The Right to Repair: How Companies Are Reducing Consumer Control

 For centuries, artisans crafted screws, bolts, and nuts by hand, a painstaking process that limited mass production. This changed dramatically in the 1790s when British metalworker Henry Maudslay developed a highly precise lathe. This invention allowed these components to be mechanically reproduced at scale, revolutionizing manufacturing. The standardization of interchangeable parts played a pivotal role in the Industrial Revolution, and by the 20th century, mass production had become the norm. From cars to home appliances, repairability was made simple—hardware stores carried replacements for common parts like gaskets or hoses.

Today, interchangeable parts remain vital for production, but many companies are intentionally restricting consumers from making their own repairs. Increasingly, repairs can only be performed by the original manufacturer, or not at all. This has led to a culture of disposability, particularly in electronics. In 2022 alone, we discarded approximately 62 million tons of e-waste, including billions of dollars’ worth of valuable metals.

How Companies Block Repairs

Companies employ several strategies to limit repairability:

1. Physical Barriers: Instead of screws, manufacturers often use adhesives to make parts harder to replace.

2. Withholding Information: Access to product manuals and schematics is often restricted. For instance, during the pandemic, hospitals struggled to repair essential equipment. The repair company iFixit created a database of manuals, but some manufacturers, like Steris, pushed to have these resources removed.

3. Parts Pairing: Many manufacturers assign unique serial numbers to parts like screens, batteries, or sensors. Internal software detects unauthorized replacements and may disable certain features or render the device inoperable. For example, replacing the screen on an iPhone can cause automatic brightness adjustment to stop functioning. Similarly, John Deere tractors require company technicians to authenticate repairs, which can delay critical farming operations.

Manufacturers can also use software to impose end-of-life dates on devices, preventing updates and slowly making them obsolete. These practices give companies significant control over their products, leading critics to accuse them of "planned obsolescence," where products are intentionally designed to fail, forcing consumers to buy new ones.

Justifications and Challenges

Manufacturers defend these practices by citing cybersecurity concerns and liability risks. They argue that allowing third-party repairs could expose their systems to hackers or result in unsafe repairs. For example, a poorly fixed medical device could have dire consequences, and the manufacturer might be held accountable. However, reports from organizations like the US Federal Trade Commission and the Food and Drug Administration have found little evidence to support these claims.

The Fight for the Right to Repair

Consumers and lawmakers are pushing back against these restrictive practices. States such as Colorado and Oregon have passed laws banning parts pairing, and courts worldwide are scrutinizing these tactics. Community-led initiatives, like repair cafes, are also gaining momentum. Over 2,500 cities globally, from Amsterdam to Bangalore, now host these spaces where individuals can share knowledge and tools to repair their items, fostering a culture of sustainability.

As these movements grow, they aim to reclaim consumer rights and challenge the throwaway culture that has become pervasive in modern society. By championing the right to repair, individuals and communities are taking a stand for a more sustainable and equitable future.