Re: OT: Huge Right to Repair Win for Consumers
On 6/10/21 2:08 AM, Paul Wise wrote:
>> The report and its recommendations may provide a means
>> to pierce the veil of closed platforms, like closed-sourced firmware.
>
> It seems unlikely to me that we will ever see a "Right to Repair" for
> software, firmware or gateware.
So, why should laws protect the intellectual property of software companies
but not the IP of hardware companies?
What supporters euphemistically call a "right to repair" is in reality an
initiative against the right of companies to protect their intellectual
property.
Why should any company take the risk of investment for new hardware developments
when they have to fear that every other company in the world will get free access
to their blue prints?
The claim that hardware companies intentionally make it hard to repair consumer
products is a conspiracy theory. In reality, a consumer product is primarily optimized
for production costs which implies cheap capacitors or cases that are glued together.
Lots of consumers seem to forget that a product sold into the market not only must
cover the material costs but also the costs of engineering, marketing, customer
support, customs, compliance tests and so on. And in the end, you still want there
to be a small profit left which is what makes the whole business model viable in
the first place.
If law initiatives also now want to take away the exclusive rights of hardware designers
over their blueprints and hence the market advantage over competitors that they took an
investment risk for, companies will lose the incentive to design and develop new
products.
Companies aren't charities so in the end they must protect their investments and have to
make profits to survive.
Adrian
--
.''`. John Paul Adrian Glaubitz
: :' : Debian Developer - glaubitz@debian.org
`. `' Freie Universitaet Berlin - glaubitz@physik.fu-berlin.de
`- GPG: 62FF 8A75 84E0 2956 9546 0006 7426 3B37 F5B5 F913
Reply to: