Army Will Seek Right To Repair Clauses In All Its Contracts (404media.co) 49
An anonymous reader quotes a report from 404 Media: A new memo from Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth is calling on defense contractors to grant the Army the right-to-repair. The Wednesday memo is a document about "Army Transformation and Acquisition Reform" that is largely vague but highlights the very real problems with IP constraints that have made it harder for the military to repair damaged equipment.
Hegseth made this clear at the bottom of the memo in a subsection about reform and budget optimization. "The Secretary of the Army shall identify and propose contract modifications for right to repair provisions where intellectual property constraints limit the Army's ability to conduct maintenance and access the appropriate maintenance tools, software, and technical data -- while preserving the intellectual capital of American industry," it says. "Seek to include right to repair provisions in all existing contracts and also ensure these provisions are included in all new contracts." [...]
The memo would theoretically mean that the Army would refuse to sign contracts with companies that make it difficult to fix what it sells to the military. The memo doesn't carry the force of law, but subordinates do tend to follow the orders given within. The memo also ordered the Army to stop producing Humvees and some other light vehicles, and Breaking Defense confirmed that it had. "This is a victory in our work to let people fix their stuff, and a milestone on the campaign to expand the Right to Repair. It will save the American taxpayer billions of dollars, and help our service members avoid the hassle and delays that come from manufacturers' repair restrictions," Isaac Bowers, the Federal Legislative Director of U.S. PIRG, said in a statement.
Hegseth made this clear at the bottom of the memo in a subsection about reform and budget optimization. "The Secretary of the Army shall identify and propose contract modifications for right to repair provisions where intellectual property constraints limit the Army's ability to conduct maintenance and access the appropriate maintenance tools, software, and technical data -- while preserving the intellectual capital of American industry," it says. "Seek to include right to repair provisions in all existing contracts and also ensure these provisions are included in all new contracts." [...]
The memo would theoretically mean that the Army would refuse to sign contracts with companies that make it difficult to fix what it sells to the military. The memo doesn't carry the force of law, but subordinates do tend to follow the orders given within. The memo also ordered the Army to stop producing Humvees and some other light vehicles, and Breaking Defense confirmed that it had. "This is a victory in our work to let people fix their stuff, and a milestone on the campaign to expand the Right to Repair. It will save the American taxpayer billions of dollars, and help our service members avoid the hassle and delays that come from manufacturers' repair restrictions," Isaac Bowers, the Federal Legislative Director of U.S. PIRG, said in a statement.
What's the history here? (Score:4, Interesting)
A quick bit of googling shows that some Democrats have proposed legislation and amendments for right-to-repair in the DOD:
https://www.stripes.com/theate... [stripes.com]
https://www.nextgov.com/defens... [nextgov.com]
It would be interesting to know why this legislation stalled.
Status - Introduced (Score:2)
Interesting, details are of course in the bill, and then there are the committees to get a bill to the floor. To get on a committee, a senator or representative needs to bring in donations for their party. And then there is the chairperson, and the party.
The status of S.5497 is Introduced. S.5497 [congress.gov]
Who knows, maybe Hegseth thought it was a good idea too, and long overdue, and got it done without the political part.
Re: (Score:3)
It would be interesting to know why this legislation stalled.
Eisenhower warned of a military-industrial complex for a reason. The military carefully cultivates non-partisan support by spreading money to lots of different congressional districts and the industry likewise contributes to candidates in lots of different congressional districts. Like most industries, they are also non-partisan in their support and consider contributions investments in people who will serve their industry and help add to their profits.
Would be an improvement to have options (Score:2)
It would be interesting to know why this legislation stalled.
Right to repair would be a good thing, it gives the Army options.
However, hasn't the military outsourced a lot of "maintenance" and "service" stuff to civilian employees and contractors so that more enlistees could go into combat arms? If so, we'll probably still see a ton of outsourcing. But again, it would be an improvement to have options.
Re: (Score:3)
Yes and no. Getting forward-depoyed engineers out to somewhere near a combat zone entails risks, but if you've got combat-ready individuals who've also got both the training *and* the authorization to do field repairs it gives a lot more flexibility to the entire system. In addition to that, there's an inescapable morale improvement when orders reflecting some semblence of reality and sanity come down from the top, and saying "yes, you can do what you need to do to get your job done with product XYZ" actual
Re: (Score:2)
And beyond that, remember that the military is not in any way, shape, or form "all grunts." If some of those contractors want to enlist or join direct, there's a market for that too.
