Every week, we get a roundup of recent developments in Right to Repair news, courtesy of Jack Monahan and Paul Roberts from Fight to Repair, a reader-supported publication. Sign up to receive updates in your inbox. (It’s free!) Or become a premium subscriber for access to exclusive content and live events!
The U.S. Department of Justice and 16 state attorneys general have sued Apple under the Sherman Antitrust Act. This antitrust lawsuit is an attempt to punish the company for using its massive market power to snuff out competition from other device and software makers, in violation of U.S. law.
And, while the word “repair” doesn’t show up once in the DOJ’s 80-page complaint, there are massive stakes that could well impact how the company manages the repair and maintenance of its hardware and software. The complaint quotes Steve Jobs in 2010 looking for ways to “further lock customers into our ecosystem” and “make Apple[’s] ecosystem even more sticky.” Anti-repair practices such as parts pairing (which Apple will soon be forced to curtail, thanks to laws recently passed in Oregon and the EU) are undoubtedly part of Apple’s ecosystem lock-in strategy and thus may come into play in the investigation.
Core to the DOJ’s case is how Apple uses its hardware and software to block or degrade competitors’ products. Apple has long been cited for weaponizing interoperability, meaning it makes sure that Apple-branded hardware and software work seamlessly with its iPhones, iPads, and Macbooks while hampering the integration of competing services and products.
Take the iMessage texting service for example. Internal communications dating back to 2016 show that Apple executives contemplated making iMessage work cross-platform on both iOS and Android devices, but concluded that doing so would “hurt us more than help us,” according to the DOJ complaint.
The result of actions like these? Barriers to use for anything not produced by Apple. For example, Apple Watch users can use the same phone number for their smartphone and smartwatch when connected to the cellular network, allowing messages to be delivered to both the user’s smartphone and smartwatch. But users with a non-Apple smartwatch must disable Apple’s iMessage service on the iPhone to use the same phone number for both devices—a non-starter for most iPhone users, the DOJ noted in its complaint.
Image via Ted Eytan.
The government’s anti-trust suit pokes at Apple’s shiny veneer, exposing the shadier side of Apple’s business practices that have crushed competition not by offering better products, but by hampering fair competition in ways that may well be illegal. But buckle up! If the recent history of anti-trust cases against wealthy tech firms is any guide, the case against Apple will drag on for years but may yield some hard-won victories for consumers and repairers when it’s all said and done.
More News
- Apple AirPods’ short lifespan is due to its design, and U.S. PIRG says they should be designed to last instead. With over 400 million sold, the buy-die-repeat cycle of AirPods and products like them contributes to serious environmental harm. Unlike some wireless earbuds, AirPods cannot have their batteries replaced, as they are glued together. This design choice renders them impossible to repair and destined for landfills, worsening the e-waste crisis. While AirPods may have revolutionized wireless audio, they perpetuate a culture of wasteful consumption, and the responsibility lies with Apple to prioritize repairability in future designs and reduce e-waste.
- Microsoft’s latest Surface Pro 10 and Surface Laptop 6 models boast enhanced repairability features, including internal QR codes and markings for easy identification of components and screws. These changes make them the most serviceable Surface devices to date, allowing for straightforward replacement of various parts such as displays, SSDs, batteries, and more. Microsoft’s efforts to improve repairability follow criticism in the past, with the company now prioritizing modularity and accessibility for repair.
- Australian farmers’ talks on right to repair are stalled. Hopes that the 2023 US MOU agreement allowing farmers to repair John Deere machinery independently would become a worldwide precedent are not panning out in Australia, where discussions between farm leaders and agricultural machinery manufacturers on the right to repair have stalled—the relevant parties have not met this year.
11 Комментариев
I thought the "parts pairing" issue was settled over 60 years ago when IBM was forced to accept punch cards and 8" floppies from other makers.
Lew Murray - Ответить
The IBM consent decree was even more reaching as it required IBM to sell repair parts and manuals as well as provide repair training for third parties. I don't understand why that ruling does not apply to companies such as Apple and John Deere now.
