You must log in or register to comment.

PROJECT_curse t1_j24l2pz wrote

Got really confused and thought this was just a bad headline, but no, they ruined the bill. We were close though


imakenosensetopeople t1_j24q4nk wrote

ELI5 what happened to ruin it?


bleue_shirt_guy t1_j24szxy wrote

NY fucked up the bill by putting the following in it: "...allows for original equipment manufacturers to provide assemblies of parts rather than the original components when the risk of improper installation heightens the risk of injury." The problem is that mfgs will default to saying it heightens injury allowing them to only sell assemblies, which often cost ~75% of the hardware, making repair by 3rd party companies unprofitable.

The fight has been to get access to the constituent compoents like screens (minus the bezel, connectors, etc) or the the individual chips instead of having to buy the entire main board or power board.

So now Hochel and the NY government will pat herself on the back like they accomplished something when they did nothing to improve the situation.


MrFantasticallyNerdy t1_j25nom6 wrote

>The problem is that mfgs will default to saying it heightens injury allowing them to only sell assemblies, which often cost ~75% of the hardware, making repair by 3rd party companies unprofitable.

Not only unprofitable for the repair businesses, but unviable for the consumer, thus making the law entirely toothless.


Omnizoom t1_j29d0i8 wrote

Perfect example was fixing a wire on my dishwasher , one wire got chewed and it was chewed to close to connector for me to just splice it , I needed one connector and 3 small wires , that’s it , my only option was to spend 250 for the entire wire assembly


MrFantasticallyNerdy t1_j2bvxei wrote

That sucks!

We the consumer need to be more mindful about our purchases. We need to pay more attention to available information that can help drive purchase decisions, like the repairability scores for smartphones. We then need to vote with our dollars so manufacturers know this isn't acceptable, both in terms of environmental sustainability, and financial prudence for the end users.


godnroc t1_j2cat7p wrote

Voting with your dollar is great when there are good options to choose instead, but if all options are bad regulation is better.

Your money is used as a carrot to lead manufacturers along, regulations are a stick when they go astray.


fordanjairbanks t1_j255rz1 wrote

That’s how all politics/legislation in New York works, especially the city. Trust me, I’ve spent my whole life here.


Tempest_1 t1_j259zdj wrote

It’s the nature of money in politics.

You’ll get voter referendums/initiatives that get deadlines pushed back and wording changed as soon as the politicians have to codify the law change already voted in my people.

Robots would do a better job at this point


Erisian23 t1_j25joy5 wrote

I've been wanting AI government since I began to understand people.


blacknine t1_j28d5dp wrote

you know who makes AI right


Erisian23 t1_j29rwqy wrote

Yes, the difference is, If I make an AI with X Goal and end it's training phase.

It isn't going to deviate from that in order to enrich itself and it's friends.


renasissanceman6 t1_j26jufm wrote

And people saying “that’s how politics are” has been said since the beginning of politics.


Ghstfce t1_j25hned wrote

You forgot that this only applies to devices manufactured after June 2023. So most of the devices that will require these services aren't going to be covered.


dissident46 t1_j280wah wrote

Doesn't matter all that much. Future BS is still BS...


rhamled t1_j28z8uf wrote

This add makes the bill even worse


anevilpotatoe t1_j25h0ge wrote

>...allows for original equipment manufacturers to provide assemblies of parts rather than the original components when the risk of improper installation heightens the risk of injury

At some point, our legislation at the Federal Level is going to have to come to a visionary bipartisan agreement to shift how we do business from Engineering workflows to Corporate Business Models. Some revolutionary ideas are needed to maintain the momentum of the Chips Act and I think Rights to Repair fits into it. For example, less revolutionary methods in Modular design offer some relativity to repairing your own devices and equipment. It could also potentially motivate companies to take less aggressive measures of protecting patents by redesigning security restrictions that don't impede repairs/shift the burden of costs on customers so much so they have to replace it.

Many critical pieces of Technology and machinery that rely on semiconductors can be developed to be almost care-free in maintenance, which in turn would free up resource availability for manufacturing tech and (I tragically wouldn't enjoy talking about) would be extremely viable for our defensive industry demands, that would require a bulk of materials and manufacturing prior to end consumers.

