Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Cellphones EU Hardware

Europe's Right-To-Repair Law Asks Hardware Makers For Fixes For Up To 10 Years (theregister.com) 110

Posted by BeauHD from the big-step-forward dept.
The European Commission has adopted a new set of right to repair rules (PDF) that, among other things, will add electronic devices like smartphones and tablets to a list of goods that must be built with repairability in mind. The Register reports: The new rules will need to be need to be negotiated between the European Parliament and member states before they can be turned into law. If they are, a lot more than just repairability requirements will change. One provision will require companies selling consumer goods in the EU to offer repairs (as opposed to just replacing a damaged device) free of charge within a legal guarantee period unless it would be cheaper to replace a damaged item. Beyond that, the directive also adds a set of rights for device repairability outside of legal guarantee periods that the EC said will help make repair a better option than simply tossing a damaged product away.

Under the new post-guarantee period rule, companies that produce goods the EU defines as subject to repairability requirements (eg, appliances, commercial computer hardware, and soon cellphones and tablets) are obliged to repair such items for five to 10 years after purchase if a customer demands so, and the repair is possible. OEMs will also need to inform consumers about which products they are liable to repair, and consumers will be able to request a new Repair Information Form from anyone doing a repair that makes pricing and fees more transparent. The post-guarantee period repair rule also establishes the creation of an online "repair matchmaking platform" for EU consumers, and calls for the creation of a European repair standard that will "help consumers identify repairers who commit to a higher quality."

"Repair is key to ending the model of 'take, make, break, and throw away' that is so harmful to our planet, our health and our economy," said Frans Timmermans, EVP for the European Green Deal, which aims to make the whole of EU carbon neutral by 2050. On that note, the EC proposed a set of anti-greenwashing laws alongside passing its right to repair rule yesterday that would make it illegal to make any green claims about a product without evidence. Citing the fact that 94 percent of Europeans believe protecting the environment is important, the EC said its proposal covers any explicit, voluntarily-made claims "which relate to the environmental impact, aspect, or performance of a product or the trader itself." Any such claims, like a laptop being made from recycled plastic, would need to be independently verified and proven with scientific evidence, the EC said.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Europe's Right-To-Repair Law Asks Hardware Makers For Fixes For Up To 10 Years More

Europe's Right-To-Repair Law Asks Hardware Makers For Fixes For Up To 10 Years

Comments Filter:

  • Weasle words. (Score:5, Insightful)

    by DrYak ( 748999 ) on Thursday March 23, 2023 @06:25AM (#63392735) Homepage

    The thing that worries me a bit is these parts:

    ...unless it would be cheaper to replace a damaged item.

    and

    ...if a customer demands so, and the repair is possible.

    You can count that Apple will throw all their giant legal department at finding ways to wiggle out of their obligations, and finding ways to legally prove that "replacing damaged item is cheaper" and "repair is impossible" (cue in horrendously complicated hardware DRM that makes quick swap of parts impractical), "customers don't demand it" (giant mix of astro-turfing + the usual social engineering through "special rebates" to coral user into upgrading their hardware that Apple is famous from). I mean they are the company that tried to argue that 3rd party reseller of genuine refurbished Apple hardware where violating trademarks, because of the Apple logo on these parts. And you can count on other manufacturer on following on this example.

    On the other hand:

    creation of an online "repair matchmaking platform" for EU consumers, and calls for the creation of a European repair standard that will "help consumers identify repairers who commit to a higher quality."

    That sounds like a clear way to establish a network of good 3rd party repairers. So, not all bad.

    • Should a trans-national government be in charge of deciding who is good at fixing things? Could it be that the "weasel words" are unavoidable because the goal of the legislation is utterly impractical? It's hardly a straightforward matter to legislate the design and construction of everything from major appliances to compact electronic devices.
      • Changing the incentives could help though... impose a longer warranty period. Why does a Washer/Dryer have a 1 year warranty? Can anybody imagine replacing their Washer/Dryer every year? Make it a mandatory 10 year warranty and you would see design changes.

