I'm unaware of the exact details, but I have heard about the basics about "right to repair" movements, and I think this is a great thing for consumers and users of products. It's in a way anti-fascist too.

By that I mean, companies already have way too much influence, and they seem to be able to control way too many things. Here the foot is put down and said, consumers are more important than companies, and you have to do what the consumers want, and they want to be able to repair and have control of their products that they buy.

The issue as whole is inherently complex, and I don't know what kind of regulations this will implement in terms of forcing producers to use certain methods in their production, which allows rather than denies repairability. But I've also heard previously that EU countries want to force producers to keep making and selling spare parts of their devices for x amount of time, which is also a good thing. Because sometimes without the right parts you can't fix the products.

Furthermore say chipped products that verifies other components is an example where you cannot change the parts in a product, even though it is technically possible, the main product refuses to accept a perfectly compatible part to to the incorrect "serial number" or otherwise verified part.

My hope is that this also opens up the market for more production of components for products, and that this new law denies companies forcing consumers to only use their parts in the product, as for example a replacement component.

Anyways, I just thought it was right to mention it on this forum, and perhaps some people have greater knowledge about the whole right to repair movement and the specific EU implementation of this. It's also interesting because of forces producers to provide "open documentation" about products to independent repair professionals and owners of the product, which is somewhat relevant to the free software movement, in that it is open documentation for hardware.

I just thought it was good and interesting this passed, and I'm interested in learning more.

https://repair.eu/news/european-parl...-obsolescence/

I think it's a marvellous idea, but policing it is going to be a problem. Companies can always find ways around these things. For example, some printers used to refuse to accept replacement cartridges that were not oem. That of course was because printer manufacturers make most of their money by selling oem cartridges at inflated prices rather than by selling printers (the Gillette principle). This was eventually declared a restraint of trade in the USA.

So now printers accept the cheaper cartridges that you can buy in supermarkets but, after a short while, the cartridge mysteriously ceases to function and the printer reports an unspecified "cartridge problem". And if you go to the manufacturer's help desk, you will be told, "Sorry but the cartridge must have been a bad one. We always advise people against buying non-oem cartridges because they're not reliable". And that's that. You can't prove that printer software was designed to accept the cartridge initially but then reject it after it's been used a few times, can you!

Passed what? There's no actual information in your post, just opinion and unfounded proclamation of a "movement".

Well, here's the BBC's take on it:
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-49884827

Thank you. This is a good thing in many ways. Unfortunately the BBC also has a tendency to use such sensational imagery ("'Right to repair' gathers force" - indeed making it sound like some sort of rebel movement).

BTW, the article is over a year old. Not sure OP wasn't refering to something newer? Yes, I could probably just look it up, but I didn't start the thread.

That is an old part of this. The new part is specifically related to consumer electronics like PC's and mobile phones.

I'm sorry, I was reading this in a technical online newspaper in my own language, so I don't really have a good source to add to this thread. I looked around a little, but.. mm.. I'll see what I can find..

Here is a decent source:
https://repair.eu/news/european-parl...-obsolescence/

Great idea I think. But the companies have all the power still imho, especially when specialty tools are required. They will provide them no problem, if you can pay for it. The computer software for my car to do my own work on it is about 5 to 6 thousand bucks, and that is for a car that is 10 years old...

From what I understand of the right to repair movement (it is a 'movement' in the US - I don't know about other places) that's actually an acceptable outcome: it's still impractical for you as the single end-user, but for a non-corporate shop that 5 to 6 thousand bucks is very doable (since they'll fix more than one car) and enables competition in the repair market, and decreases the corporate entity's power (because they can't just have their dealerships charge unlimited high prices with zero competition - they have to compete at market rates with any other shop willing to do the work). It's imperfect, especially if you want to do the work yourself, but its a lot better than the John Deere/Apple/Tesla-esque alternative that a lot of those corporate entities would prefer.

I'd like to believe this going on in the EU will become global, like RoHS...

In the US, Massachusetts recently passed a similar initiative: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Massac...itiative_(2020)

Among the hardest hit in the States have been farmers, who have been left having to have their tractors and other equipment, which can retail for tens of thousands of dollars, by the manufacturers or their representatives.

what about the right to repair the operating system software your computer comes with?

^ This is a big issue for Android devices - there's many devices that still work perfectly except for the OS being way out-of-date and hence insecure, requiring people to buy a new device regardless.
___

Thanks for the links.

As I said, this is a Good Thing on many levels (environment/global_warming, more rights to consumers, more economical, less China trash etc.).

This is actually one of the first places I heard about the right to repair movement, from farmers in the US who are stuck with expensive machinery they cannot fix, due to them being unnecessarily chipped, which prevents any "unauthorized" replacement parts. There is also an effort by some farmers to reverse engineer the software so that they can actually take control of their own machinery instead of being at the mercy of the producer.

It's good to hear similar things gaining traction in the US (where the movement originated, I think).

Anyways, in Europe, in the EU, there are several stages to this "right to repair" that have already been implemented, but I'm not sure where we are at overall. The previous mention I remember is that producers of "major appliances" are required to keep producing and supplying spare parts for at least 10 or 15 years or some such. I personally think that's a bit short, but ok.

This particular stage in this thread is about computers and mobile phones or "consumer electronics" having to meet stricter standards in regards to repairability, keeping spare parts, marking of products etc. This is also connected with the EU directive if proper waste management of electronic products and re-use and refusbishment instead of throwing away and buying new.

The question really is, what rights do consumers have to control their devices they have purchased? What right do they have to audit the code? Who really owns the devices? And if the consumer supposedly owned the device they purchased, why should they not assume full control of it within the rights of public law and order?

If you cannot audit the software on your device, and yes, also change it, then what ownership do you really have over the device and who really controls it?

Not only can you not audit the software, there is no general public auditing of software. Companies are obliged to have their finances audited and many other things, why should software company be under no public scrutiny at all?

Combine this with the abuse of the patent laws, and monopolizing of markets, then you have this kind of reverse situation going on, where companies USE people/consumers/households, rather than being an instrument which the people use to produce something useful. Then you have these new "dopamine" corporations that abuse and manipulate "consumers" into using their products so they can make money on it. Sounds a bit like fascism to me, epecially with how much power these companies have and how authoritarian they are, and how close they are connected with certain groups in governments and politics.

It's an interesting topic alltogether, and something I wrote to Richard Stallman and the European Commission about, being that free software becomes irrelevant if people have no control over or access to the devices they buy. This can potentially become a major problem for not only free software, but open source too, in the future.