If you live in the US- There is now an initiative push for a Right To Repair-

[cdev]

New York State (And now, also Minnesota) are striking back against planned obsolescence!

http://newyork.digitalrighttorepair.org/

Also- nationally :  http://.digitalrighttorepair.org

Related issue:  OpenOtto

[retrolefty]

New York State is striking back against planned obsolescence!

http://newyork.digitalrighttorepair.org/

Related issue:  OpenOtto

 I'm sure Apple Co., being so hip and all will just jump out to support this initiative. 

[tytower]

Hey Lefty nice 2 cu in posts again.
Hope you will support this - Would be good 2 get a circuit diagram at least!

[nctnico]

Interestingly a consumer magazine in the NL also features an article on repairing items this month. I guess the idea to have more stuff repaired in order to reduce the amount waste also lives at this side of the big lake.

[Rick Law]

You can get your stuff repair now if you so desire.  You just have to spend x10 what you paid for it new.  That isn't going to change because some politician passed a law.  One-to-one (person-to-machine) interaction time to debug and then to repair is expensive.

Two ways to make that work.
- Make repair cheap which means reduce the cost of labor - repair requires well trained labor.
- Make new product more expensive so by comparison repair cost is worth while.

So, get ready to spend $3000 for your next iPod.

[nctnico]

IMHO that is not true. There are many initiatives for bringing DIY repair back. Repair cafes for example: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Repair_Caf%C3%A9 where doing something social and useful are brought together. All it takes is to make devices easier to disassemble and have spare parts available.

[Kjelt]

Lets face it, pcbs on component level for consumer products <€400 new are not going to be repaired by companies. What you do see are small companies that specialize in smartphone repair for instance and that will replace batteries or lcds for much lower cost than the original manufacturer.
Apple will in the guarantee period not even replace the product with a brand new one , no they exchange it for a refur ished one. This was on the news few months back when the customer bought a new ipad air, it malfunctioned in a few weeks and he got a refurbished one back. He went to court since he argued battery life could be affected and he paid for a new device. He won. And that is a company that makes billions a quartervat the moment.

[pickle9000]

I would like to see schematics and perhaps 3D images of parts available for small devices. When would that happen, perhaps when the model is out of production? It would be great for the recycle industry.

As for parts from a manufacturer, well hat would have to be cost related. If you hat a 20,000 dollar bit of gear it would be nice to have a repair manual and access to parts. In this case you can bet the item is not disposable.

Even so uphill battle.

[JacquesBBB]

You can get your stuff repair now if you so desire.  You just have to spend x10 what you paid for it new.  That isn't going to change because some politician passed a law.

On the opposite, I think that a lot can change if  some politician passes a law.

I do not believe in obligation  to the constructor, but you can make incitative laws. This has worked very well for energy efficient appliances, by the obligation of labelling properly the   power efficient class of the appliance.


You do not oblige the constructor of any performance, but it is mandatory to provide to the consumer  a clear label with  the energy class of the appliance. Then the consumer decides  if he wants to pay more for a more energy efficient device. 

You can think of the same thing for facility of repair. The only obligation to the constructor is to provide the information of  the degree of  reparability of the device on the label.

Then  everything could be rated  in this  grade :
- easy or not to disassemble
- provide or not the schematics
- use of universal interfaces
-  open source hardware / software
- easily available firmware upgrade
- disponibility of spare pieces.

and so on .

[Ian.M]

The other carrot and stick approach to increasing the proportion of items that are repaired is an point of sale eWaste tax on consumer products, to cover the cost of collection and responsible recycling, assessed on an actual specimen of the product.  Unfortunately, in today's consumer credit driven throw-away society, such a tax would be fairly unpopular and it would be difficult to find political support for it.

One of the enabling factors behind EU energy efficiency initiatives is the high level of decoupling between the consumer's vote and the non-elected officials implementing the initiatives.  By the time it hits the market and impacts the consumer, its too late for anyone to object, and its traditional for national governments to blame 'Brussels' for legislation introduced to implement new regulations, even if the requirements are tighter than the EU requirement.

[kc9qvl]

Why would anyone need a law to repair something. It's not illegal.

[nctnico]

The other carrot and stick approach to increasing the proportion of items that are repaired is an point of sale eWaste tax on consumer products, to cover the cost of collection and responsible recycling, assessed on an actual specimen of the product.  Unfortunately, in today's consumer credit driven throw-away society, such a tax would be fairly unpopular and it would be difficult to find political support for it.

