Comment

Comment by nonrandomstring

"Right to repair" always seems a weak formulation. It's great to have "rights" but people don't always care to exercise them, and can be dissuaded from exercising them.

Right To Repair sounds nice. It alliterates. But of course we have a right to repair our stuff. That goes without saying.

What's really at issue is a duty upon manufacturer's not to obstruct the four R's, to;

- refuse

- reuse

- repair

- recycle

Let's get specific, instead of a wishy "rights" formulation.

No technology must ever by soft-mandated or made a dependency so as to preclude an ethical, environmental or economic choice to not partake in its use, or to substitute other choices.

No technology should be encumbered with locks, licenses or mechanisms that affect the post-sale rights of its owner to repurpose or modify as they see fit (all other safety and contention (RF) issues can be dealt with at a another layer of legislation and enforcement.)

No impediment shall be made to the access, manufacture and distribution of spare parts or consumables, software updates, power supplies, connectors etc

Designs should not, by the use of adhesives, welding, non-standard fixings, unnecessary integration, traps, and fuses, prevent the easy disassembly and reuse of modular components.

Discussion

Live from the official Hacker News API

A modern reader for Hacker News · SvelteKit + Skeleton