Disincentivizing Innovation, and Privacy
This commit is contained in:
BIN
drafting/computer-repair-privacy-violations.jpg
Normal file
BIN
drafting/computer-repair-privacy-violations.jpg
Normal file
Binary file not shown.
|
After Width: | Height: | Size: 254 KiB |
@@ -255,6 +255,7 @@
|
||||
email: "chase_vicente@mines.edu"
|
||||
),
|
||||
),
|
||||
|
||||
bibliography: bibliography("sources.bib"),
|
||||
)
|
||||
|
||||
@@ -270,8 +271,7 @@ Right to repair should be important to you because it allows you to maintain con
|
||||
Apart from preserving liberty, increasing product maintainability has positive implications for environmental concerns. Global e-waste has reached critical levels: in 2024, the International Telecommunication Union reported that the world produced 62 million tons of discarded electronics, yet only 22.3% were properly collected and recycled @itu. This E-waste carries a much larger environmental footprint than traditional waste due to the complex manufacturing processes and vast amounts of resources needed to produce them. Discarding these devices prematurely requires new resources to be extracted, refined, and manufactured into a new product. Furthermore, electronic devices also contain heavy metals and chemicals which pose major pollution and health risks when improperly disposed of @itu. As shown in analytical models from the 2022 article "Right to Repair: Pricing, Welfare, and Environmental Implications," prolonging the use of a product can reduce waste generation and material exploitation, making right-to-repair crucial for sustainable consumption @jin2023Right_.
|
||||
|
||||
== Cost saving
|
||||
In addition to saving the planet, regulating anti-repair practices through RTR laws would directly save you money. As discussed previously, manufacturers make repairs needlessly difficult, leaving you with no option other than to discard devices. Instead of being forced to buy costly replacements, if repairable products were more commonplace, you would have the option to use an independent repair service, which are often cheaper (and quicker) than the official options. The average consumer spends spend about \$1,767, although in an Investopedia article covering apple's support of right to repair it is reported that you could save roughly \$382 if you were empowered by right to repair @apple-supports. RTR laws, such as the European Union's Ecodesign for Sustainable Products Regulation (ESPR), aim to remove the arbitrary barriers to repair by requiring companies to provide access to repair manuals and affordable ways to obtain spare parts @34ca32eb-5148-4b33-b82a-d7cfca46c672. For instance, Kass writes about how she only paid a fifth of the cost of a new phone for a battery replacement, and it reportedly "was like getting a new phone without getting a new phone" @bar-right-repair-and-environment.
|
||||
== Ownership
|
||||
In addition to saving the planet, regulating anti-repair practices through RTR laws would directly save you money. As discussed previously, manufacturers make repairs needlessly difficult, leaving you with no option other than to discard devices. Instead of being forced to buy costly replacements, if repairable products were more commonplace, you would have the option to use an independent repair service, which are often cheaper (and quicker) than the official options. The average consumer spends spend about \$1,767, although in an Investopedia article covering apple's support of right to repair it is reported that you could save roughly \$382 if you were empowered by right to repair @apple-supports. RTR laws, such as the European Union's Ecodesign for Sustainable Products Regulation (ESPR), aim to remove the arbitrary barriers to repair by requiring companies to provide access to repair manuals and affordable ways to obtain spare parts @34ca32eb-5148-4b33-b82a-d7cfca46c672. For instance, Kass writes about how she only paid a fifth of the cost of a new phone for a battery replacement, and it reportedly "was like getting a new phone without getting a new phone" @bar-right-repair-and-environment. Standardizing R2R would make affordable repairs widely accessible, helping you spend less while extending the life of the products you already own.
|
||||
== Ethical Issues
|
||||
This section will focus on the ethical issues surrounding IP infringement, and how replicability may parasitize manufacturer profits. @11021197
|
||||
|
||||
@@ -279,12 +279,23 @@ This section will focus on the ethical issues surrounding IP infringement, and h
|
||||
= How are manufacturers fighting back?
|
||||
Manufacturers increasingly employ design and business practices that make independent repair difficult or even impossible. Common tactics include the use of proprietary screws, excessive adhesive, soldering typically modular components onto boards, and physically welding housings together, blocking internal access @repair-org. These obstacles make simple maintenance impractical. Another barrier is the introduction of digital locks, many companies--such as Apple--require "part-pairing" on all hardware used in their devices. Without reprogramming of replacement parts by an authorized servicer, pervasive warnings may appear on screen, and the replacement parts could even be completely rejected by the motherboard @part-pairing. Together, these barriers consolidate repair power within corporate monopolies, driving repair costs up, and eroding consumer choice and product longevity. But there is a bigger question than just how they are fighting back: are OEMs justified for doing so?