        • Re: (Score:1)

          by tlhIngan ( 30335 )

          Changing the incentives could help though... impose a longer warranty period. Why does a Washer/Dryer have a 1 year warranty? Can anybody imagine replacing their Washer/Dryer every year? Make it a mandatory 10 year warranty and you would see design changes.

          No you won't.

          You'll just be forcing the consumer to pay 10x as much for a good as they used to, and it's something you might want to consider before invoking inflation on people.

          If you mandate a 3 year warranty on a product, and in the US it's a 1 year wa

          • Re: (Score:3)

            by UpnAtom ( 551727 )

            How much is your insulin again?
            It's about $2 here.

            My phone contract is $6 a month for 60GB. How much is yours?

        • Can anybody imagine replacing their Washer/Dryer every year?

          A warranty period exists to cover manufacturing defects not general use, wear, or user error. 1 year is a sensible warranty period for a Washer/Dryer makes sense since moving parts that are factory defects will died within this period, as will electronics.

          I am much more in favour of a long term spare part availability. Give me a guarantee that for $30 I can fix this in 10 years over a 5 year warranty any day. If I don't use the warranty in the first year, there's a good chance I won't use it several years l

      • Calling it a trans-national government seems to be exaggerating with no point. The US is (theoretically) a federation of independent states. Member states have open borders and free trade between them and a common currency. The EU has this also. Should right to repair laws initiate in individual US states or with the federal government? Would a company prefer to keep track of 100 such laws or a handful?

        I agree, the goal of the weasel words is to specifically dictate that they DON'T understand the design

      • Should a trans-national government be in charge of deciding who is good at fixing things? Could it be that the "weasel words" are unavoidable because the goal of the legislation is utterly impractical?

        It is completely impractical, and as a person who does Surface Mount work on occasion, nuh uh. The average person isn't going to do that. The average person isn't capable of battery replacement or screen replacement for that matter. Old screen cracked? make a mess taking the old one off, cut yourself on the glass shards, then get blood on the underside, and crack the new screen taking it off to get at the blood.

        It's hardly a straightforward matter to legislate the design and construction of everything from major appliances to compact electronic devices.

        The place to legislate is mechanical standards like thread sizes on bolts, then the people build

    • Probably all true - not just Apple either - all and sundry will try to find ways around it - and lots will succeed. Hell, the Chinese manufacturers who just write "CE" on the side of their plainly dangerous products are already doing it, and to some degree at getting away with it.

      The EU regulators have historically shown that unlike their US counterparts, the "letter of the law" doesn't mean as much as the "spirit" of it. If you're working around the rules, they'll still have you for it. Like all regulators

      • Hell, the Chinese manufacturers who just write "CE" on the side of their plainly dangerous products are already doing it, and to some degree at getting away with it.

        At this point, something like a CE logo should come with a registration number. That way anyone can look up the number and see that it matches a specific registration for a specific product. The problem is when one manufacturer gets the certification and then makes branded products for other companies - they would have to reveal their identity through that registration number unless each seller gets their own number. If the number truly won't fit on the item itself, then it should be mandated to come on

      • I do wonder how they'll convince someone selling €20 devices to keep repairing them for 10 years though?

        Say goodbye to that phone. If they do decide to continue, I'd expect the price to at least quadruple. Gotta make at least 2 phones for each one sold, and since specialized SMT devices have a production lifetime, you have to do an estimate of total sales when first manufacturing the phones.

        So no more cheap phones for you! The law of unintended consequences bite hard sometimes.

        On a €1000 phone you can at least argue there's some margin in the sale to cover a repair or two, but on cheaper, lower ma

    • Re: (Score:3)

      by AmiMoJo ( 196126 )

      Given it's the EU, you can be sure that the rules were drafted well enough to avoid these kinds of shenanigans. The EU sets out the basic principles, and then individual member states implement them via their own laws. If the EU thinks that the member states' laws are not implementing the spirit of the directive, they can ask for improvements (with legal backing if needed).

      As for Apple, you will note that the directive requires them to design products with repair in mind. Any DRM BS that prevents them makin

    • "repair is impossible" (cue in horrendously complicated hardware DRM that makes quick swap of parts impractical)

      That won't fly because Apple specifically made 3rd party repair difficult. This places no demands on 3rd party reparability, and it's hard to prove that something is not repairable when you a) manufactured it, and b) have a refurb program in place already.

