Apple

Beyond the Lipstick: Apple's Tech Illusion and the Right to Repair

Apple is trying yet again to put "lipstick on a pig" of their own making. They announced earlier today that starting with new phones coming out sometime this fall, they will allow their customers to activate authentic Apple used parts for repair.  Sounds great !!  We Won !! 

Not so fast -- this announcement is purely political (aka marketing fluff) and not practical. 

Political - because there is legislation underway in Colorado that is written to match the statute in Oregon limiting how "parts pairing" can be used to block otherwise legal repairs.  Other states are moving forward with similar intent. Apple is now scrambling to avoid more laws limiting its monopoly control over parts.  This announcement is perfectly timed to take away incentive on the part of legislators to block parts pairing.   

We didn't win anything in this announcement.  Apple has framed its policy as an "innovation"  that is rich in irony. Apple created pairing software and has patented its actual innovation with a process patent.  We might need to create a new word  - "un-innovate" -  to describe not using their patent.  

It is absurdly impractical for Apple to announce they will allow consumers to activate authentical used parts on phones that are not even available, such as glass and batteries -- when these specific parts are replaced because they cannot be repaired.   The real value to consumers in legislation is to enable the use of third-party glass and batteries as the legal choice of the owner, and not to allow Apple to prevent that choice. 

Harvesting of used parts is to be applauded -- but the scope of that concession is not clear in the announcement.  Will a used camera work with a used phone? What about the dozens of other parts that can be used as spares? 

It is ridiculous that Apple proclaims they "innovated" in order to not pair parts -- when it is they that "innovated" to patent the process for confirming serial numbers in the first place.  Since the pairing process works on phones already in use -- the obvious practical "innovation" would be to update the IOS to undo its own damage.  

Also absurd is that authenticating broken glass and dead batteries is of any value to consumers -- since these parts aren't a major source of service parts as they are already useless.  

The announcement is far from comprehensive even if genuine.  The wording says "some" parts for "some" phones that do not yet exist in the market.  The only parts that are referenced are the most "consumable" parts - glass and batteries -- which are rarely used as sources of spare parts as broken glass and dead batteries are replaced. 

The real value to Apple is having enough of an appearance of doing good things while doing nothing in exchange for having legislatures roll over and play dead. 

Apple's War on Right to Repair Through Serial Numbers

Apple's latest maneuver in the battle against the Right to Repair movement is nothing short of a declaration of war on consumers and small businesses alike.

Both Cory Doctorow and iFixit have shed light on an increasingly common and unsettling practice—Parts Pairing. This tactic is not exclusive to Apple; it finds its roots in the auto industry, known there as VIN Burning. The endgame? To ensure that replacement parts, whether new or used, are rendered useless without the original equipment manufacturer's (OEM) "blessing."

What is Parts Pairing?

The Mechanics

In layman's terms, Parts Pairing is the technological "handshake" that occurs between a device and its replacement part. This "handshake" requires an authentication or "pairing" process conducted by the OEM. Imagine you've got a puzzle piece that only fits when the puzzle maker says it fits. Annoying, right?

The Motive

Now, you might ask, "Why would any company do this?" The answer is simple—control. OEMs have already cashed in on their innovations, intellectual property, and brand image. Yet, they still want to keep you on a short leash, ensuring you remain dependent on them for even the most basic repairs.

The Real-World Consequences

Killing the Repair Business

Parts Pairing is not just a mere inconvenience; it's an existential threat to repair shops. These businesses rely on the ability to use parts from one machine in another. With Parts Pairing, that's no longer an option.

The Circular Economy at Risk

Even more alarmingly, Parts Pairing undermines the very concept of a circular economy. Without the ability to reuse parts, the market for used components dries up. In turn, recyclers lose the financial incentive to harvest parts, leading them further down the road to obsolescence.

Industry Reactions

Cory Doctorow's Verdict

Cory Doctorow doesn't mince words; he calls Apple's practice what it is—scum. Read more.

iFixit's Analysis

iFixit's teardown of the iPhone 15 reveals the usual challenges in repairing Apple products, along with some glaring design and execution flaws. Read the full story.

What Next? Legislation and Activism

This insidious trend underscores the need for stronger Right to Repair laws at both the state and federal levels. We can't afford to let OEMs dictate the terms of our ownership.

Join the Fight

If you care about your right to repair, now is the time to get involved. This is not just about Apple or tech companies; it's a fight for consumer freedom and environmental responsibility.

Unpacking California's SB 244

SB 244 – the “Right to Repair Act” is a Done Deal. Its only a day away from being sent to the Governor for his signature.

Time to unpack the law and its implications:

This law is mostly grounded in the principle that when you buy something – its yours to use, fix, or resell as you like. The legislature made political choices along the way about which kinds of equipment should be covered by this law – and its no surprise that the business interests of Silicon Valley were considered. Some of the details are less robust than in Minnesota, other details are more comprehensive than New York. Whole categories of equipment were exempted in order to fight only a few 800-lb gorillas at a time.

Similar choices were made in Colorado, New York, and Minnesota. California is a very big state and has outsize influence in policy, but is still only one of many. More states are going to make their own political choices. There will be variations – just as there are variations in tax laws, liquor laws, criminal laws, teacher credentials and just about everything else.

Manufacturers seeking consistency on what to do for compliance can do so today. Follow the centuries old principle of ownership – and restore policies that recognize the buyer – your customer – is in charge of making choices of whom they trust for buying the service of repair.

Simple.