Three major goals are highlighted below:

  • A.I. will fundamentally change development, labor, infrastructure, and ROI.
  • Automation will increase productivity and provide efficiency at the same rate of labor needed to maintain equipment.
  • Chips Act can only go so far in market volatility, as much of the reliance on semiconductor development requires stable sources of material extraction.

If we are to meet those measures, then we will need to shift how we Engineer and manufacture for demand. And Rights for Repair fits into part of the larger goals and as a model to capitalize on its notes.


DragoonXNucleon t1_j25wo5y wrote

Or... they just won't because they make more money this way, and money buys votes so.... democracy?


chaotic_world t1_j28eevn wrote

This message was paid for by the Democratic National Committee (and possibly a bit of mob money).


Doomquill t1_j25wqsi wrote

It'll never happen as long as the Dollar is God and King, and the Uber rich control tech and politics. It would be awesome though.


hgs25 t1_j25j4gi wrote

Can’t wait to see Luis Rossman’s video on this bill from his former home state.


Adamstrudel t1_j27huuc wrote

He posted it already. Saw it earlier...he's ranting in his recliner taking pulls from a Ciroc bottle lol


Busterlimes t1_j25z9su wrote

We need a government agency to address this the same way DOT addresses vehicle safety


khoabear t1_j261ywc wrote

And then that agency gets directed by former tech executives because they are the "experts" in tech


Busterlimes t1_j262fc2 wrote

Yeah, there are other problems with government relationships with corporations too. The Oligarchy is an entirely different topic


Mike2220 t1_j27jy3j wrote

>The problem is that mfgs will default to saying it heightens injury allowing them to only sell assemblies, which often cost ~75% of the hardware, making repair by 3rd party companies unprofitable

This might swing the other way if they want to be pedantic enough

Rather than selling laptop fans as the subassembly they'll sell the fan blades separate from the shaft, separate from the housing separate from the bearings, and the motor and cables etc

To make it as annoying as fucking possible for anyone to repair


sneaky_squirrel t1_j27pe32 wrote

It is a shame that a collective boycott and shunning is impossible.

I love the fantasy of boycotting companies that take these kinds of decisions, which again, is only a fantasy at best.


danuser8 t1_j27gsit wrote

What about battery replacement? That can’t have risk of injury


SquirrelAkl t1_j281uuy wrote

I bet someone (company, lobbyist etc) raised the spectre of potential future lawsuits if there was an injury. There are so many downsides to such a litigious society.


chaotic_world t1_j28e6sk wrote

Back pats... sounds like you know NY politics! I know I do, living on the "long" island for 46 years. On our way to VA shortly, where I still have the right to protect myself and those I love!


rhamled t1_j28z49u wrote

Even worse, they're setting bad precedence for other states' similar bills.


Rap-scallion t1_j2bspgy wrote

Some screen replacements are made more difficult when you don’t get the full assembly. Samsung galaxy phone screen replacements in particular really suck when they aren’t full assemblies, it’s just better to do the full assembly with new battery installed as opposed to trying to install just the display


Me_Krally t1_j25yg8o wrote

So I won't be able to repair my AI that is trying to kill me because in doing so it might harm me??!?!


Opetyr t1_j26sep2 wrote

Allows companies to sell like the whole motherboard which could cost as much as a new computer when only a 5 dollar chip from Texas Instruments would fix it. This is exactly what Apple does. Samsung did this with batteries. A battery might be let us say 100 dollars but nope you can only get from Samsung the screen and the battery for 400 dollars or you could might as well get a new phone at that price. This bill was to reduce e-waste but it's going to increase it dramatically. It will also make it harder for actual true legislation to happen. Agree used the same excuses that were proven false in a FTC document.

This was going to be a big step since it was almost completely unanimous with only 2 nays. The governor made something that was supposed to be a giant step forward into a giant step back. Proves more and more why NY is just pure corruption.


voltagenic t1_j24szi4 wrote

There is an article attached to the post...


imakenosensetopeople t1_j24vh43 wrote

While true, remember we are on Reddit


CodingLazily t1_j24wdqs wrote

Indeed. Telling a redditor to read the article is about as insensitive as telling a paraplegic guy to throw a basketball. We all need to learn to respect the differently-abled.