I have to presume that the pay rate for said contractors would be reduced to the ranks of enlisted, and therefore a hard no for most people.
Re: (Score:2)
It gives our military the defensible demand that equipment be delivered with sufficient documentation and access to necessary parts to enable personnel to repair the equipment. And correctly so, as if it should have been different ever.
I heard some time ago that many US military bases use civilian contractors to provide many routine services, especially notable food services. Cooking and feeding our military. Not all of our forces deploy elsewhere for service, but when they do, they ought be be able to be m
Re:Would be an improvement to have options (Score:4, Interesting)
I think it is a good thing overall. Contractors are not going to be on the front lines trying to service some item while enemy artillery is shelling that emplacement.
I wonder if Ukraine woke the top brass in what World War III is going to be like, and being able to fix the relative sophisticated stuff like drone launchers, anti-drone emplacements, and a new generation of mines. Having the ability to repair stuff in the field is going to be critical.
I'm hoping this means the Army takes the next step... demanding easily repairable designs. For example, an old World War II Jeep that can go from crate to in service in a few hours, and be easily repaired. Being able to get stuff working in the field can mean the difference between winning and losing a battle. It also doesn't hurt to bring in a philosophy similar to how the Germans had a "war mode" switch with some of their vehicles, where it would allow higher speeds and revs, at the expense of wear or even vehicle destruction.
From there, maybe this tech will filter down. I'd like to see the Army design a light vehicle like the Willys successor which can turn into a civilian vehicle, but not be as obnoxiously large as a Canyonero.
Re: (Score:2)
I think it is a good thing overall. Contractors are not going to be on the front lines trying to service some item while enemy artillery is shelling that emplacement.
The contractors I am referring to are at bases. Many in the USA. They are doing work like plumbing, carpentry, electrical, etc. Its in these area where the military used to be far more self sufficient. Even some base security has seen MPs replaced with private police. Similarly, electronics repair has had some contracting as well. Perhaps sometimes as a result of the bad contracts with manufacturers that have been mentioned.
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
:)
man, the whole 'Democrats/Republicans' nonsense and those trying to shape what is going on to attribute it to their 'team' is SO stupid.
what about the right to have no DRM that needs onl (Score:3)
what about the right to have no DRM that needs online access for any software they use?
Re: (Score:2)
That is not a problem the military has. They buy large DRM contracts and spend enough money for the companies to forgo the online requirements.
Re: (Score:2)
Actually, most of the contracts I saw for military/embedded applications had very strict language prohibiting any kind of licensing/key provisions. Now for commercial (including commercial cloud) applications, the rules may well be different.
And I remember when the Army got its own master image of MS Windows that had no activation code. (I thought using Windows in tactical systems was appalling, but those decisions were made well above my paygrade.)
i hope the "Army" is a typo and includes ALL (Score:2)
I hope the "Army" is a typo and includes ALL branches of the military... the Navy has been plagued by issues with only contractors being able to service their tech/ships.
Re:i hope the "Army" is a typo and includes ALL (Score:5, Informative)
Just the Army.
The memo is a vague wish list aimed at the Secretary of the Army; there may be similar memos planned for other branches. This is the entire right-to-repair section:
https://media.defense.gov/2025... [defense.gov]
Re: (Score:2)
What? You mean you want a proper policy written and distributed through out the dept.? Now if you were wanting a makeup studio for T.V. appearances in that five sided monument to insanity, then you'd be on to something.....ooops....I guess they have already created one those.
Re: (Score:3)
thanks for sharing the link to the actual doc.... must admit, the fact it's only 3 1/2 pages long is an even bigger concern for me than anything else.
(except for: "Enable AI-driven command and control at Theater, Corps, and Division headquarters by 2027. " i could understand enhanced.... not "driven".... not sure i can get behind the wording of that... and doubt the troops will be happy to hear their orders are "driven" by an AI.... how do you fratricide your AI commander?)
Always knew AI will be a huge elem
Re: (Score:2)
I hope the "Army" is a typo and includes ALL branches of the military... the Navy has been plagued by issues with only contractors being able to service their tech/ships.
