Apple Is Lobbying Against Right To Repair Six Months After Supporting Right To Repair (404media.co) 27
An Apple executive lobbied against a strong right-to-repair bill in Oregon Thursday, which is the first time the company has had an employee actively outline its stance on right to repair at an open hearing. 404 Media: Apple's position in Oregon shows that despite supporting a weaker right to repair law in California, it still intends to control its own repair ecosystem. It also sets up a highly interesting fight in the state because Google has come out in favor of the same legislation Apple is opposing. "It is our belief that the bill's current language around parts pairing will undermine the security, safety, and privacy of Oregonians by forcing device manufacturers to allow the use of parts of unknown origin in consumer devices," John Perry, Apple's principal secure repair architect, told the legislature. This is a quick about-face for the company, which after years of lobbying against right to repair, began to lobby for it in California last fall. The difference now is that Oregon's bill includes a critical provision that Google says it can easily comply with but that is core for Apple to maintain its dominance over the repair market.
The Left Hand (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
This is true of any large company.
Small startups, or companies with original founders in control (if they have morals) can be better, but greed becomes it's only consistent trait when they get larger, over time. i.e. Profit over people, is the only consistent motive
Seems like ... (Score:2)
Apple decided they erred when they supported a Right to Repair and now they're trying to repair their position. :-)
Re: (Score:3)
I fail to see how they should have a right to repair it.
Re: (Score:2)
Er, no. It's saying that manufacturers' permission should not be required for me to do WTF I want with something I bought.
Re: (Score:1)
Er, no. It's saying that manufacturers' permission should not be required for me to do WTF I want with something I bought.
And they should not be forced to help you do WTF you want with a device they no longer own.
I can see their position. I'm sure they like the repair revenue, supporting third party repair shops is a pain, they're protecting their brand reputation by ensuring phones get repaired with components up to Apple standards, and perhaps they're protecting users by not allowing hacked components into their devices. I don't really believe that last one but it's the argument they're making.
You don't have to like that pos
Re: (Score:2)
And they should not be forced to help you do WTF you want with a device they no longer own.
This is a reasonable statement, except that the manufacturers being targeted by right to repair laws generally go to extreme lengths to make sure that the customers cannot do do repairs without manufacturer permission and profit. If it were otherwise, there would be no impetus for the creation of these laws.
The manufacturer excuses about security and quality are weak and hard to believe. They would like the public to believe that the only reasonable solution to security and quality are lock-in designs tha
tesla whould love to get $16K + an battery to reus (Score:2)
tesla would love to get $16K + an battery to reuse / fix / and sell.
https://www.thedrive.com/news/... [thedrive.com]
That is why parts pairing can not happen.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I don't know how to make that rhyme.
I didn't really believe them the first time. (Score:4, Funny)
Apple, last Fall: "You should totally pass a Right to Repair Bill."
This Spring: "No, not like that!"
parts pairing is ok as long as the shop can stock (Score:2)
parts pairing is ok as long as the shop can
stock parts
has access to the pairing tool with no fees, no accounts (or accounts that any one can get with out paying OEM for fees / classes / etc)
end user can run the tool on their own
batteries are not allowed to be locked down in anyway.
Re:parts pairing is ok as long as the shop can sto (Score:4, Informative)
Oregon doesn't just want them to stop part paring, Oregon is demanding they remove their secure enclave chip and the rest of the hardware encryption features.
Corrupt police and federal agencies have been pushing to gain access to all of our data for many years now and all are pretty pissed off apple refuses.
Google doesn't really care, it isn't their fault that hardware venders making android devices don't include hardware security, and they seem just as happy to point the finger where it belongs every time something goes wrong.
I hope you have no info on your device that future idiots can twist to use against you...
Re: (Score:3)
Google doesn't really care, it isn't their fault that hardware venders making android devices don't include hardware security, and they seem just as happy to point the finger where it belongs every time something goes wrong.
Google uses its Titan chip in its own devices which is very similar to Apple's Secure Enclave.
Oregon is demanding they remove their secure enclave chip and the rest of the hardware encryption features.
Do you have a link for this? Because hardware data encryption and vendor lock-in are really two separate things that do not need to be tied together.
Re: (Score:2)
Apple only supported *hastily written* RTR law (Score:5, Insightful)
Apple fought and fought Right to Repair for years. They lobbied carefully in parallel to write something that would be weak as soggy toast, get approved in legislatures, and they could then come out crowing to the incredulous iZombies that Apple supports Right to Repair. No, they supported exactly the weak laws they helped write, and nothing more.
When anyone else talks about "well, Right to Repair means NOT using your parts, or NOT asking your permission to use your parts, or NOT paying you through the nose to use third-party tools, or NOT paying you through the nose to use third-party parts," then you can really see how Apple feels about anything that is really about your right to repair what you own. Or think you own. Or was told you own.
Apple never supported right to repair (Score:5, Insightful)
They are actively gaslighting the repair industry with their comically absurd repair program, a program that makes even the best of tinkerers throw their gear at the genius bar in frustration. All the while they actively try and price independent repair shops out of the industry while still maintaining the horrible firmware locks should a 3rd party part be installed.
They didn't support the law in California. They realised it actively helps them perpetuate their fraudulent idea that repairing something yourself is too hard, expensive and time consuming.
They are against it, but (Score:4, Informative)
Sometimes, when it's politically advantageous, claim to support it, then sabotage it
They are the masters of malicious compliance
Article not readable. (Score:2)
I wanted to find out what the summary meant by "Oregon's bill includes a critical provision that Google says it can easily comply with but that is core for Apple to maintain its dominance over the repair market." Unfortunately I cannot read the article.
I'm not against news sites wanting to charge, but it's getting a little tiring to have this company so aggressively advertise on Slashdot.
Re: (Score:2)
I wanted to find out what the summary meant by "Oregon's bill includes a critical provision that Google says it can easily comply with but that is core for Apple to maintain its dominance over the repair market." Unfortunately I cannot read the article.
It is the parts pairing thing. Since Google does not make most Android devices that is not really a concern for them.
https://www.pcmag.com/news/in-... [pcmag.com]
Same old big corporate story (Score:2, Informative)
Embrace
Extend
Extinguish
Maybe there's a difference between the laws (Score:2)
This counts as journalism now? (Score:2)
Sorry, if you support a law against sex trafficking of children, you also have to support laws making homosexuality illegal. That's just how sex laws work.