|
||||
|
||||
== OEMs' arguments
|
||||
This section will focus on debunking other less-justified arguments for limiting repair. I will use these sources broadly throughout this whole section. @unintended-consequences @economic-downsides @two-wrongs-dont-make-a-right @criticism-right-repair-laws
|
||||
=== Consumer Data Privacy
|
||||
The basis of this argument is that providing open access to debugging tools would allow a bad-faith independent repair person unfederated access to consumer data stored on such device. This risk can be mitigated by allowing consumers control over their data and making end users responsible for the data security (I.E: Give them the option to set a password). This argument is from @criticism-right-repair-laws.
|
||||
=== Disincentivizing Innovation
|
||||
This argument comes from @two-wrongs-dont-make-a-right. Reinauer claims that companies may shy away from creating more complex devices, or devices with electronics due to pressure from the law, as they would also have to provide consumers with access to repair parts, which would be a costly distribution effort.
|
||||
|
||||
= Arguments against right to repair
|
||||
== Consumer Data Privacy Concerns
|
||||
One major criticism for enforcing broad right-to-repair laws is that it could compromise consumer data privacy and system security. As the original article warns, "industry representatives have raised concerns over data security and cybersecurity regarding the mandates" because they would require "the original equipment manufacturer [to] make available ... any special documentation, tools ... to access and reset [the] lock." @two-wrongs-dont-make-a-right. In a 2021 FTC report that Microsoft noted that “independent repair shops that conduct repairs could compromise the embedded hardware security” @ftc_nixing_fix_2021. The inherent security risk of independent repair is once again mirrored an article by Ike Brannon, an author of multiple anti-RTR articles, who cautions that such access could be misused by bad actors, giving them full access to any of their customers' personal information @criticism-right-repair-laws.
|
||||
|
||||
And These concerns aren't purely speculative, in a study conducted in 2022, the authors reveal that some repair shops not only access customer files when conducting unrelated repairs--such as battery replacement--but also sometime copy them off the device.@ceci2022privacyelectronicsrepairindustry. The figure below shows a brief summary of the trials that caught a repair person snooping.
|
||||
|
||||
#image("computer-repair-privacy-violations.jpg")
|
||||
|
||||
The resolution to this lies in the computer literacy of the customer. In the study, three repair providers claimed to require credentials to preform a battery replacement @ceci2022privacyelectronicsrepairindustry. This may be a red flag to anyone with a technical background, however, most people wouldn't question it at all, just like you wouldn't question letting your exterminator into your house. If consumers were made away that for nearly every repair--apart from data recovery--unlocking of the device was unnecessary, then they may avoid placed which ask for a password. If a repair service gains a reputation for asking for too much access, then they may loose customers or go out of business entirely.
|
||||
|
||||
== Disincentivizing Innovation
|
||||
|
||||
Another claim brought up in Reinauer's article is that RTR mandates might reduce incentive for innovation by forcing standardization: "the mandate ... could ultimately influence how manufacturers design their devices, leading to more standardization across product lines and less innovation" @two-wrongs-dont-make-a-right. The argument is that if OEMs are required to make parts, tools, and diagnostic documentation broadly available, then they may shy away from novel designs, simplifying them to be "repair-friendly," and potentially trading off performance, miniaturization, or advanced features. The article also raises concerns that smaller manufacturers "may lack the capital and resources to both create innovative digital products and produce adequate repair documentation" @two-wrongs-dont-make-a-right.
|
||||
|
||||
==
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
= What can be done to help?
