It is a movement that is rapidly gathering momentum worldwide. The right to repair clarion call is putting pressure on corporations to make it easier for consumers and independent shops to fix their products themselves.
Consumers are often disadvantaged as manufacturers invariably dictate who can fix their device, making it a pretty expensive deal. In the US, tech giants especially tried to stop them on their tracks. The tug-of-war over the right to repair must have perhaps started immediately after the arrival of computers on the world stage.
Are manufacturers encouraging a culture of ‘planned obsolescence’? Those supporting the right to repair movement are convinced that they are purposely designing a mandatory replacement period for their products.
The right to repair movement per se apparently originated in the US, where the Motor Vehicle Owners’ Right to Repair Act, 2012, required manufacturers to provide necessary documents and information to allow anyone to repair their vehicles.
The Act requires the manufacturer of a motor vehicle sold, leased, or otherwise introduced into US commerce to: (1) provide the vehicle owner and service providers all information necessary to diagnose, service, maintain, or repair the vehicle; (2) offer for sale to the vehicle owner and service providers any related tool or equipment; and (3) provide information that enables aftermarket tool companies to manufacture tools with the same functional characteristics.
Worldwide Movement
Yet, the right to repair movement isn’t restricted by geography and is spreading across the globe, where residents are acutely aware of its legitimacy. India is no exception to the rule and is realising the broader significance of conceding the right to repair.
In July last year, the Department of Consumer Affairs in India spoke of developing an overall framework. “The aim is to empower consumers and product buyers in the local market, harmonise trade between original equipment manufacturers and third-party buyers and sellers, emphasise on developing sustainable consumption of products and reduction in e-waste,” it said.
Such a framework would be a game-changer for sustainability of products and serve as a catalyst for employment generation through Aatmanirbhar Bharat by allowing third-party repairs, the department said. A committee formed under Nidhi Khare, Additional Secretary, Department of Consumer Affairs, identified farming equipment, mobile phones/ tablets, consumer durables and automobiles/automobile equipment for the right to repair.
A year into its formation and it is now evident that there is still a long way to go even while a right-to-repair portal has been launched. However, the on-boarding of manufacturers is taking time. As the portal states, “Under this framework, it is mandatory for manufacturers to share their product details with customers so that they can either repair them by self or by third parties, rather than only depending on original manufacturers.”
The framework, it continues, aims to help harmonise trade between OEMs, third-party buyers and sellers - thus also creating new jobs. All this sounds nice, but the ground reality could be a completely different ballgame, say industry experts. As they argue, it is not easy to find a quick fix in a country like India with such a huge population where a proper tradeoff is needed on development and environmental issues.
To that extent, the right to repair proposal remains work in progress. In the auto space, dealers will no longer be able to hold away over servicing new vehicles once the law is in place. A warranty can be void if a car owner goes outside the dealer network.
Challenges Galore
Multi-brand service outlets have had this share of challenges, as evident in the case of Carnation Auto, which went bankrupt. Mahindra First Choice shifted ownership to myTVS, and sustainability in this business is not a walk in the park. If and when the right to repair becomes a law, it requires an elaborate ecosystem to achieve the desired objectives in the auto arena. A combination of customer experience, buyers' trust and comfort levels will determine its success going forward.
While the idea globally is intended to break the monopoly of manufacturers, a Harvard Business Review report, coauthored by Luyi Yang, Chen Jin and Cungen Zhu and published in January this year, has an entirely different take on the benefits of the right to repair laws.
“Our results tell a cautionary tale about the unintended consequences of the right-to-repair legislation. We highlight the inextricable link between repair and product markets and urge lawmakers to take a more holistic approach in assessing the repercussions of the right-to-repair legislation.”
According to the HBR report, “ignoring the strategic response from the product market (which is indeed often overlooked in the current debate on the right to repair) will paint an incomplete picture and even lead to flawed conclusions. Instead, lawmakers should examine specific product categories, including their production cost and environmental impact, and guard against sweeping, one-size-fits-all legislation”.
The key is that manufacturers “might strategically adjust” new product prices to mitigate their foreseeable profit loss from the right-to-repair legislation. The HBR report then goes on to pose the following questions: Will manufacturers follow a margin strategy and raise new product prices to capitalise on easier repair? Will they follow a volume strategy and cut new product prices to lure consumers into replacing instead of repairing a glitch-product?
Nuanced Implications
Such price responses can have “nuanced implications” for both consumers and the environment, cautions the report. In the US, lawmakers of a few States have cleared right-to-repair laws, a list that includes New York, Minnesota and Colorado. In June last year, the New York state legislature became the first in the world to pass the right to repair bill that requires digital electronics makers to make parts, tools, information and software available to consumers and independent repair shops.
Self-repair groups such as iFixit hailed the ruling, calling it 'one giant leap for repairkind'. In a blog post, it said, ”People who want to fix their own stuff can. And your repair experience should improve even if you're intimidated by the thought of cracking open your laptop or phone.”
Tech companies such as Apple Inc began fighting such bills in mid-2016 when a larger right to repair movement began led by TRA (The Repair Association). In 2017, the California-based company began offering battery discounts to affected users, which could have been avoided if only Apple had permitted third-party battery replacements.
Stiff Penalty
Last year Apple was reportedly fined $113 million following the accusation that it purposely — using an artificial method — slowed down the older models of iPhone. Recently, after US President, Joe Biden, signed Executive Order 14036, the Federal Trade Commission made a unanimous vote and enforced the right to repair as a policy. It mandated taking action against companies that would limit the type of repair work that an independent repair shop could do.
In the UK, the right to repair laws came into effect from July 1, 2021. Here, electronic appliance manufacturers must provide consumers with spare parts for getting the repair done either by themselves or by local repair shops. This law gives a two-year breather for compliance.
The European Parliament too, has approved recommendations regarding the passing of laws that will give consumers the right to repair their electronics goods. In Europe, the law has mandated manufacturers to supply spare parts for up to ten years. In Australia, repair cafes are a feature of the Australian system. These are free meeting places where volunteer repairmen gather to share their repairing skills.
Photo Courtesy: Pix 1 - Mahindra; Pix 2 - Haynes & Pix 3: MyTVS
Also Read:
ASDC, Hero MotoCorp Introduce 2W Preventive Maintenance & Repair Course