Senate Bill 542
The Oregon Senate Committee on Energy and Environment recently held a two-day hearing to receive feedback on SB 542, a proposed right-to-repair bill for consumer electronics.
During both days of testimony, nineteen individuals voiced support while eight expressed opposition to the legislation. Altogether, twenty-seven members of the community made speeches to share personal views.
Under the proposed legislation, manufacturers of consumer electronics would be obligated to make documentation, tools, parts, and other necessary items equally available to authorized repair providers as well as owners. This includes both software and hardware components, and terms must be deemed “fair” for all parties involved.
“Fair and Reasonable”
Pertaining to this bill, the concept of “fair and reasonable” must be specifically applied when providing documentation, tools, and parts for device repairs. Unless there is a cost associated with printing or shipping, these resources would be given out freely. Additionally, parts would be offered at prices comparable to those which OEMs extend to certified vendors. Also, under this legislation, device owners and independent mechanics couldn’t be coerced into becoming authorized repair providers in order to receive service.
According to the law, anyone who experiences an “ascertainable loss of money or property” due to OEM’s non-compliance is legally entitled to seek restitution. This could include filing a class action lawsuit and recovering either actual damages or statutory damages in the amount of $1,000, whichever is greater.
Also, OEMs would not be required to share any confidential information, unless for the purpose of fixing the device, and wouldn’t be held liable for any physical harm or destruction caused by independent repair.
This proposed legislation would not apply to motor vehicles, any items which are not available for purchase by an individual, products regulated and approved by U.S. Food and Drug Administration, as well as air conditioning systems, or solar power systems.
Right-to-Repair
Janeen Sollman
Sen. Janeen Sollman, chair of the committee and a sponsor of the bill, told her fellow committee members that “This is about the environment. This is about consumer protection and small business support. It is about your right to repair.”
“My belief is if you own it you should be able to choose where and how you repair it, but all too often the only option available to you is to have your device fixed through the manufacturer,” Sollman stated on February 9th.
In her opinion, the latest legislative effort to pass a consumer electronics right-to-repair bill was too broad. In comparison, she feels this bill is more tailored and precise compared to earlier attempts.
Privacy and Copyright Concerns
Tara Ryan
Tara Ryan, a representative of the Entertainment Software Association (ESA), spoke out against the bill. ESA is an organization that works with notable video game companies like Microsoft, Nintendo and Sony, as well as other developers in the industry.
According to her, right-to-repair bills are a major concern when it comes to gaming consoles, as the sharing of information regarding the device could lead to an increase in video game piracy. She thinks that this could potentially pose a threat to copyright and intellectual property.
“Game consoles have a unique issue that has to be addressed,” she commented.
In evaluating the situation, Sollman stated that she had consulted with the Entertainment Software Association and was taking into account the “strong argument” being presented.
Ashley Sutton
Also in opposition to the bill, TechNet’s executive director, Ashely Sutton, warned of potential effects on consumer privacy that could arise from visiting independent repair shops. She argued that this was a real risk which should be considered.
Sutton added, “It creates more opportunities for bad actors to snoop on consumers.”
Sollman noted that privacy violations were not just a problem for independent repair shops, but authorized ones as well. This was highlighted through the 2021 settlement which involved Apple paying a University of Oregon student millions of dollars, in response to a breach of privacy that had occurred during a repair job.
“This is a situation we should be concerned about all around,” she added.
Paul Roberts
On February 14th, the stance of Secure Repairs, an organization of IT experts committed to promoting the right to repair, was clearly articulated by founder, Paul Roberts. He explained that “there are no additional cyber risk associated with non-OEM repairs when compared to the risks presented by OEM repair programs.”
“All opponents of this bill you’re hearing are generally industry lobbyists and in support are members of your community” he said.
Fawn Barrie
Fawn Barrie addressed those in attendance, informing them of the Oregon Liability Reform Coalition’s opposition to the bill, due to a clause concerning liability.
“The concern is that Oregon will become a test case for deciding what is and is not a trade secret,” she stated, adding that “we think it opens the door and sets a dangerous precedent.”
Barrie proposed that the attorney general should take control of the issue, to which Sollman replied that she had been collaborating with the association in regards to its concerns as well.
Walter Alcorn
Walter Alcorn of the Consumer Technology Association was strongly opposed to the proposed bill, claiming that it would lead to a disjointed set of legal regulations. He preferred an alternative solution that would be applicable on a national scale.
“Our fear is it would do more for the legal industry and lawyers than the repair industry,” he said, also bringing up concerns about consumer safety risks with self-repair.
Alcorn was pressed by the committee to reveal whether the organization’s plan included getting a bill presented on a federal level. In response, Alcorn commented that they were in the process of creating a model bill.
Environmental Benefits, Access, and Equity
Charlie Fisher
The Oregon State Public Interest Research Group (OSPIRG) state director, Charlie Fisher, discussed the safety implications opponents brought up by stating that “fixing the brakes on my car, which weighs thousands of pounds, is inherently more dangerous than replacing a battery in a phone and yet I can do it myself, I can take it to anyone I want and there’s no restrictions on the information or parts and tools.”
Fisher further argued that SB 542 would be a financial benefit to consumers and provide a boost to independent repair businesses. He compared it to getting a car fixed; although each option has its own advantages, by opting for the local mechanic, he knew they’d have access to the correct components and equipment.
“That’s what we’re trying to replicate for the electronics market,” he explained.
Juan Muro
Juan Muro, the executive director of Free Geek, a nonprofit refurbisher, was highly in favor of the bill. At the presentation, he held up a 2021 Macbook and revealed that his organization had to recently discard 55 laptops. This was due to not having access to software from Apple to wipe the hard drives.
“We have the solution for technology reuse,” he told the committee. “And we now need your help.”
Panel members also raised questions as to why only a few independent shops had received authorization to become repair shops.
Romain Griffith
Romain Griffith, proprietor of Hyperion Computerworks, an independent repair shop, explained that he had considered becoming certified by Apple. However, part of the requirements entailed committing to sales goals for new products, and stipulating restrictions concerning which devices could be serviced and the types of repairs which could be performed.
In his opinion, these obligations were too extreme to justify access to the data.
Erick Reddekopp
According to Erick Reddekopp, co-owner of Geeks4Mac, an independent repair shop, there is no intellectual property threat posed by the bill would necessitate OEMs to disclose sensitive information.
Reddekopp said he was previously employed by Apple, and there was “nothing I had as an employee that could be considered proprietary.”
He also brought focus that due to data limitations, a “black market” for manuals has emerged to satisfy customers with older systems that Apple is unwilling to aid. He noted that businesses have begun catering to “a niche of people that have older systems that Apple will not help.”
Those For and Against the Bill
The group of supporters behind the initiative was diverse, featuring Kyle Wiens, CEO of iFixit; Jenna Jones, Oregon Metro Regional Government’s state and regional affairs representative; and Meghan Moyer, a public policy director with Disability Rights Oregon.
A variety of voices were heard opposing the issue, including Dustin Brighton of the Repair Done Right Coalition, John Keane from the Association of Home Appliance Manufacturers, and Scott Bruun, who serves as vice president for government affairs at Oregon Business and Industry.
