After years of fighting Right to Repair, Apple U-turns-ish in California
- Reference: 1692907094
- News link: https://www.theregister.co.uk/2023/08/24/apple_california_right_repair/
- Source link:
In a [1]letter [PDF] provided to The Register , the iBiz this week declared it supports [2]SB 244 and urged the State Assembly to approve the law bill, passed by the State Senate in May. The draft legislation is due for a committee vote in the State Assembly next week that would advance it to a general vote.
"In recent years, Apple has taken significant steps to expand options for consumers to repair their devices which we know is good for consumers' budgets and good for the environment," said D. Michael Foulkes, director of state and local government affairs for Apple, in the letter to the bill's sponsor, California Senator Susan Talamantes Eggman.
[3]
"In that spirit, we have appreciated the opportunity to engage with you and your staff on SB 244, California's proposed Right to Repair Act, to help ensure California consumers have the resources available to safely repair their devices in a matter that does not compromise their privacy or data security."
That's the way the Cook, he crumbles
It was not always so. For years, Apple and other technology companies like John Deere have fought rules requiring them to allow third-parties to access and repair their products. For example, tech industry lobbying groups previously opposed letting consumers repair mobile phone batteries because it's claimed to be [4]dangerous [PDF]. And industry lobbyists [5]killed a prior California bill, AB 1163, that Eggman introduced in 2019.
Eggman also authored three additional repair bills that did not pass: AB 2110 (2018); SB 605 (2021); and [6]SB 983 (2022).
[7]Cali Right-to-Repair law dropped, cracks screen, has to be taken to authorized repair shop
[8]Minnesota governor OKs broad right-to-repair tech law
[9]Another redesign on the cards for iPhone as EU rules call for removable batteries
[10]Apple jacks up Mac, iPhone, iPad battery replacement fees
"Apple’s support for California's Right to Repair Act demonstrates the power of the movement that has been building for years and the ability for industries to partner with us to make good policy to benefit the people of California," said Senator Eggman in an email to The Register .
"I’m grateful for their engagement on this issue and for leading among their peers when it comes to supporting access to repair."
[11]
[12]
Repair advocates also greeted word of Apple's about-face with enthusiasm.
"Apple’s endorsement of the Right to Repair Bill in California is a watershed moment for consumer rights," said Kyle Wiens, CEO of repair site iFixit, in [13]a statement . "It feels like the Berlin Wall of tech repair monopolies is starting to crumble, brick by brick."
[14]
According to iFixit, California's bill goes further than repair laws passed recently in Minnesota and New York by establishing how long parts and updates must remain available. It requires that parts, tools, and documentation for products priced between $50 and $99.99 can be obtained for at least three years after product discontinuation. And for products priced at $100 or more, repair materials must be made available for seven years.
SB 244 also allows cities, counties, or the state to file a legal challenge in superior court, rather than relying exclusively on the state attorney general for enforcement, which would make the law much harder to dodge.
Now look at the caveats
Apple's support, of course, is not unqualified. The Tim-Cook-run corporation says it will back the bill so long as it:
Does not require that manufactures allow repair shops to disable security features
Focuses on manufacturer obligations to support authorized repair channels
Requires that repair providers disclose non-genuine parts
Does not extend repair requirements to older (pre-2021) products.
You may want to therefore curb your enthusiasm until we see how these bullet points develop into policy, particularly the bit about how security features will affect repairs. Still, it's a start.
"Apple has long been one of the main Goliaths standing in the way of Right to Repair," said Nathan Proctor, senior director of nonprofit PIRG's Right to Repair Campaign, in [15]a statement . "Our rag-tag team of Davids has not only overcome its opposition, we have flipped its position on our core request. We’re closer than ever to a more fixable world."
Asked whether there's something hypocritical about Apple's enumeration in its letter of all the things the company has done to make its products more repairable since 2016 while its lobbyists have done the opposite, Proctor told The Register :
I think we are all used to companies' public relations teams minimizing criticisms. I don't really care, though. We are focused on trying to get people their Right to Repair, and if Apple has seen the writing on the wall and is changing its tune, we surely welcome the company's support. Apple lobbyists surely were not the only ones opposing our legislation.
As for the timing of Apple's reversal, Proctor said he doesn't know what's going on inside the iTitan but said he suspects the [16]passage of a strong Right to Repair bill in Minnesota made it clear that repair advocates have the will and political clout to get legislation approved.