      I'm sure they'll find something to bitch about, but this wouldn't hold up to any scrutiny.

  • Thicker devices, maybe smaller batteries? (Score:3)

    by Babel-17 ( 1087541 ) on Thursday March 23, 2023 @06:53AM (#63392759)

    In other words, redesign all the gadgets to not jam everything in as tightly and they can more easily be built to make repairs more doable and less expensive.

    Car analogy - I remember how much room there was under the hood of compact and mid sized cars of the 60s and 70s. People used to commonly do their own maintenance of a lot of the items that it's nearly unthinkable to do so on now. There was no such thing as a buried spark plug.

    • Re: (Score:2, Insightful)

      by Anonymous Coward

      People used to commonly do their own maintenance of a lot of the items that it's nearly unthinkable to do so on now

      It's also unnecessary. I'm old enough to remember replacing things like spark plugs and distributor caps, and fiddling with the fuel/air mixture on carburetors to keep a car running.

      It's been a few decades since cars needed any of that. The cars of today are far better and more reliable than they were in my youth.

      • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

        by Joce640k ( 829181 )

        I'm old enough to remember replacing things like spark plugs and distributor caps, and fiddling with the fuel/air mixture on carburetors

        The cars of today are far better and more reliable than they were in my youth.

        Mainly due to lack of people fiddling with them.

        • I'd say it's more because a lot isn't really fiddle-able anymore. Sticking with cars, if a distributor, carb, or Gawd forbid points, went wonky you could tinker around in at least some attempt to mend it. Nowadays, if a coil pack or injector or ECU goes bad you just yank it and pop in a new one – the car can be repaired with new parts, but the parts themselves are merely replaceable black boxes.

          Not to say that the bits of a smartphone shouldn't be as easily (yes, yes, I know I'm using that word very l

          • Re:Can't fiddle with something you can't fix. (Score:5, Informative)

            by Joce640k ( 829181 ) on Thursday March 23, 2023 @10:18AM (#63393109) Homepage

            Smartphones need replaceable screens, buttons and batteries.

            There's probably no need to mess with the PCB. It's unlikely the PCB will fail if it makes it as far as end-of-warranty.

          • I remember my Boomer dad lamenting back in his day you just had to keep a set of points for GM, Ford, and Chevy and you could get most people going on the side of the road. I pointed out the electronic ignition systems which followed replaced all that and rarely failed thus not leaving you stranded in the first place. He couldn't quite get that. I still repair my own mobile, desktop, laptop devices. I also have never spent a dime on automotive repair labor. Still turn my own wrenches and have not bumped in

        • And also they don't need to. Carburetors always need adjusted because they don't hold perfect alignment. Fuel injection with a computer to measure air/fuel mixture can automatically adjust without any manual changes needed.

        • Re:Thicker devices, maybe smaller batteries? (Score:4, Informative)

          by Ol Olsoc ( 1175323 ) on Thursday March 23, 2023 @12:27PM (#63393427)

          I'm old enough to remember replacing things like spark plugs and distributor caps, and fiddling with the fuel/air mixture on carburetors

          The cars of today are far better and more reliable than they were in my youth.

          Mainly due to lack of people fiddling with them.

          I don't doubt that is a part of it.

          But today's engines are built to some pretty strict tolerances. My new Jeep Trailhawk's engine would be considered "blueprinted" back in the 1970's. Back then what you got from the manufacturer wasn't all that precisely built.

          Component quality. All the car parts are made of much higher quality metals - even plastics living well in that engine environment.

          My first car was a 65 Buick Skylark with a 300 ci engine. I maintained it well, and by the time it hit 100 K miles, it was pretty well knackered. and had already been in for a repaint and rust fixing.

          Recently, my cars have been doing 300K and zipping along very nicely. Although now I tend to buy new every couple years, so they don't get near that before I get a new one. Maintenance is the biggie.

    • There's also the thing that they add noise shielding and a bunch of accessories nowadays, which takes up space.

      I remember tinkering under the hood myself and seeing plenty of the ground underneath around the engine block. Now I don't see anything of it.