DaRadioman t1_j26pnow wrote

I can't forget since now I am stuck in a loop.

"Remember we are on Reddit" "Remember we are on Reddit" "Remember we are on Reddit" "Remember we are on Reddit" ...


Juxtapoisson t1_j25127l wrote

Bad headlines are clickbait. Don't reward bad behavior.


thetomahawk42 t1_j2517lt wrote

If someone has already read and summarised it, it's less ads and cookie-gates that one has to get through to get the information.


Lefty21 t1_j26vkvv wrote

Are you actually 5? It’s literally in the article, click the link and read.


Felaguin t1_j265htk wrote

Of course they did. This is the same crowd that labels a bill “anti-inflationary” when the provisions of the bill only spur inflation rather than counter it.


sbear37 t1_j27neij wrote

It's still a terribly written headline.


Ninnux t1_j256zbz wrote

It passed and then was amended after the fact, effectively breaking the language needed, which should be illegal.


BevansDesign t1_j27l01a wrote

This is a form of government fuckeduppedness that I wasn't aware existed before now.


asdaaaaaaaa t1_j24n3h0 wrote

Check out Rossman for his issues dealing with New York. Basically got audited, proved he didn't have any problems when they "mistakingly" said he did. Then he got audited again, directly after, at least from my understanding. It's incredibly corrupt, and sucks because it allows businesses easy access to stopping laws/policies and such like this one (or just completely ruining/editing it, as in this case).

I wonder how much companies "lobbied" to keep this law from happening.


Me_Krally t1_j25ypld wrote

Is that the legendary Rossman from Anandtech?


TheyCallMeMrMaybe t1_j266vip wrote

Nope. Louis Rossman of Rossman Repair Group. A repair tech based out in NYC and an avid Right-To-Repair activist.


TrickUp25 t1_j27kug6 wrote

And had since relocated to Texas because NYC sucks


N983CC t1_j2881vr wrote

Damn... another ATOT alumni in the wild. Cheers!


LordDaniel09 t1_j28wkvz wrote

Didn't it end with them catching him missing his taxes by like 0.1%? absolute ridiculous waste of time and money on him. Lets say he had million of dollars to pay in taxes, then this means he missed 1000$. NYC tried to go and look at him, finding anything to fine him, and the worst thing they found is a few grands missing in his taxes.. what a joke.


cha614 t1_j24wgp9 wrote



mechmind t1_j279gke wrote

You're wrong. I thought so too, but the title"breaks" is accurate. Read on


sigma941 t1_j24n8n1 wrote

Get Louis Rossmann in here!!


Bhraal t1_j24rf2g wrote

He's literally quoted in the article...

> This makes the bill “functionally useless,” according to Louis Rossmann, a repair technician who has been a fierce advocate of toothy right to repair legislation. Rossmann responded today to the amended bill with a video full of detailed analysis and criticism.


hiricinee t1_j25a0w8 wrote

You thought the ghost of Steve Jobs was going to put up with this bullshit? He didn't design the IPhone so that some 17 year old living down the street could fix it for 60 bucks.


jdvhunt t1_j27cxy2 wrote

Why does America even pretend to have laws and government? Just publicly and officially hand control over to the corporations and be done with it


nclh77 t1_j26rse4 wrote

The corporate uniparty wins again!


No1has1 t1_j2674uk wrote

Looks like big tech donated to some super pacs and special interest groups.


FeralCJ7 t1_j254w23 wrote

> The bill also won’t require OEMs to provide “passwords, security codes or materials” to bypass security features, which is sometimes necessary to do to save a locked, but otherwise functionally fine device.

That part I understand at least. If anyone can access locked devices there's not much point for locking it.

But the part about selling component parts is bullshit


Levelman123 t1_j25c7hl wrote

No, do not even give them that. The FTC has done plenty of research on this. There is absolutely no difference in data safety when an "approved Technician" is fixing your device and a third party technician is fixing your device.

