The emerging trend of the Right to Repair
A case for the right of repair is its absence restricts the use of people’s own devices and it triggers consumerism or what advocates label as throw-away culture.
Published in Daily Tribune on December 2, 2021
by:
A new legal right of consumers is currently gaining traction in the United States. In July 2021, US President Biden has signed an executive order directing federal agencies to promote competition in the US economy, one of which is to enact regulations that prohibit manufacturer policies barring the repair of equipment and devices by individuals and independent repair shops. In other words, the right-to-repair of consumers.
Imagine buying a laptop worth P80,000. As time goes by, you will soon be tethered to the wall because the battery gave up. Owners are left with either replacing the battery (if available) or deciding to get a brand-new laptop. This is a familiar predicament for laptop owners. Imagine next that you bought that new iPhone worth P70,000. As time goes by, that iPhone will no longer support new updates. Owners are left with purchasing a new iPhone or choosing to have an outdated phone. Imagine that instead of these choices, you are allowed to repair the battery yourself, or the battery is ensured to be available or in the case of the new iPhone, you may modify the same to allow further updates. This is the gist of the right of repair.
To be clear, the owners are allowed to modify their devices as it is. Apple users for example may be familiar with jailbreaking their devices (with the risk of reducing their devices to bricks). However, with the right to repair, manufacturers may be required to ensure that despite being jailbroken, devices will retain their functionality by ensuring third parties have repair kits and the ability to install custom software in such devices.
The objectives of the Right to Repair are as follows:
• To allow everyone reasonable access to manuals, schematics, and software updates. By doing so, software licenses are no longer limited in terms of support options and the coverage of the service/product;
• To ensure the availability of parts and tools not only from the manufacturer but also from third-party repair shops and even the end-user of the devices,
• To allow unlocking, adapting, or modifying a device, so an owner can install custom software; and
• To accommodate repair in the design, in other words, devices must be manufactured in a way that has a high chance of repairability.
A case for the right of repair is its absence restricts the use of people’s own devices and it triggers consumerism or what advocates label as throw-away culture. The absence of the said right makes it difficult if not impossible for users to repair their devices. Have you been told before that repairing a broken glass of a phone or a battery replacement that is just too expensive that you might as well buy a new one? These are some of the manifestations of the throw-away culture the right of repair is trying to curb.
It is also argued that the obsolescence of devices serves as additional wastes that are harmful to the environment. Have you ever wondered where your old devices go after you are done with them? The right of repair curbs this problem by ensuring the longevity of devices owned by individuals.
A case against the right of repair is made by tech giants such as Apple and Microsoft going so much as to argue that their products are repairable and that they are protecting consumers’ safety, privacy, and security by restricting who does the repairs. Apple, for instance, limits consumers from repairing their devices by requiring specific tools or authorized parts. Others argue on the ownership over said schematics, plans, and computer codes.
In the context of the Philippines, the right may not be as in demand as these developed nations. However, with the Filipino Consumer being one of the biggest consumers of smartphones and similar devices, it is only a matter of time that this right will be called for. Moreover, with resistance to this right from tech giants, legislators may want to ensure a home-court advantage for Filipino consumers who end up buying these products. When will this end up in the Philippines’ Consumer Rights? I cannot say for sure but it is only a matter of time.