Such a system has been in effect for around a decade in the NL. It is not intended to drive repairs but to raise money to get equipment recycled. At the moment I have 3 bins for 4 different kinds of waste in front of my door 

[oldway]

http://repaircafe.org/

[Monkeh]

Why would anyone need a law to repair something. It's not illegal.

But possessing the information required to do so may be.

[Rick Law]

You can get your stuff repair now if you so desire.  You just have to spend x10 what you paid for it new.  That isn't going to change because some politician passed a law.

On the opposite, I think that a lot can change if  some politician passes a law.

I do not believe in obligation  to the constructor, but you can make incitative laws. This has worked very well for energy efficient appliances, by the obligation of labelling properly the   power efficient class of the appliance.
...

We have a difference of opinion.  I subscribe to the idea that since Government is the only entity in the world that can take away property or even life legally, what government should do is as little as possible.

In fact, the whole US Constitution is to constrain what government is allowed to do.

How efficient an appliance is should be a decision of the consumer.  His money, his decision to spend it on electricity as the appliance is used or a more expensive one up front and less running cost later.

If you don't like the X (electronics, appliance, books, whatever), don't buy it.  Write (email) the manufacturer and tell them why.  Enough people do that, there will be manufacturers taking a different approach so as to take that niche of the market.

[JacquesBBB]

We have a difference of opinion. 

Who is "We" ?   Have you been mandated to speak on behalf  of a community ?  If  so, which  community ?

I subscribe to the idea that since Government is the only entity in the world that can take away property or even life legally, what government should do is as little as possible.

In fact, the whole US Constitution is to constrain what government is allowed to do.

How efficient an appliance is should be a decision of the consumer.  His money, his decision to spend it on electricity as the appliance is used or a more expensive one up front and less running cost later.

If you don't like the X (electronics, appliance, books, whatever), don't buy it.  Write (email) the manufacturer and tell them why.  Enough people do that, there will be manufacturers taking a different approach so as to take that niche of the market.

I am not speaking of obligation of  doing whatsoever for the  companies, I am just proposing that a clear labelling of the repair  factor  should be mandatory. Then the consumer judges what kind of product he wishes to buy, and at which price.

You seem to say that they are no regulations in the US, but there are. There  are regulations on labelling, on safety, and so on.. (I am certainly not an expert on US regulations, but I am sure other on the forum can extend on this ).

The proposition to rely uniquely on  the  consumer awareness  is very inefficient. It is OK to start a process,  it cannot  end  up  with the generalisation of a practice.

[Kjelt]

I am just proposing that a clear labelling of the repair  factor  should be mandatory.

Define repair factor in units?

[Rick Law]

We have a difference of opinion. 

Who is "We" ?   Have you been mandated to speak on behalf  of a community ?  If  so, which  community ?
...

re: Who is "We" ?

You and I are in conversation and it appears to me that you and I do disagree.  So, "We have a difference of opinion."

...

I subscribe to the idea that since Government is the only entity in the world that can take away property or even life legally, what government should do is as little as possible.

In fact, the whole US Constitution is to constrain what government is allowed to do.

How efficient an appliance is should be a decision of the consumer.  His money, his decision to spend it on electricity as the appliance is used or a more expensive one up front and less running cost later.

If you don't like the X (electronics, appliance, books, whatever), don't buy it.  Write (email) the manufacturer and tell them why.  Enough people do that, there will be manufacturers taking a different approach so as to take that niche of the market.

I am not speaking of obligation of  doing whatsoever for the  companies, I am just proposing that a clear labelling of the repair  factor  should be mandatory. Then the consumer judges what kind of product he wishes to buy, and at which price.

You seem to say that they are no regulations in the US, but there are. There  are regulations on labelling, on safety, and so on.. (I am certainly not an expert on US regulations, but I am sure other on the forum can extend on this ).

The proposition to rely uniquely on  the  consumer awareness  is very inefficient. It is OK to start a process,  it cannot  end  up  with the generalisation of a practice.

I am not saying there are no regulations in the US; on the contrary, I am saying there are too many regulations in the US.

Here, you can take it as I speak for a community of people.  The community consist of like minded people who wishes to stay true to The Constitution.  As the community "are like minded" so by definition they are those who agree with this view.

Our Constitution explicitly enumerates the power given to the federal government, and in the next sentence, explicitly stated that power not thus enumerated are reserved to the State Government.