In fact common sense says the third party if established will actually be much more cautious and handle your data a hell of a lot more safely than some dude working at the genius bar that had a 15 minutes breakdown on how to see water damage and tell you "nothing we can do" as the third party establishment has to uphold their reputation while the the genius bar guy can just go get another job.


Ashmizen t1_j25mj4h wrote

Well if my iPhone is stolen, I want to ensure the thief cannot just take it to a repair shop and unlock it and get a nice free iPhone.

Today they get sent to shenzhen and sold for a tiny fraction of the value for just the parts, making stealing iPhones far less profitable.

If stealing iPhones can net you a unlocked phone by using some master security pass/reset, iPhones would be targeted by thieves like car cat converters, as we are talking about $500 value of phones vs $50 value of parts.


Levelman123 t1_j25vazh wrote

Hmm. Not bad, This could be solved by insuring the same customer locks remain in place throughout the transaction. Or at least at the beginning and end of the transaction. Like repair shops cant unlock phones for the reason of "forgot password" as that is not a repair issue.

I guess the better question to ask would be does apple tech already have this? If so what is the difference to a guy with 15 minutes of training but branded an "apple genius" unlocking my phone compared to a guy with 20 years experience in his own repair shop doing it?


Ashmizen t1_j26jwfa wrote

I would assume currently iPhones do not have any unlock mechanism - however, laws can force Apple to change their design, like the recent EU ruling that is forcing Apple to add support for multiple app stores on future iPhones


IThinkIKnowThings t1_j26gh56 wrote

Culpability. It's much harder for Apple, who's ultimately responsible for their poorly-trained employees' actions, to get away with stuff like that. They're way too big with way too much government oversight. The public outrage alone would be palpable, with demands for Apple to pay. Meanwhile if Joe Blow jail breaks some stolen iPhones no one outside of law enforcement and those affected would know.


Scizmz t1_j26sq3p wrote

> with way too much government oversight.

You're funny.


FeralCJ7 t1_j25df8x wrote

If they sell the codes whatever to licensed technicians, will there be some sort of federal licensing required to ensure they don't sell it Joe Blow on the street though?


Levelman123 t1_j25ee60 wrote

Why cant Joe Blow on the street fix his own device? I don't know how licensing works with phone repair as i cant think of anything dangerous enough to warrant such licensing. If my phone is broken, i feel i should be allowed to take whatever steps i need to make it operable. There is nothing i can do from my phone that would give me access to any backdoor systems in their systems, if their is, that is a them issue, and they should deal with it on their end.


FeralCJ7 t1_j25glb2 wrote

I guess I'm looking at it from the perspective of right now the tools needed to break encryption and unlock devices aren't commonly possessed. So the incentive to steal my phone, which could happen, really isn't that high right now cuz I can lock it, wipe it etc.

But once you start selling the ability for people to crack devices it'll basically make locking your device worthless.


Levelman123 t1_j25k4yi wrote

Those tools exist en mass currently. Data centers get breached constantly, any incentive to steal your phone already exists. And that incentive doesnt go away just because the person behind the desk is from apple or a tech shop.

In fact apple service jobs have high turn over rate, so the incentives to steal phones is actually higher then if you just gave it to "tom's repair" down the street. Thats what im getting at. There is no difference in security, so when they block any repair bill using security as an issue, just know they are lying through their god damn teeth.


FeralCJ7 t1_j25peih wrote

I don't think I'm making myself clear.

I'm not talking theft from a shop. I'm talking theft from person. From car. Right now pawn shops (at least where I live) only take phones you can prove are unlocked. If anyone can just buy the stuff to unlock it thefts could go up.


Levelman123 t1_j25s4y2 wrote

You dont need to buy anything to unlock a phone right now. Those tools already exist is what i was getting at. Plus pawn shop aint the best example. All i need to do to get around anything a pawn shop looks into is factory reset the phone and remove the sim.


azvnza t1_j26a3pg wrote

a big example is more for iphones, you can’t remove the icloud account without the password. there is no way to do it, and it is still linked to the account post factory reset.


DaRadioman t1_j26qcii wrote

That's not how iPhones work. You can't factory reset away ownership on them, they stay tied to the iCloud account.

