Oregon could soon become the latest state to pass right-to-repair legislation. Last month, Google provided its support in an open letter, calling Senate Bill 1596 “a compelling model for other states to follow.” The bill, sponsored by a sextet of state senators and representatives, was inspired in part by California's SB 244, which Gov. Gavin Newsom signed into law in October.
Apple openly supported that bill, a rare endorsement from a tech giant that loves to play secretive. Cupertino, however, is less enthusiastic about certain inclusions in the Oregon legislation that were not present in the California law.
“Apple overwhelmingly agrees with Senate Bill 1596,” John Perry, Apple's senior manager of Secure Systems Design, said in testimony before state lawmakers this week. “I have met with Senator (Janeen) Sollman several times and appreciate her willingness to engage in open dialogue. “Senate Bill 1596 is a step forward in ensuring that Oregonians, including myself, can repair their devices easily and cost-effectively.”
Apple's main sticking point with the proposed legislation centers on a policy known as “parts repair.” Both iFixit and PIRG (Public Interest Research Group) have criticized the policy, which requires the use of source components during the repair process. PIRG, which asked the FTC to ban this practice late last year, called it “one of the most pernicious obstacles to the right to repair.”
Apple, in turn, has staunchly defended the practice, insisting that using third-party parts could present a security issue for users.
“We believe the bill's current language on parts matching will undermine the security and privacy of Oregonians by forcing device manufacturers to allow parts of unknown origin to be used in consumer devices,” Perry said. . “It is important to understand why Apple and other smartphone manufacturers use part pairing. It is not to make the repair difficult. In fact, it is to facilitate access to repair while ensuring that your device (and the data stored on it) remains safe. “Part pairing also helps ensure optimal performance of your device and the safe operation of critical components like the battery after a repair.”
Shortly after the California bill passed, iFixit highlighted that “seven iPhone parts can cause problems during repairs” in a New York Times article. That figure was more than double the three identified in 2017 and marked an increase of “about 20% annually since 2016, when only one repair caused a problem.”
The document continues: “New batteries can generate warning messages, replacement screens can disable a phone's brightness settings, and substitute selfie cameras can malfunction.”
The element of the bill pointed out by Apple says, in part:
An original equipment manufacturer shall make available to an owner or independent repair provider, on fair and reasonable terms, the documentation, tool or part necessary to disable and reset any electronic security lock or other security feature on consumer electronic equipment. that is or should be disabled or that must be reset during diagnosis, maintenance or repair of consumer electronic equipment.
. . .An original equipment manufacturer may not use parts matching to: (A) Prevent or prevent an independent repair provider or owner from installing or enabling the operation of a replacement part or component of consumer electronic equipment, including a or replacement component that the original equipment 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 alerts or warnings about unidentified parts, especially if the alerts or warnings cannot be dismissed.
In a recent conversation with TechCrunch, co-sponsor Senator Sollman describes closed-door meetings in which Apple discussed its concerns about the parts-pairing provision, described its frustration, and called the hardware giant “very private” in its deals with the bill.
“People were coming to me with potential changes, and I felt like I was playing the carrier's game, like I was the one who had to come up with the changes, and not Apple itself,” Sollman says. “That is very frustrating. We considered many of the changes that Apple introduced and are in the California bill. There were two remaining items that concerned them. We have addressed one of them because that provided some ambiguity to the bill. And then I think the only part that. . . They will stand on the hill where the pieces are matched.”
In his testimony, Perry raised specific concerns about biometric sensors, a category that includes things like fingerprint readers and Face ID cameras.
“Under the current part-pairing language of SB 1596, Apple could be required to allow third-party biometric sensors to operate on our devices without any authentication, which could lead to unauthorized access to personal data. an individual,” said the Apple employee. “This would be a disservice to consumers not only in Oregon, but around the world, as we do not have the ability to restrict such provisions on a regional level.”
Certainly, the concerns cited by Perry could apply to the “substitute selfie cameras” alluded to in the Times article.
For her part, Senator Sollman refers to the pairing of pieces as “anti-consumer.”
“I'm not trying to get attached to (Apple) or anything like that,” he says. “I'm trying to make this consumer friendly so we can have a policy that works. I think we've gotten to that place with Google, and I think others will soon (go public) as well. “I think Apple will probably hold firm on parts matching, because this would be the only policy in the United States that won't eliminate that.”
