Washington Consumers Will Gain 'Right To Repair' Cellphones, Other Electronics (seattletimes.com) 25
An anonymous reader quotes a report : Washington is joining a growing list of states trying to tear down barriers for consumers who want to repair their electronics rather than buy new ones. Gov. Bob Ferguson last week signed the state's new "Right to Repair" policy, House Bill 1483, into law. It was a yearslong effort to get the law approved. "This is a win for every person in Washington state," said the bill's prime sponsor, Rep. Mia Gregerson, D-SeaTac.
In 2021, the Federal Trade Commission reported that consumers with broken electronics don't have much choice but to replace them because repairs require specialized tools, unique parts and inaccessible proprietary software. And those restrictions, the FTC found, disproportionately burden communities of color and low-income communities. Some companies engage in a practice called "parts pairing" that can make replacing parts of a device impossible. Washington's new law would largely outlaw this tactic.
Starting Jan. 1, 2026, the law will require manufacturers to make tools, parts and documentation needed for diagnostics and maintenance available to independent repair businesses. The requirement applies to digital electronics, like computers, cellphones and appliances, sold in Washington after July 1, 2021. Manufacturers won't be able to use parts that inhibit repairs. The state attorney general's office could enforce violations of the new law under the Consumer Protection Act.
In 2021, the Federal Trade Commission reported that consumers with broken electronics don't have much choice but to replace them because repairs require specialized tools, unique parts and inaccessible proprietary software. And those restrictions, the FTC found, disproportionately burden communities of color and low-income communities. Some companies engage in a practice called "parts pairing" that can make replacing parts of a device impossible. Washington's new law would largely outlaw this tactic.
Starting Jan. 1, 2026, the law will require manufacturers to make tools, parts and documentation needed for diagnostics and maintenance available to independent repair businesses. The requirement applies to digital electronics, like computers, cellphones and appliances, sold in Washington after July 1, 2021. Manufacturers won't be able to use parts that inhibit repairs. The state attorney general's office could enforce violations of the new law under the Consumer Protection Act.
but they can still fuck you with cars? (Score:3)
but they can still fuck you with cars?
Re: (Score:2)
Let me guess, you drive a Ford Probe?
Still, it's going to depend on the size of your garage.
Re: (Score:2)
I want replaceable batteries (Score:5, Insightful)
I did replace that generic Android tablet with a Samsung one and I'm hoping that when the battery goes over there I can at least get a replacement since it's a brand name but who knows?
Batteries should be easily replaceable and use standard batteries even if that means sacrificing slightly on form factor.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I agree. Non-replaceable batteries are the worst invention since social media. It's corporations not even being coy about planned obsolescence.
Re: (Score:3)
This reads less like a right-to-repair argument and more like a tech support rant that wandered into a policy discussion by mistake. You’re mad that your off-brand tablet bricked itself and somehow landed on "battery form factor" as the culprit—when the real issue is repair obstruction by design, not whether your lithium pack came in the wrong flavor. It’s a misdiagnosis that derails the conversation and lets the actual bad actors off the hook.
I want replaceable batteries. Mandatory of course.
Sure, and I want universal healthcare, a pet v
This law should go nationwide (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
I'm afraid that won't happen. Something even worse is going to happen: federal preemption.
From the US constitution:
"This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof; and all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the Authority of the United States, shall be the Supreme law of the land; and the Judges in every State shall be bound thereby, any Thing in the Constitution or Laws of any State to the Contrary notwithstanding."
Federal law being the "Supreme law o
Re:This law should go nationwide (Score:4, Insightful)
This isn’t an argument—it’s a forecast of failure dressed up as constitutional inevitability. You shrug off state-level action with a citation, assume Congress will sell us out by default, and pretend that quoting the Supremacy Clause is the same as engaging with the policy stakes. It’s defeatism posing as insight, and it completely sidesteps the actual fight: whether people should have the right to fix what they own before federal preemption is even on the table.
I'm afraid that won't happen. Something even worse is going to happen: federal preemption.
Ah yes, the Slashdot doomer special: surrender in advance, dressed up as constitutional realism and served with a crocodile tear-laden sigh. You’re not predicting the future, you’re narrating your own capitulation and hoping someone mistakes it for insight.
From the US constitution:
"This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof... shall be the Supreme law of the land..."
Thanks for the Wikipedia refresher, counselor. Quoting the Supremacy Clause like it’s a mic drop would be more impressive if it weren’t irrelevant to the present topic. You don’t get bonus points for citing boilerplate text that every 1L memorizes before lunch on day two. Quoting it here, in the context of a state-level repair thread, is like bringing The Art of War to a street fight—technically impressive, but totally missing the point.
Federal law being the "Supreme law of the land" means it trumps (no pun intended) any state law.
No kidding. And yet somehow we still have state-level environmental laws, labor protections, and consumer rights statutes—because federal preemption isn’t automatic. It requires actual conflict, not just existential dread and a bad attitude. Congress has to explicitly occupy the field, and right now, it hasn’t.