|
||||
== Ongoing Lawsuits
|
||||
|
||||
@@ -1,102 +1,102 @@
|
||||
@article{hernandez2020Empowe,
|
||||
issn = {2071-1050},
|
||||
month = {January},
|
||||
number = {3},
|
||||
publisher = {MDPI AG},
|
||||
title = {Empowering Sustainable Consumption by Giving Back to Consumers the ‘Right to Repair’},
|
||||
author = {Hernandez, Ricardo J and Miranda, Constanza and Goñi, Julian},
|
||||
issn = {2071-1050},
|
||||
number = {3},
|
||||
doi = {10.3390/su12030850},
|
||||
year = {2020},
|
||||
volume = {12},
|
||||
journal = {Sustainability},
|
||||
pages = {850},
|
||||
url = {http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/su12030850},
|
||||
pages = {850},
|
||||
publisher = {MDPI AG},
|
||||
author = {Hernandez, Ricardo J and Miranda, Constanza and Goñi, Julian},
|
||||
volume = {12},
|
||||
year = {2020},
|
||||
month = {January},
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
@misc{34ca32eb-5148-4b33-b82a-d7cfca46c672,
|
||||
doi = {https://lup.lub.lu.se/record/34ca32eb-5148-4b33-b82a-d7cfca46c672},
|
||||
author = {Svensson, Sahra and Richter, Jessika Luth and Maitre-Ekern, Eléonore and Pihlajarinne, Taina and Maigret, Aline and Dalhammar, Carl},
|
||||
abstract = {{The transition to a Circular Economy (CE) aims for more efficient use of resources and reconsideration of how products are designed and used, including promoting longer lifetimes through design and repair. However, several factors influence whether it is an option for the consumer to repair the product. These range from legal and market impediments to factors of cost, convenience, and consumer preference. In this paper, we examine the current state of right to repair and different stakeholder perspectives. We outline the fundamental barriers to accessing repair services for consumer electronics as well as current and proposed policies in both the EU and U.S. promoting access to repair. Following a comparison of initiatives, we conclude by discussing the need to balance stakeholder interests in defining the desired scope of Right to Repair (R2R) - distinguished from a fully open access to repair - within the context of CE goals.}},
|
||||
year = {2018},
|
||||
language = {{eng}},
|
||||
abstract = {{The transition to a Circular Economy (CE) aims for more efficient use of resources and reconsideration of how products are designed and used, including promoting longer lifetimes through design and repair. However, several factors influence whether it is an option for the consumer to repair the product. These range from legal and market impediments to factors of cost, convenience, and consumer preference. In this paper, we examine the current state of right to repair and different stakeholder perspectives. We outline the fundamental barriers to accessing repair services for consumer electronics as well as current and proposed policies in both the EU and U.S. promoting access to repair. Following a comparison of initiatives, we conclude by discussing the need to balance stakeholder interests in defining the desired scope of Right to Repair (R2R) - distinguished from a fully open access to repair - within the context of CE goals.}},
|
||||
url = {{https://lup.lub.lu.se/search/files/63585584/Svensson_et_al._Going_Green_CARE_INNOVATION_2018_PREPRINT.pdf}},
|
||||
note = {Accessed 16 Oct. 2025},
|
||||
doi = {https://lup.lub.lu.se/record/34ca32eb-5148-4b33-b82a-d7cfca46c672},
|
||||
title = {The Emerging ‘Right to Repair’ legislation in the EU and the U.S.},
|
||||
keywords = {{repair; right to repair; Intellectual property rights (IPR); electronics environmental impact; Ecodesign Directive; ecodesign; Circular Economy}},
|
||||
language = {{eng}},
|
||||
note = {Accessed 16 Oct. 2025},
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
@article{terryn2019A_Righ,
|
||||
doi = {10.54648/erpl2019044},
|
||||
publisher = {Kluwer Law International BV},
|
||||
author = {Terryn, Evelyne},
|
||||
publisher = {Kluwer Law International BV},
|
||||
url = {http://dx.doi.org/10.54648/erpl2019044},
|
||||
issn = {0928-9801},
|
||||
pages = {851–873},
|
||||
journal = {European Review of Private Law},
|
||||
year = {2019},
|
||||
volume = {27},
|
||||
doi = {10.54648/erpl2019044},
|
||||
journal = {European Review of Private Law},
|
||||
pages = {851–873},
|
||||
year = {2019},
|
||||
number = {Issue 4},