"Public support has only grown," said Proctor. "Efforts to offer half-measures and anemic voluntary programs have fallen flat. On some level, I'm sure it just made the most sense to stop trying to stop legislation, which wasn't working." ®
Get our [17]Tech Resources
[1] https://regmedia.co.uk/2023/08/24/apple_letter.pdf
[2] https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billNavClient.xhtml?bill_id=202320240SB244
[3] https://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/jump?co=1&iu=/6978/reg_onprem/personaltech&sz=300x50%7C300x100%7C300x250%7C300x251%7C300x252%7C300x600%7C300x601&tile=2&c=2ZOfTCIo5-qOqWS2IkcXzAAAAAAM&t=ct%3Dns%26unitnum%3D2%26raptor%3Dcondor%26pos%3Dtop%26test%3D0
[4] https://regmedia.co.uk/2019/05/02/security-industry-right-repair.pdf
[5] https://www.theregister.com/2019/05/02/california_right_to_repair_law_dropped
[6] https://www.theregister.com/2022/06/01/california_repair_bill/
[7] https://www.theregister.com/2019/05/02/california_right_to_repair_law_dropped/
[8] https://www.theregister.com/2023/05/25/minnesota_right_to_repair/
[9] https://www.theregister.com/2023/06/20/removable_battery_eu/
[10] https://www.theregister.com/2023/01/03/apple_battery_service/
[11] https://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/jump?co=1&iu=/6978/reg_onprem/personaltech&sz=300x50%7C300x100%7C300x250%7C300x251%7C300x252%7C300x600%7C300x601&tile=4&c=44ZOfTCIo5-qOqWS2IkcXzAAAAAAM&t=ct%3Dns%26unitnum%3D4%26raptor%3Dfalcon%26pos%3Dmid%26test%3D0
[12] https://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/jump?co=1&iu=/6978/reg_onprem/personaltech&sz=300x50%7C300x100%7C300x250%7C300x251%7C300x252%7C300x600%7C300x601&tile=3&c=33ZOfTCIo5-qOqWS2IkcXzAAAAAAM&t=ct%3Dns%26unitnum%3D3%26raptor%3Deagle%26pos%3Dmid%26test%3D0
[13] https://www.ifixit.com/News/79902/apples-u-turn-tech-giant-finally-backs-repair-in-california
[14] https://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/jump?co=1&iu=/6978/reg_onprem/personaltech&sz=300x50%7C300x100%7C300x250%7C300x251%7C300x252%7C300x600%7C300x601&tile=4&c=44ZOfTCIo5-qOqWS2IkcXzAAAAAAM&t=ct%3Dns%26unitnum%3D4%26raptor%3Dfalcon%26pos%3Dmid%26test%3D0
[15] https://pirg.org/media-center/release-after-years-of-opposition-apple-calls-for-passage-of-right-to-repair-in-california/
[16] https://www.theregister.com/2023/05/25/minnesota_right_to_repair/
[17] https://whitepapers.theregister.com/
>> Call me cynical, but surely those two caveats basically neuter the entire proposal?
Exactly. Apple hasn't changed their tune, they will work hard to make sure the bill is toothless, and then they will use their support of it for PR purposes. In the meantime, they will continue to solder non-standard and commercially unavailable memory and SSDs directly to the motherboard and require "calibration" tools which aren't available to the public for even the most simple part replacements.
"Does not require that manufacturers allow repair shops to disable security features"
Bingo. There ya go. Everything's going to be "protected by a security feature" even the battery "for your protection"
Or am I just too cynical?
Re: "Does not require that manufacturers allow repair shops to disable security features"
"Or am I just too cynical?"
Not at all. Many companies have weaponized the DMCA by putting locks on all sorts of things. The locks are super wimpy but circumventing them is a felony (in the US) so it's a matter of The State vs. hacker rather than a company having to spend their own money prosecuting cases. Third party repair shops that do anything to circumvent those locks would be up on charges.
It's pretty stupid of manufacturers to do this. If I had an iPhone and broke the screen, I may not have the money for an official Apple repair nor the time to send it in the mail for repairs. I might need to buy an Android phone to be able to get by until I can get the iPhone repaired or afford a replacement. That's a big risk for Apple if I find that something less expensive does the job just fine after getting used to a different OS. Repaired iPhones also be sold back into the market if the former owner opted for a replacement and traded in the broken phone. That means more people with iPhones and those people may buy a new one from Apple in future. Until that time, they'll be spending money in the app store to have a full set of spyware to add to the factory installed collection.
Way back when I was doing pro audio, gear that could be repaired was much more prevalent. If you couldn't get parts or service docs, you retired that bit of kit and bought something that a local shop could fix. Over time that process selected the sorts of equipment many companies had in stock. It was also pointless to not sell parts and provide schematics since the gear isn't that complex. Even the most complex gear didn't come with firmware listings so you couldn't go out and build a copy which I found was more expensive than buying new.
Does not require that manufactures allow repair shops to disable security features
So, basically, if Apple implement "security features" to prevent non-Apple parts working, repair shops would not be allowed to disable those features, and would have to use Apple parts, at whatever excessive price Apple charge?
Focuses on manufacturer obligations to support authorized repair channels
Who authorizes "authorized repair channels"?
Call me cynical, but surely those two caveats basically neuter the entire proposal?