Hence this whole damned conversation...


Levelman123 t1_j27iqmy wrote

Okay. Then just make it so they have to sign in to their account first? I'm not sure where this convo ended up


IThinkIKnowThings t1_j26gzdp wrote

"I don't know about you, but I don't want my tax money going towards yet more god damn government oversight." - Some Republican who at some point will cut funding to said licensing agency.


Mygaffer t1_j26d8nz wrote

Nope, that's not at all what that's about. It's literally a software lock only put in to prevent replacing broken parts. NOTHING to do with device security.


FeralCJ7 t1_j26dl58 wrote

Ahhh gotcha, okay. Thanks for clarifying


Guffawker t1_j268gkr wrote

Theft will always happen. It's not going to change. Theft still happens right now even when people know the device is basically non-functional. The difference is it would just get tossed in a dumpster since it's a brick. That's absurdly wasteful. Now, you're down a phone and have a brick in a landfill. You don't fix that issue by making tech obsolete if it's stolen, you fix that issue by tighter regulations on repair/second hand shops. Every device has an SN, that SN can be registered. It can be tracked to the owner. Realistically there are ways that could fix this both in ensuring the device is being sold by the proper owner, and having the software check/alert the owner when the device is reactivated or reset.

This doesn't even get into the fact that you can accidently lock your own phone, forget your password, buy something second hand, etc and be left with a brick. This kind of thing doesn't help anyone. Your phone will still get stolen because the thief doesn't gaf if it's locked or not. If it's locked they bin it, if not they sell it.

These aren't anti-theft measured....these are measure to limit the second hand use of these devices, and keep prices high by artificially regulating the amount of devices that can end up on the second hand market. That's the problem.

The whole "locks only keep honest people out" applies to comp sec as well. Let's not keep contributing to e-waste by pretending things like these do anything for our "security". Once your device is stolen, it's stolen. This just determines if it ends up in a trash can or usable once it is.


blastermaster555 t1_j26c6ai wrote

So if someone steals your phone, unlocks it, then downloads data that lets them steal your identity, that's alright?

Stolen phones get bricked is good if everyone does it - then phone thefts go down because word on the street is, it's not worth it.


FeralCJ7 t1_j26duhz wrote

I was a cop for 14 years and just got out. I absolutely remember iphones getting stolen constantly when they were fairly new; gradually the thefts have tapered off due to being able to be tracked so easily by the owners and locked remotely.

I agree with you that allowing software to unlock these devices would just increase thefts.


Guffawker t1_j26f7j6 wrote

No one is saying're making a gross assumption on how things like that work. We are talking about manufacturer password/admin use to "reset" the phone, not "unlock" it. No one is saying the data should be widely accessible, but that's a SEPARATE thing. You can make the device function again without allowing access to the user data.

That's the whole point. We shouldn't sell devices that become bricks just because of theft (and in a lot of cases we don't, users just don't have that access). Having a way to reset the phone into working order is NOT the same as allowing unauthorized access into the phone. I'm advocating the former. Not the later. Stolen phones getting bricked does nothing, because people will still steal your phone, because it's always a user opt in feature, and users won't always use it. People will steal your phone in the hopes it's unlocked, because it's a small, incredibly easy device to lift, check, and bin if not the case. Even then, people will still steal them in hopes that they will be able to do something with it.

No amount of anti-theft measured are going to prevent someone from stealing a phone. You can lift 100 of um off people and if 1 person doesn't have a password, those 100 you stole don't matter. These measures just mean they get thrown in landfills instead of used. Shit, it might even REDUCE theft in the end, because if you can steal 1 and be able to make a buck off of it, you don't have to risk stealing 100. Phone theft works on the same "operation" as email scams. Doesn't matter how secure 99% of them are, you are looking for the 1% that isn't.

Again, no one should have access to your data. Full stop. Don't invent bs to my argument because you don't understand it. But you should be able to reset a phone into working order. That's the whole point. Your data is still safe, the theft already happened, the bricked device didn't prevent it, so instead of artificially keeping your stock off the second hand market and ending up in landfills, let's make them actually usable.


blastermaster555 t1_j26jaou wrote

Every theft is a chance to get caught.