Well you'll have to wait for DOGE to get around to the DoD then. :-)
Seriously, there is a bit of redundancy between the branches. I realize that superficially people make the mistake of thinking the Marine Corps is redundant given the Army. That in reality the Marines and the Army have different missions so that their training is different and some of the gear is specialized. But do the Marines really need their own boots with the Eagle Globe and Anchor (EGA) insignia on them. Could, perhaps, the Army an
Does Space Force need its own blue handled Ka-bar? (Score:2)
https://www.kabar.com/products... [kabar.com]
Re: (Score:2)
The Space Force has a ka-bar knife? I have my father's from WWII. I cannot imagine why the Space Force even needs knife. I admit is it damn useful at times, but then I do not use it for my myriad space duties.
Re: (Score:2)
The Space Force has a ka-bar knife?
Well I was joking in my post, hence the ";-)". The knife is real, but it's a commemorative thing not issued equipment. There is a commemorative ka-bar for each branch of service.
I have my father's from WWII. I cannot imagine why the Space Force even needs knife. I admit is it damn useful at times, but then I do not use it for my myriad space duties.
I used my Dad's during scout wilderness survival training. It was great for processing branches to make poles for lean to's and stuff. Got my own for camping later on. If space force has wooden crates to open, maybe they do have ka-bars. :-)
Re: (Score:1)
I don't know. If I had to name one single item just about any soldier probably can make effective use of, hey even the non-combat office workers might be confronted with opening a cardboard box, its a good study knife that keep an edge even when abused.
A knife might not be the right tool, or optimized for the task you'll face but in terms of trying to be prepared for the unknown, I can't think of much else you could have a long that will prove employable to at least some benefit.
Re: (Score:2)
The USSR equipped its cosmonauts with pistols in case they needed to fight off a bear after landing in Siberia...
Re: (Score:2)
I cannot imagine why the Space Force even needs knife
For those ocassions when you have to fight a giant alien reptile hand-to-hand of course. Like this [youtube.com].
Re: (Score:2)
Space Force has the good stuff from the SGC but that is only on the top secret books. Musk does not have access to.
Re: (Score:2)
That's fixable.
What's good for the goose... (Score:5, Insightful)
Why is it that this is a good thing (reducing total cost of ownership) for the Army but not for everyone else? Explain that one to me, Congress.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
a piece of equipment that could put lives at risk if it goes offline
Doesn't that accurately describe cars and phones? It may not be in the same way but it still greatly increase risks. At least in the military they have redundancy where many people do not have that luxury.
Not to worry!! (Score:1)
Army Will Seek Right To Repair Clauses In All Its Contracts
Not to worry, President Trump will put an end to these socialist DEI shenanigans which are extremely unfair to America's corporations. It's obviously far more profitable to bring in a defense contractor than it is to fix things yourself.
Re: (Score:1)
Only if the trail of bread crumbs leads back into his pocket.
No John Deere in the army then (Score:2)
I guess....
I joined the USMC in 85 (Score:1)
By the time i got out 2005 we could not even wash our own uniforms that had been outsourced to marriot
Re: (Score:2)
Damn! Historically, the Armed Services were renowned for doing their own repairs. I never served myself but I do remember seeing teams of gearheads and techies going through extensive training for mechanical and electronic maintenance.
I guess that's all faded away then.
I also guess that means the US Army is probably intending to shop around for alternate contractors rather than in-housing the repairs.
Re: (Score:1)
there some 3000 m1 tanks sitting in utah never touched. General Dynamics or who ever make them now have a fixed price contract for x number a year. Only problem is they are delivered ungraded and are never used. We just strip them part for tanks already upgraded. The reason for this we can not do the upgrades our self so we cannibalize brand new tanks to keep the ones we are allowed to work on running.
Improves on existing law (Score:2)
Cost cutting (Score:1)
Need to change some laws (Score:2)
There's several items in the Hegseth memo that will require Congressional action. Some of the intellectual property rights provisions are not DoD contract decisions, but legal mandates.
Personally, I've always argued that the Army should -own- the software it pays for. Instead, we get 'government purpose rights' which in theory means govt can do anything it wants, but in practice makes it really difficult for a 3rd party to take over software maintenance. The theory behind 'govt rights' rather than actual
Now they need to train their personnel (Score:2)
Solution: Replace Your F-35 Engine Cartridge (Score:3)
and the defense contractors will send (Score:3)
you and whoses army is going to enforce it - (Score:2)