Explained: What's right to repair? How does it impact Apple, Tesla?

On Friday, US President Joe Biden signed an executive order directing the Federal Trade Commission to draft new regulations limiting device manufacturers’ ability to restrict independent repairs of their products. In simple words, the order wants companies to allow and facilitate users to repair the products they own. For instance, why can't an iPhone user repair the smartphone himself/herself?

It has asked the Federal Trade Commission to force tech companies to let consumers repair their own devices—or use the technician of their choice—instead of having to use authorized repair technicians. But the executive order is more than that. It is designed to promote competition across American industries, calling on regulators to increase scrutiny of technology companies, drug prices, shipping, and more. There is growing pressure on manufacturers around the world to allow consumers the right to repair their own devices.

Like most rules of the current world, the right to repair movement also started in Europe. The UK has introduced right-to-repair rules that legally require manufacturers to make spare parts available to people buying electrical appliances.

The European Commission has announced plans for right-to-repair rules for smartphones, tablets, and laptops.

The US President wants to require large manufacturers—including Apple, Amazon, Microsoft, John Deere, General Electric, and Tesla—to make available to everyone their repair manuals, tools, and components and parts, as well as proprietary software code that allows components to function.

Interestingly, Biden specifically called out cell phone makers and tractor manufacturers in the White House’s fact sheet. This may even force manufacturers to rethink how products are made to ensure they’re more durable and more easily repairable.  

Isn't it an obvious right?

To have total rights to repair the products you own seems to be an obvious right. We own the products, so we should be able to do what we want with them—including taking apart and repairing them. But turns out that was not the case so far. It’s not possible for all devices, including many cell phones and laptops, because companies maintain the right to their own designs and products. This means that, in certain instances, it might actually be illegal for you to fix something you own.

One of the key questions of the raging debate is--why do consumers not have the right to access parts and guides to the devices that they own?

Interestingly, Apple co-founder Steve Wozniak also voiced support for the movement. Wozniak said that he was "totally supportive" of the cause — which gives consumers the right and information to fix their own devices — and somewhat "emotionally" affected by it. "We wouldn't have had an Apple had I not grown up in a very open technology world," he said.

Wozniak's comments come as Apple — the company he left as an active employee in 1985 — has long faced criticism over policies that restrict where its customers can get their iPhones and other electronics fixed without jeopardizing their warranties.

Planned obsolescence

While the term might sound sophisticated and technical, it is something that we all are too familiar with. Planned obsolescence simply refers to a company creating a product with a plan to make it obsolete after a certain point. Manufacturers and service vendors force updates that cause older models to become slow or unusable or stop producing the associated support.

For instance, Apple doesn't offer support services for iPhone 4S any longer.

The common reasons for planned obsolescence include ending support for legacy systems and encouraging consumers to buy replacement products. While product enhancements can't be ruled out, it's from a pure profitability point of view that some companies write off certain products into obsolescence.

While it is too soon to determine what the FTC’s new rules might look like or how long it will take the agency to impose any new regulations, the Biden administration’s involvement in repair issues brings national attention to a topic that has, for the most part, been addressed only in legislation at the state level. And it could have major implications for large tech companies and equipment makers that have historically held a tight grip on how—and by who—their devices can be repaired.