So what will happen, is some "watered-down" right to repair law will be passed by Congress and signed in to law.
Cool story, Nostradamus. Got any stock tips while you’re at it? Because what you’re describing isn’t inevitability—it’s corporate lobbying strategy, and the only way it becomes law is if people like you convince everyone else to give up before the fight even starts.
This law's sole purpose will be to prevent states from passing their own right to repair law.
You just described half of American regulatory history—the bad half, where corporate lobbyists write the rules and Congress rubber-stamps mediocrity under the banner of “compromise.” But the other half? That’s where states lead, push harder, and force the issue—raising the bar until federal law has no choice but to follow. That’s how we got cleaner air, safer cars, and actual privacy laws with teeth. That’s the tradition this movement is part of—not performative despair, but the long, patient work of bringing corporations to heel when they try to make anti-competitive, anti-labor, and anti-consumer behavior the default.
So save the constitutional quotes and the political fatalism for a different thread. This one’s about people clawing back control over the devices they bought—and if that makes you nervous, maybe ask yourself why.
Mexico leading real reforms (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
A Pine Phone is just what you’re looking for. https://www.ifixit.com/Guide/P... [ifixit.com]
Crumbs (Score:2)
These are mere crumbs.
We need the DMCA and all similar legislation repealed and the right to reverse-engineer enshrined in law. It's the only way to ensure competition and success based on merit rather than lock-in.
Now do copyright (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I so wish you weren't right about that.
It has become clear that the supreme court is as sold out as our politicians are.
Worse for us in that they don't ever have to try to get reelected.
Re: (Score:2)
I think people need to wake up to how narrowly drawn our ruling class has become. There have been two justices appointed to the Supreme court in the last 50 years that didn't attend either Harvard or Yale law schools.
With the exception of those two justices, they were mostly appointed by a President who attended Harvard or Yale. During those same 50 years only the 2020 presidential election didn't have someone from Harvard or Yale on the ballot for either President or Vice-president. And 2016 and 2020 are
Re: (Score:2)
Let's keep some metrics (Score:3)
I'd be curious to see some metrics after a few years. How many devices were actually repaired? What was repaired on them?
My prediction: 80% of repairs were screens. 15% were batteries. 4% were random parts damaged by water. 1% was everything else. And those last two, the repair was "replace the motherboard", not "fix the motherboard".
I'd also like to see metrics on the age of repaired devices. My prediction: 80% of repaired devices were three or fewer years old with a rapidly declining tail.
If I'm right, Washington could pass a much more limited bill, mandating manufacturers make it possible to replace screens and batteries for five years from introducing the product. That would be 90% of the benefit at a much more limited cost.
What's the catch? (Score:2)
Which special interests got exemptions from this? What products are covered by "right to repair" in this instance and which manufacturers used lobbying (and "campaign contributions") to get exemptions?
Right-to-Repair: What It Means After You Own It (Score:3)
We’re watching it in real time: states like Washington are finally passing real right-to-repair laws—and the corporate response is already queuing up its next move: federal preemption as a kill switch.
But here’s the thing: that’s not how federalism has to work.
Yes, there’s a long and infuriating history of Congress preempting stronger state laws to protect corporate margins. But there’s another tradition—the one where states lead, and federal regulators are forced to follow. We didn’t get clean air, safer cars, or any meaningful data privacy because Congress took the initiative. We got them because states refused to back down when industry lawyers screamed “preemption.”
Congress hasn’t passed anything yet. And if they do, we face a choice: let it become a ceiling that kills progress—or fight to make it a floor we build on.
Right to repair isn’t just about a cracked screen. It’s about who controls the sales channel after the sale. When a company locks you out of repairs, it’s not just protecting IP—it’s rigging the aftermarket to force you back through their checkout page. This is deliberate enclosure, enforced through firmware flags, tool lockouts, and legal threats. And you don’t fix that kind of predation by surrendering in advance. You call the bluff. You name the game. And you pass laws that call this what it is: anti-competitive, anti-labor, and anti-consumer.
And while it may seem slightly off-topic, it’s anything but. In the distorted version of capitalism that thrives in the U.S., a used item is a threat—competition that must be neutralized. From the manufacturer’s perspective, every repaired screen is a sale lost. They mitigate that loss by locking consumers into their own repair channels or licensing repair out only to those who pay to act as their proxies—the textbook definition of monopolistic behavior. This isn’t about protecting innovation; it’s about controlling the entire product lifecycle—from launch to landfill. Anything that keeps a device in circulation longer than the next sales quarter is a threat to the model. And that’s why right-to-repair laws are now in the crosshairs.
Just like clean air, clean water, and fair pay laws before them, these bills will be fought tooth and nail by corporations who profit from legislative silence. The only question is whether we’ll stay quiet—or get loud before Congress locks the door behind us.