US Senator Challenges Defense Industry on Right-to-Repair Opposition (reuters.com)
- Reference: 0180049580
- News link: https://news.slashdot.org/story/25/11/11/1917226/us-senator-challenges-defense-industry-on-right-to-repair-opposition
- Source link: https://www.reuters.com/world/us/us-senator-challenges-defense-industry-right-to-repair-opposition-funding-talks-2025-11-10/
> In a sharply-worded November 5 letter to the National Defense Industrial Association (NDIA) obtained by Reuters, Warren accused the industry group of attempting to undermine bipartisan efforts to give the Pentagon greater ability to repair weapons and equipment it owns.
>
> She called the group's opposition "a dangerous and misguided attempt to protect an unacceptable status quo of giant contractor profiteering." Currently, the government is often required to pay contractors like NDIA members Lockheed Martin, Boeing and RTX to use expensive original equipment and installers to service broken parts, versus having trained military maintainers 3D print spares in the field and install them faster and more cheaply.
[1] https://www.reuters.com/world/us/us-senator-challenges-defense-industry-right-to-repair-opposition-funding-talks-2025-11-10/
Right to repair for everyone (Score:2)
The people against right to repair are a bunch of anti-capitalists plutocrats. Capitalism = free (as in choice) market = no restrictions on repair.
The scum trying that crap on the US military should be forbidden from selling to the US government for 10 years.
Re: (Score:2)
> anti-capitalists plutocrats
... is an oxymoron if I ever heard one.
> Capitalism = free (as in choice) market = no restrictions on repair.
Capitalism is defined as "an economic and political system in which a country's trade and industry are controlled by private owners for profit." (Thanks, Google.)
In this context, third parties might be able to offer repair services and parts for military equipment, but without some assistance from the manufacturer, the entry-burden might be too high. Yet the original manufacturer can refuse to offer such assistance in a laissez-faire capitalist system.
IMHO, right-to-re
Re: (Score:2)
> And opposition to right-to-repair can't be enabled by capitalism alone, either.
Well...no.
A right-to-repair would have to exist before anyone could oppose it. Capitalism alone wouldn't create the right in the first place (government would) but once it was created, we can assume that capitalism would, and could, oppose it all by itself.
If the right didn't exist, then there would be nothing for capitalism to oppose, so the issue would be moot.
So I'd say opposition to the right can be created by capitalism alone, even though the right might not be so created.
> You need government intervention to enact and enforce prohibitions like DMCA, otherwise the free market will eventually [reverse] engineer around the problems.
In lassiez-faire capitalism, a
Re: (Score:2)
You like many people in the US, have fallen victim to the poor education that the GOP attempts to create.
Capitalism is NOT about the rights of the wealthy. It is not about corporations or the government. Plutocracy is rule by the rich. They get to do what they want, everyone else suffers. That is NOT capitalism.
Here is the full paragraph that Google returns, because you lied about Googles results - you left out the second sentence proving you wrong:
"Capitalism is an economic system where private indivi
Re: (Score:2)
You make numerous misrepresentations about me.
First of all, I was not educated in the USA, although I do live there now.
Second, I saw only one sentence returned by Google for the definition of capitalism. There was no second sentence. So no, I did not "lie" about Google's results.
Finally, I have given you no reason to know my "belief" about who owns something after it's sold. But now that we're here, I will say there are legitimate situations where such control can occur. Copyright works for example. If I w
Re: Right to repair for everyone (Score:2)
Right to repair isn't capitalist or anti-capitalist. It's a consumer protection law. If capitalists want to produce a product that's hard to repair, then consumers can choose not to purchase from them. That's not anti-capitalist. That's the very essence of capitalism. Producers always have to follow consumer protection laws, in every industry. Those laws may be lax or onerous, but neither changes the nature of resources being directed by those who control capital as decided by the votes of those who purchas
Re: (Score:2)
Monopolies, including those on repair services, are anti-capitalist. Making the purchaser/licensee of a product agree to pay a monopoly for repair, whether the product itself is a monopoly or not, is very similar to voluntary slavery which most libertarians consider to be a contradiction in terms.
Re: (Score:2)
You are incorrect because you misunderstand Capitalism. You have spent a lifetime being lied to by the GOP. Capitalism is NOT about making you rich. Nor is it to benefit the wealthy, the corporations, or the government. That is GOP bullcrap.
Capitalism is about competition and free market. If you have read Adam Smith's The Wealth of Nation you would understand that.
There is NO special protection given to producers. The single most important idea Adam Smith came up was "everyone should be free to enter a
Agreement is possible. (Score:2)
I don't usually agree with Warren, but I'm 100% with her on this. Nice to see that bipartisanship can still exist.
The solution is simple (Score:2)
Just have Donald get his marker pen out and enlist a range of "defence industry" personnel from technicians to company executives, to make sure qualified personnel are available to the armed services for the repair of front line equipment. When they find their backsides are plonked onto bench seats in the hold of a C-17 or A400M headed for Donetsk, attitudes will rapidly reverse.
Do the private sector too (Score:2)
Do the private sector too, John Deere is one of the worst offenders
Re: (Score:2)
and apple... and most hardware builders out there
Re: Way to blow your negotiating position by (Score:3, Insightful)
Yeah, but in actual war (like Ukraine is finding out), flexibility matters. There are absolutely cells of Ukrainian engineers 3D-printing parts as they respond to our evolving understanding of drone warfare with innovative solutions.
Moreover, standardization is a long recognized enabler of industrial warfare... good standards let militaries flexibly source parts and share equipment, simplifying logistics. Letting military contractors obstruct that is our corruption... it's strategical stupid for a military
Re: Way to blow your negotiating position by (Score:1)
Yes. And if you were sitting across the table from me, I'd be less inclined to try to snow you than if you were talking about 3d printed artillery shells.
The perception of competence matters. And regardless of any wishful thinking to the contrary, the only way to achieve the perception of competence is to demostrate actual competence.
Ukraine (Score:2)
I wonder if maybe recent Ukrainian experiences has driven home the direness of the situation for the Pentagon? Maintaining employment numbers isn't any help to an inoperative force.
Re: Ukraine (Score:1)
That would be relearning a forgotten lesson the easy way.
I am not convinced that learning anything viscerally, as opposed to intellectually, is possible the easy way.
The Pentagon won't change it's ways unless and until we get into war *not* of our own choosing and we start to lose.
Ukraine shows the way (Score:2)
We can learn from the Russias invasion that countries such as Ukraine, Sweden and - with the exception of fighter jets - Finland are well prepared to defend against Russia. The dispersed operations 24/7, months and months and months without returning to a fixed base is not just "nice to have". It's what makes the difference between life and death. If it can't be fixed in the field by a handful of conscripts under the supervision of just one single trained guy, it's not worth operating.
Right to open software and standards. (Score:2)
If right-to-repair covers software, then it'll be interesting to see Palantir's stance.