I understand the separation, but the way the post was worded, it sounded like advocating for being able to unlock locked devices, which means getting access to user data.

Before the device locking (device tied to account, requires unlock), phone theft was more profitable, because tossing the sim card and resetting it was trivial. Now that we have stolen phone databases (carriers refuse phone on the network when stolen), device sign in requirements (phone serial attached to account and required to unlock), and on device encryption, now we have a different problem.

From what I understand via RtR, the problem is not this, but being able to connect replacement parts that are serialized for security reasons. It is a security risk to have a bugged part paired such as a touchscreen or print reader that can easily have an extra chip used to steal customer info. The problem that it clashes with RtR is with manufacturers not providing a way to put official parts on yourself (such as re-pairing these serialized parts with the device).


Guffawker t1_j26swiw wrote

Yes, but getting caught is not a deterrent to theft. If it was....people wouldn't steal. The people that steal do it because the risk of getting caught is worth the return. That doesn't change just because a device is locked. Phones are easy to steal. So it will always happen. Even with increases in security phone theft is on a rise. People don't give a shit if the device is locked or not, again, because they can pick it up, stick it in their pocket, and walk away. No amount of increased security changes how easy they are to steal. It's the same thing as spam emails. It works because you only need 1% of the 99% you go after to be unsecure for it to be worth your while.

Again, kill switches are the problem. I know how trivial it was. I've worked tech repair/IT my whole life. I've dealt with this issue. All that happens is the dude that came in with a phone asking for it to be fixed just walks outside and throws it in the trash. The theft still happens, but the device ends up in a landfill which is a problem. It may reduce it slightly, but it's not going to prevent it, all it does is prevent that device from ever being used again. If you want to stop the theft, make better measures of tracking the device, not allowing manufacturers to turn their device into a useless $1000 piece of landfill. These companies don't do this because it "protects" your device. That's just an added bonus. They do it so their devices don't end up costing $200 at a pawn shop. They could build other methods of theft reporting/alerting into the software if they wanted, but it's more beneficial for them if the device becomes a brick, because it kills the second hand market and the og owner now has to purchase a new one. Again, as you've said too, carriers have already implemented blacklists and such for stolen devices, so bricking the device does even less in that regard.

Again, data should always be secure.

This isn't in any way pointing to this as the problem of RtR.....this was a response to someone discussing the particular aspect of this bill that referenced the article mentioning the lack of requiring manufacturers to provide access to "save locked devices" as an oversight of this bill.

As far as RtR is concerned that's hardly the issue at all. It's not about using unofficial parts. That has little to do with RtR at all. RtR is honestly a LOT of fights wrapped into one, but the bi issue is about manufacturing companies having a monopoly on the ability to service and repair devices they manufacture, often to the detriment of the user. RtR is about separating the "electronics repair" industry from the "electronics manufacturing" industry, because they are two separate entities. It doesn't mean "users can shove whatever they want into their tech" (although, largely, they should be able to. It's your equipment, you bought it, you should be able to do what you want with it), it means "John Deere must provide other companies (and even the tech savvy DIY farmer) with the parts for repairs and make repairs accessible via normal means. You're still using their manufactured stuff, it's just you have more options then your current option of "Pay John Deere $7500 to service my tractor, or throw it away and buy a new one". A lot of tech companies have a monopoly on their services and outright refuse to sell parts to any other company. That means they can charge you whatever they want because your only solution to fixing the device is "buy a new one". Even if the fix is simple. Your argument is the kind of shit companies spew to make it seem like RtR is a bad thing, but it doesn't mean or prevent anything, and largely has little to do with RtR itself. RtR is about forcing manufactures to provide access to the tools/software/components for users and third party individuals to actually have options to repair, especially, because as is, it's completely legal to repair and modify things you purchase. It's not a security thing. It's about manufacturing companies not wanting to provide repair materials to external companies and individuals because if they are the only ones that can service their devices, they can make a shit ton more money. It's not a security risk at a to allow people to repair their own equipment or use a third party. It's not even a security risk to allow third party manufacturers to make parts that work in your equipment. We already have regulations on that shit, and consumers can/do spend time researching options like that when replacing parts. As a side note, things aren't serialized like that for "security" it's so the manufacturer can detect if you're using their parts and void/refuse service if you aren't. If people want to steal your data, they aren't going to "install an unauthorized touchscreen". They are gonna use cheap external hardware that can easily be removed/installed/disposed of, that they have full access to instead of having to find a way to implement it in the companies software as well, that would have to continually broadcast data to them in some way.

