot online, what do I know.

    • @Raisin8659OP
      link
      English
      -510 months ago

      Try asking Bing. It gives multiple possible answers with references. Still have to check the references anyway because sometimes the references don’t support the statements.