My view is the same as those who wrote the Constitution.  Government is to be limited and constrained.  The less it does, the better.

State Governments are free to install regulations within the confines of The Constitution.  As have been said by many historian:  We have 13 experiments.  (13 states around the founding of the nation, 50 now)   Those who doesn't like how their States are ran, can go to other States.  Today, we have 50 to choose from.

New York (high regulation and high tax state) are loosing people to other states every day.  California is near bankrupt and lost a lot of businesses to Colorado, Texas, Nevada....

If you want to repair something, you don't need government to be involved, you do need them to stay away.  In many cases, you can't reverse engineer the digital-electronic thing to figure out how it works - digital rights violation.

If the government stays away, you want to repair something, just go do it.

Rick

[Wim_L]

I am just proposing that a clear labelling of the repair  factor  should be mandatory.

Define repair factor in units?

Perhaps mandatory labeling of certain misfeatures. Like, say, a mandatory notice on the packaging if batteries are not easily replaced by the average user. Preferably in a large and ugly font that will be noticed easily, similar to what some countries require for the mandatory warnings on products containing tobacco.

[miguelvp]

Or go to ifixit to check if the device is easy to repair or not. No need for regulation and stickers.

[pickle9000]

Manufacturers have little to no interest in doing anything that will not increase profit. Perhaps as a PR stunt but that is to increase profit as well. Forcing plastics labeling would never have been done without government involvement. Now we have an industry that revolves around simple labels.

I do think it would be worthwhile for manufacturers to be forced to put schematics and part images with specifications online for out of production products. 

Will it happen? Very, very unlikely. 

[SkyMaster]

"Right to Repair" is to force the corporations to make documentation and spare parts available, to the end users.

It is really surprising that some persons are against this concept.

[eas]

I subscribe to the idea that since Government is the only entity in the world that can take away property or even life legally, what government should do is as little as possible.

Government is the only entity in the world that can:
A. Take away property legally
B. Take away life legally
C. What government should do is as little as possible [including making laws about repairability]

To you, C may flow logically from A+B, but in case you haven't realized it by now, to some, there is an incredibly large gap there. This is probably not the place to fill it.

On the topic at hand, I have mixed feelings.

I have some plans to make a living by making and selling stuff that might need repair. It will be tough going at first, and having to meet some standards for repairability in the early days could be the difference between success and failure.

On the other hand, I buy stuff, and when that stuff breaks, some of it seems like it would be worth repairing, if only more information was available.

[SeanB]

Adding a tax to the price of an item does nothing. All it does is provide an extra revenue stream for government to use, and they will not use it for the repair or recycle that it was originally intended for. An example is fuel taxes and levies, originally intended for use to maintain roadways. Now you still pay this, but also have to pay extra on toll roads, even though the roads now tolled were originally paid for with the taxpayers money.

[Rick Law]

....
To you, C may flow logically from A+B, but in case you haven't realized it by now, to some, there is an incredibly large gap there. This is probably not the place to fill it.

On the topic at hand, I have mixed feelings.

I have some plans to make a living by making and selling stuff that might need repair. It will be tough going at first, and having to meet some standards for repairability in the early days could be the difference between success and failure.

On the other hand, I buy stuff, and when that stuff breaks, some of it seems like it would be worth repairing, if only more information was available.

Let just leave the other topic as something we disagree.  I have a lot to say about the problems facing us, but this is not the forum to get into it.

Now back to the main show:

You probably didn't mean "making and selling stuff that might need repair."  Why would you make something that needs repair.  Selling stuff that might need repair make sense.  Trouble is, value.

Apart from collectors items which has other value, common sense suggest to me that most appliance and "item for use" type stuff need to follow this basic rule:
Price_of_item_needing_fix + Cost_of_repair   must be less than    Cost_of_item_when_new

Cost_of_item_when_new keeps falling, so your sell price plus cost of repair must fall as well.  To estimate cost of repair, you need to spend a good bit of time trouble shooting or getting enough info for a good guess.

To be accurate, the compare should not be cost_of_item_when_new but instead it should be to cost_of_used_item_in_working condition.  That brings the number lower still.

I am but guessing, but I suspect for most consumer items, margin will be very very very thin.  As cost_of_item_new keep falling, the margin will just get thinner by the day.  If the item can be fixed by very cheap labor, there may be a better chance.