Manufacturing companies having a monopoly on servicing their products doesn't prevent a security risk. You, as a consumer, can still shop around for reputable repair service tecs, that use genuine parts provided by the manufacturer, or do it yourself with parts purchased from them.

The whole intent of RtR is to point out and clarify that manufacturing and service are two different industries, and just because you provide the former, does not give you exclusive rights to the later. In fact, just the opposite. It should be incredibly difficult for a company providing a product to be allowed to be the sole service point of that product, as it's in direct violation of already established copyright laws and allows the company to extort the consumer for repair cost.


Crimsonak- t1_j2629mh wrote

I haven't checked his channel yet since this news broke but I can sense Louis Rosman (rightfully) losing his patience over this like Alderaan being destroyed.


TakeTheWheelTV t1_j26l29i wrote

Title forgets to note that the bill is essentially useless as well.


really_nice_guy_ t1_j27ed4y wrote

>New York breaks the right to repair bill.

It’s a titlegore but it’s there


Castle6169 t1_j24qh8h wrote

This is really good only if the manufacturer keeps making the parts and sell them to everyone at a reasonable price.


bleue_shirt_guy t1_j24t5gi wrote

That's the problem, it dosen't, they can say it's a "safety concern" and only sell assemblies making 3rd party repair unprofitable.


Dobber16 t1_j252p7n wrote

That means it’s not a good bill. If you have to rely on goodwill to prevent something like this from happening, you created an advertisement, not a law


Bruhngles t1_j2895l7 wrote

Another win for lobbyists. All politicians are traitors and should be arrested and given the harshest sentence


joeymonreddit t1_j26tjb2 wrote

They knew what they were doing. This will be enough of a win for most people that the fight behind what the bill was will evaporate.


somethingdarksideguy t1_j2741fx wrote

And they completely defeated the entire purpose of the bill right before signing.


marsumane t1_j28am4h wrote

Get the money out of politics. Only then any other fight is worth your time


zer04ll t1_j26cduf wrote

not it doesnt, it gave a template on how to get out of helping customers


RTwhyNot t1_j28pqj9 wrote

All show, no substance. Thanks for nothing but headlines, politicians.


johnyj7657 t1_j27i7o1 wrote

They really earned the raise they voted to give themselves.


Nagu360 t1_j27rygn wrote New York just incentivized manufacturers to essentially deliberately booby trap their products so that they can maintain their exclusive repair rights.

What could possibly go wrong?


Xeong5 t1_j28mqzr wrote

The US is a joke. I like Louis but fighting the government is like getting accountability from the police. Never going to happen.

I am happy I don't have to deal with this BS. Left the country and so far have seen schematics on the side of my brand new Hitachi microwave.

Have fun with these clowns. You can't beat them.


Bussaca t1_j291i9r wrote

Empty words and platitudes. The Bill doesnt have any teeth. It doesnt cover electric cars, dosent cover farm equipment, and definately only goes into effect for products sold in 2023. So you still cant make apple sell you parts to fix your phone you bought this year.

They could have set the standard but instead literally virtue signalled and did nothing. But hey we did "something" that counts right? NO IT DOESNT. Is it a step in the right direction sure, but its not even a babystep.

Where are the environmentalists, climate changers, green new dealers, right to repair is your greatest win for sustainability. Planned obsolescence and disposable economics are the the greatest problems. All those carbons created making electric cars when you could just sell refit kits updating your already good car. Whats wrong with your phone? Screen cracked, better get another 700 dollar phone. Tv broke? Take it to the tv repair guy and fix it for 50 bucks, nope buy another 500 dollar one. Oh and that guy went out of buisness 20 years ago when Amazon made sure the disposable economy was cemented into reality.

