Fixing the Right to Repair
Asking whether the person who buys — and presumably owns — a car (or a tractor) has the right to repair it is kind of like asking whether you have the right to eat the food you just paid for.
Denying that right is probably next.
Car companies — and tractor/farm equipment companies, too — have asserted that they have the right to deny owners as well as independent, non-dealer shops the right to repair their vehicles by claiming ownership over the software that powers the computers that run the vehicle’s systems, such as the engines/transmissions. They demand payment for access to the data stream needed to figure out what’s wrong via annual subscriptions to expensive, proprietary diagnostic computers, without which that data cannot be obtained. Independent shops often don’t have such access — and private owners almost never do — which effectively forces the owner to go to an “authorized” dealer to get the work done.
In some cases, even if a replacement component is the correct factory replacement part — and even if it is correctly installed — it will only work if “paired” by a dealer’s proprietary computer, which is controlled by the vehicle’s manufacturer.
One mechanic at an independent Virginia shop recalled one job: “We couldn’t do the programming because they wouldn’t release the software. We had to then take the car there for them to program it, bring it back, cost the consumer an extra $1,200 they didn’t need to pay.”
“Right to repair” laws have been put forward to remedy this weird post-purchase assertion of ownership over vehicles that are legally the property of the people who bought them and whose names are on the title, which you’d think affirms the vehicle’s ownership status. This includes access to the vehicle’s onboard diagnostics, the system that stores fault codes and so on, that a technician has to have to be able to figure out what’s wrong, in order to be able to fix what’s wrong.
President Trump is on the right track when he argues that Americans ought to have the “Freedom to Fix.” It’s a measure of just how off the rails things are that it’s necessary for the president to explain that.
Nine states have already passed Right-to-Repair laws. Congress has gotten involved, too, with the REPAIR Act. The bill would codify some right-to-repair conditions into federal law and give the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) the power to make sure that repair resources are made available to independent garages.
Specifically, the legislation would require “motor vehicle manufacturer(s) to provide to a vehicle’s owner certain direct, real-time, in-vehicle data generated by the operation of the vehicle that is related to diagnostics, repair, service, wear, and calibration or recalibration of parts and systems of the vehicle” and prohibit a vehicle manufacturer from “impair(ing) an owner’s access to such vehicle-generated data or impair(ing) an aftermarket parts manufacturer from producing or offering compatible aftermarket parts. A manufacturer also must make available to the vehicle’s owner, and designees, vehicle-generated data through a standardized access platform. Outside of recall and warranty repairs, a manufacturer may not mandate the use of a particular brand or manufacturer of parts, tools, or equipment.”
There’s some legitimate contention, though, over an earlier version of the REPAIR Act that would have provided much broader access to the vehicle’s data stream. That bill was abandoned after automakers objected, arguing it violated their intellectual property rights. They meant the software that they designed to run the car — as distinct from servicing it.
They also argued that by opening up what’s known in the industry as telematics — the ability that all new and most late-model vehicles since about a decade ago have to both transmit and receive over-the-air updates, very much like a smartphone — vehicles will be rendered much more vulnerable to hackers. This vulnerability would encompass personal (not just vehicle) data, as most people pair their phones to their cars, thus potentially providing access to their data to anyone who can hack into the car’s real-time data stream.
In 2023, John Deere opened up some repair data to farmers while seeking guidance from the federal government on the issue. Earlier this summer, the company struck a deal with the Trump administration that secured the right to repair in full for tens of millions of American farmers. The agreement aligns with federal law. Farmers’ ownership rights are acknowledged — including their right to repair them — while Deere maintains its patents, IP, and trade secrets. Individuals and independent garages have access to onboard software for diagnostic purposes, but not control over it.
In other words, owners can’t alter the code.
This is important to securing right-to-repair nationally, because if the code — which controls a vehicle’s emissions systems — can be altered, then a valid argument can be made that people will alter the programming in such a way as to defeat the function of the emissions control system, thereby creating a strong argument to deny owners (and independent shops) any access to the data they need to repair modern vehicles.
Ultimately, it is about property rights. You own the vehicle — and have the right to repair it.
But you don’t own the code itself, just as — back in the day — you didn’t own the rights to the Pontiac name just because you owned a vehicle made by Pontiac (such as this writer’s 1976 Trans Am).
READ MORE from Eric Peters: