Oregon may soon become the last state to pass right-to-repair legislation. Last month, Google lent its support in an open letter, calling Senate Bill 1596 “a compelling model for other states to follow.” The bill, which was sponsored by a cent of state senators and representatives, was inspired in part by California SB 244, which Gov. Gavin Newsom signed into law in October.
Apple has openly supported this bill — a rare endorsement from a tech giant that likes to play it close to the vest. Cupertino, however, is less enthusiastic about some inclusions in the Oregon law that were absent from the California law.
“Apple agrees with the vast majority of Senate Bill 1596,” John Perry, Apple’s senior director of Secure System Design, said in a filing with state lawmakers this week. “I met with the senator [Janeen] Sollman several times, and I appreciate her willingness to engage in an open dialogue. Senate Bill 1596 is a step forward in ensuring that Oregonians, including me, can get their appliances repaired easily and affordably.”
Apple’s major sticking point with the proposed legislation centers around a policy known as “pars pars.” Both iFixit and PIRG (Public Interest Research Group) have criticized the policy, which requires the use of first-party parts in the repair process. PIRG, which filed a request with the FTC to ban the practice late last year, called it “one of the most pernicious barriers to the right to redress.”
Apple, in turn, has strongly defended the practice, insisting that the use of some third-party parts could create a security problem for users. T
“We believe that the bill’s current language regarding part pairing will undermine the safety, security and privacy of Oregonians by forcing device manufacturers to allow parts of unknown origin to be used in consumer devices,” Perry said. “It’s important to understand why Apple and other smartphone manufacturers use part pairing. It is not to make the repair more difficult. In fact, it’s to make it easier to access repair while ensuring that your device — and the data stored on it — remains safe. Part matching also helps ensure your device performs optimally and critical components such as the battery function safely after a repair.”
Shortly after the California bill passed, iFixit pointed out that “seven iPhone parts can cause problems during repairs” in a New York Times article. That figure was more than double the three found in 2017 and marked an increase of “about 20% per year since 2016, when only one repair caused a problem.” Apple supports some third-party parts, such as batteries and display, although these often limit certain functions.
The paper continues: “New batteries can trigger warning messages, replacement screens can disable a phone’s brightness settings and replacement selfie cameras can malfunction.”
The element of the bill that Apple singled out is in part:
An OEM makes available to an owner or independent repair provider on fair and reasonable terms and documentation, a tool or part necessary to disable and reset any electronic security lock or other security function on consumer electronic equipment that is or must be disabled, or must be reset when diagnosing, servicing or repairing consumer electronic equipment.
. . .An OEM may not use part matching to: (A) Prevent or inhibit an independent repair provider or owner from installing or enabling the operation of a consumer electronic equipment part or component, including an original equipment part or component that manufacturer has not approved; (B) Reduce the functionality or performance of consumer electronic equipment; or (C) Cause consumer electronic equipment to display unnecessary or misleading notices or warnings about unidentified parties, particularly if the notices or warnings cannot be ignored.
In a recent conversation with TechCrunch, co-sponsor Senator Sollman described closed-door meetings where Apple discussed its concerns about providing part matching, describing frustration while calling the hardware giant “very private” in its dealings. with the bill.
“People would come to me with potential changes, and I felt like I was playing the operator’s game, like I was the one who had to push the changes and not Apple itself,” says Sollman. “This is very disappointing. We enjoyed many of the changes Apple introduced that are included in the California bill. There were two items left that concerned them. We addressed one of them because it provided some ambiguity in the bill. And so I think the one place that . . . they will stand on the hill where the parties mate.’
In his testimony, Perry expressed particular concern about biometric sensors — a category that includes things like fingerprint readers and Face ID cameras.
“Under the current wording of SB 1596’s component pairings, Apple could be required to allow third-party biometric sensors to operate on our devices without any form of authentication, which could lead to unauthorized access to an individual’s personal data ,” the Apple employee noted. “This would be incredibly bad for consumers not only in Oregon, but around the world, as we do not have the ability to limit such provisions at the regional level.”
Certainly the concerns Perry mentioned could potentially apply to the “substitute selfie cameras” mentioned in the Times piece.
For her part, Senator Sollman refers to the pairing of accessories as “anti-consumer.”
“I’m not trying to push it [Apple] or whatever,” he says. “I’m trying to make this consumer friendly so we have a policy that will work. I think we got to that place with Google and I think others will soon too [go public], also. I think Apple will probably stand firm on pairing its components, because that would be the only policy in the US that doesn’t do away with it.”