    • There won't be any differences: stuff can be repaired as is. The legislation just wants the producer to be responsible longer.

      I've replaced batteries and screens on phones of mine that had no "user replaceable battery". They're not any thicker, don't have smaller batteries - on the countrary, within the same dimensions, some years later I often fit a higher capacity battery than originally provided.
      Replacing such, while not trivial for most people, isn't rocket science either.

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by AmiMoJo ( 196126 )

        Given that batteries are consumable parts, it would seem that they would design the battery to be replicable at reasonable cost.

        What counts as reasonable depends on the product, but for example a 5 year old iPhone is worth very little, so a battery replacement would need to be very cheap. Otherwise the owner is incentivized to throw it away.

        If it was a couple of screws and the user can simply slide a new battery in, like you used to be able to, that would satisfy the requirements.

        • Given that batteries are consumable parts, it would seem that they would design the battery to be replicable at reasonable cost.

          What counts as reasonable depends on the product, but for example a 5 year old iPhone is worth very little, so a battery replacement would need to be very cheap. Otherwise the owner is incentivized to throw it away.

          If it was a couple of screws and the user can simply slide a new battery in, like you used to be able to, that would satisfy the requirements.

          A 5-year-old iPhone XS Max refurbished and in good condition is going to cost around $300. That's not "very little" to anyone in the USA working class, and is still a stop-and-think price for most of the USA lower middle-class.

          If anything, I suspect a replaceable battery would bring the reseller cost of iPhones down, and thus the cost of new OEM batteries up because it would decrease overall demand for used phones. There are lots of people who can't afford $900 for the brand-new phone, but their 3yo battery

    • Or buy from companies that already do that. Take a look at the Fairphone 4 [fairphone.com].

      Fairly descent spec (I don't game on my phone, but seems to run the last games good enough when I lend it to my kids), 5 years warranty, good battery size (lasts 1-2 days, depending if I lend it to my kids ;). And fully repairable: you can literally change the battery without any screwdriver, as the back is clipped in a way that you can take it apart with just your hands, and at the same time it doesn't come off by accident even when

      • Sadly the Fairphone doesn't appear to be available in North America, even from their reseller Murena. I'm unaware of any other hardware manufacturer trying for that level of repairability.

        • For reference, we also have the Shiftphone [shiftphones.com] in Europe, price slightly higher, but better specs.

          In the US, there is the Teracube 2e [androidcentral.com] (4 years warranty, replaceable battery, no glue only screws, SD card slot, ...). It's the only one I could find that fit the "easily repairable" description for the US.

          As with the fairphone, you won't be able to get an iphone-like smartphone, or even something similar to a top of the line Samsung. But do you need it?

          If yes, regulations like the one they try to put in place in Eur

    • For some of the same reasons as cars, jamming everything in tightly, especially with a water resistant seal, makes more reliable products.

      A waterproof seal on an iPhone isn't so you can take it swimming. Do you remember how many phone warranty claims used to get denied due to "water damage" where the moisture exposure indicator merely saw a few hot summer days? But really, that moisture still does damage. Sealing the phone is overall a good thing and all the brands do it.

      Devices get more complicated and

    • In other words, redesign all the gadgets to not jam everything in as tightly and they can more easily be built to make repairs more doable and less expensive.

      Nope, nothing at all like that. Even the most densely designed devices are currently repairable by the manufacturer. This is saying they should damn well do it rather than throwing it away.

    • In other words, redesign all the gadgets to not jam everything in as tightly and they can more easily be built to make repairs more doable and less expensive.

      Enter the Phablet! 26 cm screen, 3 cm thick Smartphones FTW.

      Thicker, larger, and smaller capacity batteries because they have to have a non-custom form factor and are encased in plastic to keep them from being pinched and getting all explodey.

    • The funny thing is that in recent years this has come full-circle. But not for any reason that wouldn't make you facepalm. First off, engines have been getting smaller over the years for the equivelent power and torque. That is, of course, as it should be; technological progress and all that. But consumers these days are not generally willing to pay more for better power, torque, or handling. They WILL, however, pay (quite a lot) extra for size and ride height. Gotta overcompensate for that small peni

    • I remember how much room there was under the hood of compact and mid sized cars of the 60s and 70s.

