EU's New Right to Repair Directive Requires 10 Year Component Availability

[TheLostSwede]

A new directive from the EU wants its member states to implement new right to repair laws that require hardware manufacturers to repair products up to 10 years from the date of purchase. This also means that devices under warranty will have to be repaired, rather than replaced, to reduce the waste that the faulty devices would most likely have ended up producing. The key part of the new directive is device manufacturers now have to offer the right to repair long after warranties have expired, with some product categories being forced to offer parts for repair up to 10 years after the purchase date, if the customer demands it.

We're not just talking about home appliances here, but also phones and tablets, as well as other consumer electronics, as well as commercial computers. That said, some devices will only be required to have a five year supply of parts and components, which makes sense for some more affordable products. The directive also calls for a union wide "repair matchmaking platform" that should make it easier for consumers to get their products repaired. However, the Right to Repair coalition calls the new directive a missed opportunity, as it wants the right to repair to be universal, but it says that the new directive is at least a step in the right direction. The biggest concern about the new directive is that it doesn't mention anything about the cost of the repairs, so we could end up seeing price gouging on spare parts and repair costs, which would make the new directive moot, as it could be cheaper getting a new product rather than having it repaired.



View at TechPowerUp Main Site | Source

 

[ZoneDymo]

Im waiting for the lobbied "right to impair" law to pass

 

[Vayra86]

Move in the right direction, for sure.

 

[bug]

Move in the right direction, for sure.

"For sure?"
Already for a shattered protection glass (the screen was fine) fix, I was asked for about half the cost of the phone. The window for abuse is wide open, if some manufacturers choose to take that route, the rest will be forced to follow.
Rather then regulating the right to repair, I would have mandated modular designs instead. You know, no more this is glued to that, so they have to be replaced together, no more "tough luck, this laptop came with 4GB of soldered RAM".

 

[Denver]

"This also means that devices under warranty will have to be repaired,"

That doesn't sound right. If it is after the legal guarantee then that would be positive.

 

[Vayra86]

"For sure?"
Already for a shattered protection glass (the screen was fine) fix, I was asked for about half the cost of the phone. The window for abuse is wide open, if some manufacturers choose to take that route, the rest will be forced to follow.
Rather then regulating the right to repair, I would have mandated modular designs instead. You know, no more this is glued to that, so they have to be replaced together, no more "tough luck, this laptop came with 4GB of soldered RAM".

Of course, and I agree, would have been better.

But I compare this move to the one that GDPR brought us. Its about first setting that new norm, planting in people's heads that a company is supposed to offer a repair policy. The next step is people who start counting on a repair policy. People will compare repair options eventually on bigger purchases and it will weigh into their buy decisions.

GDPR today is a global concept and is being enforced, and people have indeed started using it to their advantage, while companies must comply.

"This also means that devices under warranty will have to be repaired,"

That doesn't sound right. If it is after the legal guarantee then that would be positive.

Warranty extends beyond 1 or 2 years initial. It always has and always did.

In many countries consumer rights already specify a general term for how long items 'should last economically'. During that whole time you have warranty rights, where its possible both parties take some part of the expense to keep the product functional.

 

[TheinsanegamerN]

"This also means that devices under warranty will have to be repaired,"

That doesn't sound right. If it is after the legal guarantee then that would be positive.

It is right, many phones, when submitted for warranty repair, are binned and replaced because its cheaper. e-waste is a huge issue in the computing industry.

 

[Denver]

It is right, many phones, when submitted for warranty repair, are binned and replaced because its cheaper. e-waste is a huge issue in the computing industry.

I meant that this is not positive if within the warranty period, you lose the right to receive a new product in exchange for the defective one, repairs can result in more problems later.

 

[R0H1T]

It is right, many phones, when submitted for warranty repair, are binned and replaced because its cheaper. e-waste is a huge issue in the computing industry.

Any stats to back that up? At least in this part of the world replacement is the absolute last resort!

 

[bug]

@Vayra86 Fwiw, I don't have very good feeling about GDPR either
I mean, it does its job, but I can't shake the feeling it's akin to shooting mosquitoes with a cannon. As a software developer, I already had to implement sub-optimal solutions, simply because copying an email address or something would require us implementing some purge mechanism that was tricky to implement. We just went for the slow implementation that would just query for data every time instead. And I'm not even talking about an industry that deals with large amounts of PII.

 

[bonehead123]

I haven't read the entire regulation yet, but so far, I see nothing about regulating/controlling the 3rd party warranty companies (who somehow always manage to obtain your phone/email etc) constantly bombarding you with ads and offers for repair coverages that are usually way to expensive for the limited number of things they cover, as well as their really high deductibles.... this crap needs to be heavily scrutinized too IMHO

I also think the stipulation for keeping parts available for 10 yrs would only cause prices to rise significantly, due to the mfgr's having to spend way more $$ to storage, inventory mgmt, not to mention the actual costs of the parts themselves...

For things like appliances and other things that consumers normally keep for long periods of time, this may make more sense, but certainly not for small electronic devices that are either outdated/incompatible with standards, and/or basically unusable after a few years....