Its such shit. But hey go NY.. you did something....a 10th right..


aggelalex t1_j2924eg wrote

Oh no, they didn't do anything, all they did was water down the bill to be completely useless and then signed it to get all the clout.


ZLBuddha t1_j26cwpl wrote

F tier title try again


xcebrian t1_j2757dj wrote

Wow so we can actually use the devices that we paid for anyway we see fit now! Finally freedom has come a long way in america! SMH


gymbaggered t1_j27eqiq wrote

Louis Rossmann has entered the chat


Cold_Zero_ t1_j27erbp wrote

Well, at least they broke it when the right to repair came into existence


TrickUp25 t1_j27ly21 wrote

If you are interested in this issue, do yourself a favor and watch this video by Louis Rossmann


EuroPureo t1_j283eg0 wrote

Amazing!!! Need this in Australia, this country is fucked


0x1a3c3e7 t1_j288mn9 wrote

Who needs permission to DIY your own stuff?

And why buy it if you can't repair it?


AloofPenny t1_j28iw7c wrote

With some manufacturers, they’ll only like, send replacement parts to verified repair people, or do other things that seem ok above-board, but are really anti-consumer.


0x1a3c3e7 t1_j29d0tv wrote

In a normally functioning free market, this would draw competition and eliminate bad practices. That this is not happening means the market is protected by anti-competitive regulations. Regulations that were written and passed by the same schmucks who tried to fool us with this bill.


SneakySnk t1_j292tw5 wrote

You don't need permission to DIY, but you don't have permission to buy the required parts and you don't get access to schematics that can help you repair it (something that was the standard, years ago).

This bill was going to make so that you could get any part you wanted, and they changed a line making it useless.


AloofPenny t1_j28ijb4 wrote

Thank Louis!

EDIT: also, thx Louis


Lovat69 t1_j2957c3 wrote

Damn, is anything actually covered by the law?


0x1a3c3e7 t1_j29e19a wrote

Intellectual property, geographic exclusivity, superfluous consumer safety and environmental protections, zoning laws, high licensing fees and heavy licensing requirements, special tax laws, local ordinances.


darkseid001 t1_j24wqki wrote

I've always repaired my own things and will continue to. I don't care what anyone says. I have the skill set I will use it.


Dobber16 t1_j252rxs wrote

Repair with what parts? If the parts aren’t available, good luck repairing


darkseid001 t1_j26jaqu wrote

Seriously I could give 2 shits about Apple fuck Apple don't use their products wouldn't ever recommend them once you get sucked into their evil ecosystem you're done.


darkseid001 t1_j255n8g wrote

You can get parts anywhere, have to have resources, and also not for nothing. eBay has a wealth of parts.


Onilakon t1_j25s5d3 wrote

Good luck finding individual chips that apple won't allow to be sold


ArcheryTXS t1_j253wrf wrote

It was a case 8+ years ago. I was fixing all my friends phones , like screen , batteries , usb. And then at some point i was unable to. No parts , solidified design that prevents repairs , build in battery etc etc


darkseid001 t1_j255y76 wrote

You can still replace those batteries you have to learn to split the case.


ArcheryTXS t1_j259eob wrote

Not, u cannot. U r not gonna be able to put it together the same way so u do not lose IP6 protection . The case will be loose and clumsy. The battery thermal cover u gonna need to rip off so there is no way to put it back the same way .

Tested on the last 3 generations of LG phones


what_Would_I_Do t1_j283wdt wrote

The law is for the rest of the population to simplify the repair process because it doesn't really have to be that complicated. Wouldn't you like an easier repair?


darkseid001 t1_j28iqfv wrote

Of course, I'm just saying that I've always done it and there's always a way.


what_Would_I_Do t1_j28k3m9 wrote

Idk man. They are making it harder and harder to get schematic and when you blow a cap or something it's becoming hard to know what a suitable replacement is unless you're only taking about the easy stuff like phone.


darkseid001 t1_j28kb0r wrote

I'm not saying you're wrong my point was they won't stop me ill always find a way.