Greg Baker -
Although Apple loves to show how environmental friendly or green they are, they are quite the opposite. This constant push for discarding anything a few years old and doing everything in their power to force you to do so seems to be their model the past ten years. I love and use Apple products, but I personally draw the line at SSD, Memory and other parts being paired or soldered directly to the motherboard for the purposes of making it hard (or virtually impossible) to repair. I've slowly been considering dropping all Apple products from my life, it will be nice if they are forced to 'play nice' - I think they would be surprised the good things that would come from making their products more repairable and compatible outside the Apple eco system. Even better, do it voluntarily... be smart... oh and not fake compliance... Apple Authorized Repair crap.
Chris McKernan - Ответить
I'm not really opposed to "parts pairing" as long as the parts are made available at competitive prices. I recently purchased an Apple battery replacement from their store which was $15 more than a comparably priced 3rd party battery. And the old battery was shipped back to a recycler at Apple's expense. And based on experience with 3rd party batteries, I have more confidence that an Apple branded battery will last longer and give me less problems in the future.
Glenn - Ответить
How & where did you buy the Apple battery?
Thanks..!
Jim Samuelson -
Apple is hurting itself in the long run by annoying their customers with restricted interoperability and parts pairing. A better way is to provide interoperability with Android devices, but push ads for the latest competing Apple equivalent. Nothing long or annoying, but just a quick blurb illustrating how much better the Apple product is on a particular function, or trade-in offers, or some such. Parts pairing has its place if there is some complex calibration process in getting parts to work together, or some need to track reliability or ownership issues (i. e., discourage theft for "chop shop" purposes), but those who practice it should provide a seamless, simple on-line parts registration process that permits third-party parts to be registered with manufacturer ID made part of the replacement/upgrade part registration.
Apple's designers should ask themselves what they would want if they had bought the product and couldn't afford Apple Store repair prices. "Love your neighbor as yourself."
PAB1130 - Ответить
Parts paring is one of those things where you look to balance consumer safety and reparability.
Clearly the practice helps defend against cheap counterfeit replacements.
It also eliminates consumer repair. there needs to be some level of balance. The number of people who would buy a phone with a self repair done is very small. And the consumer should have some way of knowing when they purchase a used phone.
Finding a place in between is a must.
John clark - Ответить
Apple has been doing this to customers and dealers since the early 80s, constantly finding new excuses and ways to chat their dealers and end customers, starting with using non Apple accessories and supplies. In many cases they'd refuse warranty work and even void a products warranty altogether when "their supplies and accessories" weren't used on their products. Then came false advertising of their products from that same time era, and then they almost went bankrupt 3 times that I remember. I was a HUGE supporter and customer but turfed their crap and attitude, unloading 2 rooms of their garbage on the early to mid 80s, and refused to EVER buy back into their crap. Now they're still up to this crap decades later and customers are dumb enough to put up with it. I don't get it, really. This is just yet another tactic to legally avoid laws in some countries and then fight them for a many years as possible, no different than Microsoft in Europe, Apple tried doing similar in Brazil and violate import laws without any regard for their laws. So glad I ditched then decades ago.
Giulio Moro - Ответить
I am not a lawyer, and do not understand patent or Intellectual Property law, but maybe someone can answer these questions:
1. When I buy a microwave oven, I do not have to agree to accept a EULA screens such as those that typically must be accepted on computers and other electronic devices before they can be used. Do the EULA screens have any limitations or restrictions regarding repairs to computers and electronic devices?
2. If I buy a computer or other electronic device that is covered by patents on the hardware and / or firmware does patent law limit what parts can be used in the repair of the device?
kenny - Ответить
IANAL, either, but I can touch on part of 2. Firmware has issues in copyright, not patent law. A long time thorn in reviving and maintaining retro equipment. Patents expire rather quickly. Copyright lasts a lifetime. And the DMCA tosses a whole new concern on top of that.
John clark -
Apple has always done this. Instead of making a better product, they force you to use the sometimes inferior offering they produce. This has gone on since Macintosh days. There were better peripherals available but you had to use a Mac mouse and keyboard. Their file systems weren't compatible with the other mainstream operating system. They need to be put in their place.
Glen Logan - Ответить