Pretty clear you either haven’t read the bill or grossly misunderstood it. What you describe is not proposed legislation - it’s the current reality that individuals and independent repair shops already live with.

The 2024 variant of the bill isn’t actually publicly available online, but here’s last year’s WIP text:

https://olis.oregonlegislature.gov/liz/2023R1/Downloads/MeasureDocument/SB542

Absolutely, the bill you mentioned is the one I was referring to. It does state that manufacturers must provide documentation, tools, and parts to both independent repairers and owners under fair terms. However, the real issue lies in how “fair and reasonable terms” are interpreted and applied in practice.

Here’s a quote from Google’s actual response:

User safety should be a top priority. Improper repair can be dangerous—especially if individuals use faulty parts or are unfamiliar with safety critical components, such as lithium ion batteries.** Legislation should acknowledge the risks borne by unskilled repairers and allow original equipment manufacturers (OEM) to provide parts assemblies rather than individual components to reduce the risk of injury.**

Doesn’t scream right to repair to me, let’s continue.

Right to Repair regulation should focus on: Devices that are repaired by an OEM’s existing repair offerings3 Right to Repair legislation in the United States is focused on leveling the playing field between OEM repair and independent repair offerings and putting consumers first, which we fully support

So, if they don’t repair their devices and only replace assemblies, they’re not required to do anything for RTR, how convenient!

Right to Repair regulation should focus on: Parts that are provided by an OEM’s existing repair operations

Hmm… So the easiest way to comply with the law is to not do anything

Policies should encourage repairers and recycling centers to recycle or to dispose of e-waste responsibly. We believe repair can be an important mechanism to reduce the large and growing problem of e-waste

Classic corporate green washing, this doesn’t mean recycling, it means break products, into as many parts as possible and dispose of them.

This is what recycling means to big tech:

Those are icloud locked iphone mainboards that have had their chips drilled through (this is "recycling). Some extremely smart people have figured out how to scrap them for parts, but that’s the ingenuity of actual repair people, not Big tech’s recycling.

Yes, it basically just reinforces the usual “Authorized Service Providers” spiel, i.e. it’s not a real right to repair bill.

Special Access for ASPs: manufacturers have to share repair manuals, tools, and parts ONLY with ASPs under “fair and reasonable terms”.

This means if you’re not part of their club and haven’t signed their agreements to become an ASP you may not be allowed to purchase parts. And to be clear, becoming an ASP can restrict you in the kinds of repairs you can provide, and the kinds of information you can tell your customers, under legal threat, and may require you to hit impossible sales quotas.

Parts and Conditions: It gets trickier with parts. Manufacturers aren’t actually forced to give you, the little guy, access to individual parts. What they’re obligated to do is to provide full assemblies to ASPs. So, if you need just a tiny part for a fix, tough luck – they can legally turn you away or make you buy a whole assembly, which is neither practical nor cost-effective.

Do you have a license for that?: It’s like asking, “Do you have a permit for that fishing rod?” before you even get to the lake. The bill implies that if you want to repair these devices, you better have some sort of certification or license. This could be a huge barrier for independent repair shops, especially those who don’t have the best relations with the company they repair devices of, or even DIY fixers. You want to repair something? First, prove that you’re qualified according to their standards, which can be pretty steep or even unrealistic for many. It’s another way of keeping the repair circle closed and controlled while pretending to be the moral authorities of social and environmental justice.

“Can’t you see just how great a company we are? We’re allowing you to repair YOUR device, (assuming that we like you, that is), aren’t we such good people? After all you’re our dear cust---------”

ERROR: CONSUMER ACCOUNT NR. 48570 TERMINATED FOR INAPPROVED WRONGSPEAK. PLEASE INSERT CREDIT CARD TO CONTINUE READING MESSAGE.

Thank you for buying from Google, we support you, we love 😍 right to repair, we love 💚 the environment and we 💕 you, dear consumer 😘… errr… customer

Exactly! This is just a PR stunt, nothing more, and it looks like “journalists” bought it.

except that’s not happening. It’s giving big tech good PR while they keep doing exactly what they have been doing for the past 2+ years (i.e. pretending to care about right to repair, and the environment, and whatever other good-soundign cause they can think of, without actually doing any of it)

No they will not.

That’s a shitty article by a “journalist” that hasn’t read the bill otherwise they would know that it’s NOT right to repair, but rather it’s a bill disguised as right to repair that actually gives even more monopolistic powers to big tech.

don’t lump in everyone with musk, there are many people that actually believe in free speech

if caring about privacy and not wanting companies and governments to watch everything you do is “the ideology of a suburb liberal”, then fine, I’m a “suburb liberal” lol

EDIT: reading your profile you’re (in your words) a “Firm believers in Marxism Leninism, cartoons, and the need for Gulags” so I don’t think I will continue this discussion. have a nice day ^^

dude, don’t just assume my political beliefs based on nothing more than a comment…

some of us ARE doing something about it

My intention wasn’t to equate ads with psychological trauma, but rather to emphasize the profound impact such invasive practices can have on our sense of privacy and autonomy. The terminology of ‘personalized ads’ can often obscure the magnitude of surveillance behind it. I understand that this might come across as hyperbolic to some, but it’s essential to articulate the depth of concern many feel.

If we’re serious about transforming the conversation around this issue, we’ve got to be more intentional with the words we choose. Let’s call a spade a spade: labeling them as “personalized ads” is a gross understatement.

It’s more than that. It’s like someone constantly lurking behind you, watching every move you make, and getting into the private spaces of your mind. It isn’t mere content tailoring—it’s relentless stalking and a brazen assault on our psyche.

We need to call it what it is.

google didn’t come up with passkeys. It’s an idea that originated from the FIDO Alliance (of which google is A MEMBER).

Oh you’re right I’m sorry, this is not the video I thought it was. I thought it was the video from a few days ago when he was talking about what happened to Brandon Jackson!

We should stop calling cloud-connected iot devices “smart”. How is it “smart” to connect to the internet just to check if you can use your internet-connected doorbell?

Actual smart home devices are AWESOME. If your iot devices use standard, open protocols, don’t connect to the internet, except for your local network and can be controlled from anywhere in your house by using tools like Home Assistant, then they’re ACTUALLY smart devices.

We should start calling cloud iot devices “dependent” devices.

The term “dependent” more accurately represents the nature of these devices: they are reliant on internet connectivity and proprietary protocols, limiting user control and adding unnecessary complexity to simple tasks. Unlike truly “smart” devices, these “dependent” devices are less functional and flexible, due to their need to always be tethered to the cloud.

Think about it: if your internet goes down, your “smart” doorbell becomes nothing more than an ordinary doorbell. If the company’s servers have an outage, your “smart” security system can’t alert you of potential dangers. You’re left completely in the dark, with supposedly advanced technology that’s completely useless when it’s most needed.

With truly smart devices that use standard, open protocols and can function independently of the internet, you maintain control and can adapt your system to meet your needs. Even without internet, these systems can continue to monitor your home, control your lights, and more. That’s the real power of smart technology.

So let’s change the language we use and the expectations we set for this technology. Let’s demand independence from the cloud, security, and reliability from our devices. It’s time to transition from “dependent” devices to truly smart home technology.

This didn’t happen to louis, or anyone in the rossmann group, this was a news story, he just happens to retell it.

EDIT: I was thinking of another video, ignore what I said.