      I miss the old vehicles too, but the new vehicles have a lot more interior room for the same exterior dimensions. That matters more to more people.

  • Does not require manufacturers to allow 3rd party repairers access to parts. Does not stop manufacturers setting artificially high prices for their monopoly repairs, making replacement "cheaper". It's like someone has totally misunderstood the problem, or a lobbyist got to them.

  • Keeping products working longer so they don't end up as landfill as quickly....

  • "Up To" (Score:4, Insightful)

    by flightmaker ( 1844046 ) on Thursday March 23, 2023 @08:07AM (#63392863)

    - the worst ever pair of words.

    Advertisers everywhere just love it because at the same time as being designed to confuse the gullible it is absolutely meaningless. For example, use this paint and your metal will be protected for "up to" 5 years. It might all peel off the week after and that's absolutely fine because all that's expected of it is not to last for more than 5 years.

    It's high time "up to" was banned and replaced by "at least".

    • Re: (Score:3)

      by AmiMoJo ( 196126 )

      The headline is misleading. The time period for repair is set by the EU on some criteria by the category of product. It will probably depend on the environmental impact of replacing the product, the cost to the consumer, and so forth.

      A washing machine costing hundreds of Euros might be 10 years, a little battery operated soap dispenser might be 5 years.

      The EU usually gives a range, in this case 5 to 10 years, and then either sets up some organization to decide for different product categories, or lets membe

    • I find it funny that advertisers also like to pair it with the phrase "or more" to make it even more meaningless [segmeowtationfault.com].

    • While we're at it, we should also do something about manufacturers using the term "starting at" when advertising their prices.

      It's all nice and well to tell me the price "starts at" a given point, but if they refuse to sell a base model, and only will stock fully-loaded models, that's just not right.

  • Louis, champion of Right-To-Repair "screams at EU for fifteen minutes - because they deserve it" https://www.youtube.com/watch?... [youtube.com]

  • The European Commission has adopted a new set of right to repair rules (PDF) that, among other things, will add electronic devices...

    The European Commission has adopted a proposal for a new set of right to repair rules (PDF) that, unless amended by the European Parlament or the European council would, among other things, add electronic devices...

  • Okay, Let us assume that the EU is successful in mandating that smartphones and electronic devices must be repairable for 10 years.

    There will be many changes in the manufacturing and repair process. Let's just use smartphones as an example.

    There will be a choice to be made, since it is to be assumed that ten years from the date of the last sale, there will be in all practicality, the need for making 2X of every phone sold in order to comply with this dictate. For ten years. past the date of the last

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by AmiMoJo ( 196126 )

      The devil is in the detail. I haven't read all of it, but it seems like as long as a good faith effort is made those companies should be fine.

      So if they know that they get around a 2% rate of needing repairs per year, with a bump to 90% at the 3 year mark because the battery is knackered, they would need to stock spares appropriate for that. For a phone manufacturer the chances are they could factor in a very small number of repairs, mostly batteries, after the 5 year mark.

      • The devil is in the detail. I haven't read all of it, but it seems like as long as a good faith effort is made those companies should be fine.

        So if they know that they get around a 2% rate of needing repairs per year, with a bump to 90% at the 3 year mark because the battery is knackered, they would need to stock spares appropriate for that. For a phone manufacturer the chances are they could factor in a very small number of repairs, mostly batteries, after the 5 year mark.

        As long as nothing unexpected happens.

        I can relate a story of a radio transceiver that was manufactured by a Japanese company. It had a touch screen on the front. And soon after introduction, the screen had a bad burn in and contrast problem, starting at the edges, and working their way in. And as it turned out, the screen was discontinued around the time the radio came out. So they had to replace many or most of the screens under warranty from stock that was originally expected to last the lifetime of t

        • Re: (Score:2)

          by AmiMoJo ( 196126 )

          A very big fine most likely. They should have tested the screens better if they invented to use a part without a long guaranteed supply. Another option would be to refund customers, or develop a replacement screen and any firmware needed.

          • A very big fine most likely. They should have tested the screens better if they invented to use a part without a long guaranteed supply. Another option would be to refund customers, or develop a replacement screen and any firmware needed.