 

[DeathtoGnomes]

Im waiting for the lobbied "right to impair" law to pass

Getting Impaired is more fun. Its a fundamental right. I have to say the EU got this one right.

 

[Readlight]

Lithium battery haw 10 years age
All electric cars in world

 

[Ferrum Master]

Any stats to back that up? At least in this part of the world replacement is the absolute last resort!

None. His so called replacement units are refurbished units, many ain't aware of that.

This all initiative will end up in higher prices. Just as that. The parts will be there, but for how much money? EU cannot regulate their cost. It will be just an abstract number, no real improvement in ewaste.

 

[lexluthermiester]

A new directive from the EU wants its member states to implement new right to repair laws that require hardware manufacturers to repair products up to 10 years from the date of purchase.

Now let's do this stateside!!

 

[neblogai]

This all initiative will end up in higher prices. Just as that. The parts will be there, but for how much money? EU cannot regulate their cost. It will be just an abstract number, no real improvement in ewaste.

The cost, most likely, will often be just at the limit of being worth to repair. For example, when I needed a replacement motor for Bosch electric screwdriver, the cost of that single part was quite expensive- about half the price of a whole brand new screwdriver with batteries, box, etc. I went with fixing it partially because it was still somewhat cheaper, but also- just to not produce waste.
I think, a good next step would be to encourage companies to simply offer longer warranties, for example- by taxing short warranty. Then, there would be an incentive for them to simply make items that work without issues for longer. But as it is, I hope that this will at least lead to more component standardization, so that spare part costs can be reduced by having less categories/more reuse between devices.

 

[bug]

Now let's do this stateside!!

I think I read something about it years ago. Of course, it was just a couple of states, as is the norm over there, and I haven't read anything since. Iirc it was more aimed at keeping local repair shops alive.

 

[TheinsanegamerN]

I think I read something about it years ago. Of course, it was just a couple of states, as is the norm over there, and I haven't read anything since. Iirc it was more aimed at keeping local repair shops alive.

The RTR legislation we did get was neutered and gave corporations a big leg up to increase costs without benefiting the consumer.

Just typical US government things.

 

[Squared]

Why are laws like this always about regulating what the consumer is allowed to buy? Why not instead require transparency to the user about what the repair options might be?

Put iPhones on the store shelf and they say "$800, screen replacement $500, screens not available for purchase" and a more repairable phone might say "$800, screen replacement $200, screens for purchase $100".

 

[remunramu]

Im sure we already aware that first party service center like Apple, Samsung or any major electronic companies they don't repair broken or faulty components, they'd replace them. Only street 3rd party service repair would deal with the real repair. Instead of replacing a single faulty chip, IC, transistor or damaged pcb trace 1st party would just replace the entire board, would not want to deal with soldering and stuff and charge you hefty price while 3rd party would solder that parts for you, repair and charge it way way cheaper.

I remember in some of Rossman video (an activist the right for repair) Some of his customer brought a macbook with a display problem, Apple 1st party service required him to replace the mainboard because of broken socket. While this Rossman dude found out it was just a bent pin in socket, and fixed it for free. Damn this is why we need those 3rd party repair to stay in business with this new Right to repair.

 

[ThrashZone]

Hi,
Boy you think items cost a lot now just wait for that to be enacted

 

[bug]

Im sure we already aware that first party service center like Apple, Samsung or any major electronic companies they don't repair broken or faulty components, they'd replace them. Only street 3rd party service repair would deal with the real repair. Instead of replacing a single faulty chip, IC, transistor or damaged pcb trace 1st party would just replace the entire board, would not want to deal with soldering and stuff and charge you hefty price while 3rd party would solder that parts for you, repair and charge it way way cheaper.

I remember in some of Rossman video (an activist the right for repair) Some of his customer brought a macbook with a display problem, Apple 1st party service required him to replace the mainboard because of broken socket. While this Rossman dude found out it was just a bent pin in socket, and fixed it for free. Damn this is why we need those 3rd party repair to stay in business with this new Right to repair.

In order to do that, you have to train technicians to spot a bent pin. Apparently that's too costly in today's environment. It's much cheaper to train monkeys to replace 4 or 5 major components.

But also, let's be honest, how many times have you had your car serviced without the mechanic trying to upsell you on a faulty piece?

 

[SamuelMa]

Rossman is great.

But y'all missing the point. You don't add more regulation to solve this problem; you remove some.

Expire their patents and you'll see a lot of competition in parts, even upgrading beyond original vendor spec.

Otherwise you'll just make it more expensive for new players to enter the market; entrenching the existing; causing consumers to get the short end of the stick.

 

[R0H1T]

All regulations & polity are by design entrenched to make the vested interests even more profits, now they could throw a bone or two (to the masses) like this proposed regulation but in the end IMO the big corps will end up making more money any way!

Apple Reportedly Planning to Limit iPhone 15's USB-C Port in the Same Way as Lightning​

 

[ThrashZone]

Hi,
This brings the question who is using a 10 year old device especially cell phone when they're outdated after 4 and battery is crap after 2 maybe 3 at best
Selling/ auto including 10 year warranties will be pretty expensive careful what you ask for EU you guys and gals are already seeing higher prices