General > General Technical Chat
Right to repair, my problem with it
<< < (6/39) > >>
rstofer:

--- Quote from: DrG on July 18, 2021, 06:08:54 pm ---
Other states like Arizona have different levels of inspection and I have no idea what they mean or what they look at ...e.g.  for a Level 3 inspection - "This highest level inspection can only be conducted by a peace officer "..."Level III inspections are required when a vehicle is restored salvage, a recovered stolen vehicle or has been involved in a collision. This inspection is necessary to verify all major component parts (front-end assembly, engine, transmission, rear-end assembly for trucks and truck-type vehicles), and the vehicle is equipped for highway use."

Why a peace officer? Why not a mechanic? dunno.

--- End quote ---

Because they don't want to disclose where the hidden VIN numbers are located.  There are VINs all over the place, not just at the lower left of the windshield.  There's actually a 'big book of VIN number locations' available for Law Enforcement (only).

robint91:

--- Quote from: bsfeechannel on July 18, 2021, 06:07:46 pm ---
--- Quote from: robint91 on July 18, 2021, 06:02:09 pm ---
--- Quote from: bsfeechannel on July 18, 2021, 05:48:04 pm ---
--- Quote from: robint91 on July 18, 2021, 05:40:27 pm ---For electronic and other consumer equipment that doesn't exist. The only thing that is the conformaty when the device is manufactured.

--- End quote ---

Every single product that gets out of the assembly line is tested for EMc in the same anechoic chamber its prototype was tested when it was certified by an accredited lab?

--- End quote ---

No, that doesn't happen. One product gets tested and all the others are the same because of the exact same design and exact same way of producing.

--- End quote ---

Checkmate. Let me repair so as to restore the product to the exact same design and way of producing (or even better). That's the right to repair in essence.

--- End quote ---

But that makes you, the repair guy, liable for the conformaty. Don't know if you want that. The manufacturer doesn't grant you conformaty. Without that right to repair is only a hollow vessel.
TimFox:
To rstofer:
That’s why the US is still a federal republic.  Quite a few States mandate safety inspection, which is independent of emissions or electric power.
Mr. Scram:

--- Quote from: robint91 on July 18, 2021, 06:16:44 pm ---But that makes you, the repair guy, liable for the conformaty. Don't know if you want that. The manufacturer doesn't grant you conformaty. Without that right to repair is only a hollow vessel.

--- End quote ---
Again, not an issue with cars. You really need to stop thinking in issues and snap out of your mindset.
bdunham7:
There are quite a few issues with right-to-repair, but it making up FUD does no good.  Most right-to-repair legislation I have seen is relatively well thought out and pretty well focused on what many consider to be unfair or deceptive trade practices.  One of the basic principles behind R2R is the first-sale doctrine.  Once an IP-holder sells the product, the buyer acquires (as to the IP holder) rights which include using, repairing and even modifying the item.  This has nothing to do with other laws that might prohibit such activity for reasons other than the IP holder's rights.


--- Quote from: robint91 on July 18, 2021, 05:24:16 pm ---FCC does care when I'm selling a single unit. It needs to be tested according to their rules, why would it be for repair different?

--- End quote ---

Because the laws explicitly impose specific requirements on manufacturers and retailers.  Those requirements are not imposed on repairers, although separate legal requirements often do apply.  If I sell you a new car, it has to comply with FMVSS (safety) and EPA (emissions) requirements.  If I repair you car, say installing new tires and brake pads, I am not required to recertify it to FMVSS or EPA standards--that would obviously be cost prohibitive.  There may be separate requirements imposed on the repairer and the suppliers of replacement parts may also be required to certify them.  Requiring repairers to recertify the entire vehicle or device to all of the applicable standards would eliminate the repair industry entirely.  Legislators, judges and regulators have concluded that this would be an undesirable result and have made laws that reflect that.  I entirely agree with that, despite the obvious issues that can and do arise from incompetent repair or poor quality parts. 


--- Quote ---So if I ask Intersil to create a custom design for specially me and also ask them to produce it for me. Who are you to demand access to that chip? In my view you are asking for an "Apple component" from Intersil, and not a "Intersil component". Which manufacturer it makes totally doesn't matter. It is a "Apple component" so you should ask Apple if they could supply it to you. I don't see any point to have legally forced to sell you that part. Or should we also demand from Apple that they sell their M1 CPU?

It is wat rstofer said, we need to define "repair". And in my honest opinion and component level repair has already died with the introduction of SMD. And the repair that happens now is just scribbling in the margins.

--- End quote ---

I've not seen any R2R rules that would require such a bizarre result as demanding access to your proprietary chip.  Typical R2R requirements are simply that independent professional repairers must have the same access to parts and repair information as the manufacturers authorized agent at non-discriminatory pricing and terms.  There are often additional requirements, such as mandating availability of replacement parts for a specific period of time and not taking specific actions that are deemed anti-competitive or solely for the purpose of inhibiting repairs.  As for component-level repairs, I'm not aware of any manufacturer being required to supply any separate board components, schematics or code unless those are available to their own repair personnel.  This is not a violation of your IP rights--you have the right to NOT sell your product.  However, if you choose to sell it to consumers, the government may impose certain requirements upon you as a condition of being allowed to sell the product.

These are not just consumer protection laws, they are fair trade and competition laws.  A manufacturer that shirks its generally accepted warranty and support obligations gains a competitive (cost) advantage over a manufacturer that provides an acceptable (or required) level of support.  And relying on consumers to sort that out by reputation sounds like nice free-market idea, but in reality they don't have any way of knowing ahead of time who is going to decide to screw them and who isn't. 
Navigation
Message Index
Next page
Previous page
There was an error while thanking
Thanking...

Go to full version
Powered by SMFPacks Advanced Attachments Uploader Mod