            What they did was discontinue the radio after they ran out.

            It really isn't possible to predict failure modes, even if they rigorously test components. And despite companies presumably having to announce End of Life for components, there are sudden ends that occur. The type of radio I use had a panic delay in production when a cooling fan was suddenly discontinued.

            Point is, forcing what is tantamount to a ten year warranty and the right to repair over that time - except you have to pay - for component

    • They already do overproduce for warranty work and a certain amount of repairs, but this would put the process on steroids. 10 years from the date of the last device sold.

      This only matters if someone WANTS to repair the phone. It won't increase the demand for tail-end repairs by that much unless people never wanted to replace their phone in the first place. In which case this is actually a good thing.

      • They already do overproduce for warranty work and a certain amount of repairs, but this would put the process on steroids. 10 years from the date of the last device sold.

        This only matters if someone WANTS to repair the phone. It won't increase the demand for tail-end repairs by that much unless people never wanted to replace their phone in the first place. In which case this is actually a good thing.

        So they gamble, amirite? Seems like if they gamble and lose, they are breaking the laws of the EU, and likely to get a billion dollar fine for it.

    • Comment removed based on user account deletion

      • Well at some point technology is good enough and additional innovation is a solution looking for a problem the generates additional overhead to life to constantly retool to yet another equivalent solution.

        All been said many times in the past. Where is your level of good enough, and additional innovation is a solution looking for a problem? What point in history 1500's? 1700's? 1800's? Make the decision, and live your life before this unneeded technology messed everything up.

        This is the problem. A lot of people believe that technology is bad, and overdone, and good enough. They have done that pretty much forever for all we know. At the beginning of the induestrial revolution, a lot of sabots were thrown in

        • Comment removed based on user account deletion

          • When talking about broad scale things such as national technology trends, well.. Ever play any games like Civilization or simcity? Maybe now you get where I'm coming from

            I understand your thought process exquisitely. It is the sort of thinking that can sometimes blossom into groups like the Amish or if really extreme, the Shaker movement. Mennonites, Hasidic Judaism, are less extreme groups. Attempts to maintain a stasis. Varying levels as to what is just the right point that technology must be stopped. For some, technology up to about 1840 is where the sweet spot ends, others pick and choose different points on the calendars.

            And you know - that's okay, as long as you un

  • I have a EU-made car. The tail light holder tabs are made of zinc and have corroded to powder, necessitating replacement of both tail light assemblies - the whole thing. 120k miles. 9 years. Why not use copper like everyone else? ESG? Planned decrepitude?

    Same car, 10,000 miles earlier - all four corner marker lights - the mounts are plastic. The heat from a measly 5w 168 bulb melted all four, necessitating replacement.

    Same car at 90,000 miles, valve guide seals shot. Direct-injection to blame. All

  • Return to whomever is stronger (i.e. has a bigger fist). as the one who makes the policy, but that might be a bit "uncivilized"...
  • On one hand I am an engineer and love repairing stuff, everything from electronic devices to home appliances to cars, and I realize that it is getting harder and harder to do. On the other hand repairability requirement for, say, smartphones would make it almost impossible to build them, e.g., immersible. I was very happy when after a fall from a pier I've fished out Sony photo camera and Samsung phone from my waterlogged pants and they just kept on working. And I am not sure that I would try to repair a m

  • As usual it's clear that the EU is compromised of morons and clueless people that have no clue about anything they are trying to set rules for. This does absolutely nothing to help with right to repair. It doesn’t actually address the underlying problem of right to repair, the only thing this does is add more complexity for the repairs shop for complying with some forms. Why is Europe so useless?

  • Comment removed based on user account deletion

  • The problem with this law is regulatory capture. I don't know how the EU handles such things, but often in the US such regulations are only used to eliminate the possibility of new competition (that isn't extremely well funded).

    Regulators should be forbidden from EVERY accepting any payment in any kind from those they currently or once regulated.

Slashdot Top Deals

Top Ten Things Overheard At The ANSI C Draft Committee Meetings: (5) All right, who's the wiseguy who stuck this trigraph stuff in here?

Close