|
||||
month = {August},
|
||||
title = {A Right to Repair? Towards Sustainable Remedies in Consumer Law},
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
@article{jin2023Right_,
|
||||
url = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.2022.4401},
|
||||
doi = {10.1287/mnsc.2022.4401},
|
||||
journal = {Management Science},
|
||||
year = {2023},
|
||||
title = {Right to Repair: Pricing, Welfare, and Environmental Implications},
|
||||
author = {Jin, Chen and Yang, Luyi and Zhu, Cungen},
|
||||
volume = {69},
|
||||
month = {February},
|
||||
publisher = {Institute for Operations Research and the Management Sciences (INFORMS)},
|
||||
pages = {1017–1036},
|
||||
issn = {1526-5501},
|
||||
year = {2023},
|
||||
url = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.2022.4401},
|
||||
publisher = {Institute for Operations Research and the Management Sciences (INFORMS)},
|
||||
volume = {69},
|
||||
journal = {Management Science},
|
||||
author = {Jin, Chen and Yang, Luyi and Zhu, Cungen},
|
||||
month = {February},
|
||||
title = {Right to Repair: Pricing, Welfare, and Environmental Implications},
|
||||
doi = {10.1287/mnsc.2022.4401},
|
||||
number = {2},
|
||||
pages = {1017–1036},
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
@online{criticism-right-repair-laws,
|
||||
note = {Accessed 16 Oct. 2025},
|
||||
title = {A Criticism of ‘Right to Repair’ Laws},
|
||||
url = {https://www.cato.org/regulation/spring-2024/criticism-right-repair-laws},
|
||||
year = {2024},
|
||||
author = {Ike Brannon},
|
||||
note = {Accessed 16 Oct. 2025},
|
||||
year = {2024},
|
||||
url = {https://www.cato.org/regulation/spring-2024/criticism-right-repair-laws},
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
@online{bar-right-repair-and-environment,
|
||||
author = {Madeline June Kass},
|
||||
url = {https://www.americanbar.org/groups/environment_energy_resources/resources/natural-resources-environment/2023-fall/right-repair-and-environment/},
|
||||
note = {Accessed 16 Oct. 2025},
|
||||
year = {2023},
|
||||
author = {Madeline June Kass},
|
||||
title = {Right to Repair and the Environment—Fix It or Nix It?},
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
@book{whos-right-is-it,
|
||||
volume = {25},
|
||||
publisher = {University of Tennessee College of Law},
|
||||
title = {Transactions: The Tennessee Journal of Business Law},
|
||||
pages = {125-164},
|
||||
year = {2023},
|
||||
notes = {Gambino, Alexandar Joseph. "Right to Repair: Whose Right Is It Anyway?." Transactions: The Tennessee Journal of Business Law, vol. 25, no. 1, Fall 2023, pp. 125-164. HeinOnline, https://heinonline.org/HOL/P?h=hein.journals/transac25&i=133.},
|
||||
author = {Alexandar Joseph Gambino},
|
||||
pages = {125-164},
|
||||
publisher = {University of Tennessee College of Law},
|
||||
notes = {Gambino, Alexandar Joseph. "Right to Repair: Whose Right Is It Anyway?." Transactions: The Tennessee Journal of Business Law, vol. 25, no. 1, Fall 2023, pp. 125-164. HeinOnline, https://heinonline.org/HOL/P?h=hein.journals/transac25&i=133.},
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
@inproceedings{11021197,
|
||||
doi = {10.1109/SIEDS65500.2025.11021197},
|
||||
year = {2025},
|
||||
title = {Ethical Dimensions of the Right to Repair},
|
||||
keywords = {Ethics;Portable computers;Pollution;Green products;Legislation;Companies;Maintenance engineering;Electronic waste;Sustainable development;Strain;Right to repair;sustainability;restrictive repair;ethics},
|
||||
booktitle = {2025 Systems and Information Engineering Design Symposium (SIEDS)},
|
||||
pages = {139-142},
|
||||
author = {Brooks, Landon and Jones, Opel and Mera, Isaac and Minneweather, Lillian},
|
||||
year = {2025},
|
||||
keywords = {Ethics;Portable computers;Pollution;Green products;Legislation;Companies;Maintenance engineering;Electronic waste;Sustainable development;Strain;Right to repair;sustainability;restrictive repair;ethics},
|
||||
title = {Ethical Dimensions of the Right to Repair},
|
||||
booktitle = {2025 Systems and Information Engineering Design Symposium (SIEDS)},
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
@online{two-wrongs-dont-make-a-right,
|
||||
note = {Accessed 16 Oct. 2025},
|
||||
author = {Alex Reinauer},
|
||||
year = {2023},
|
||||
url = {https://cei.org/studies/two-wrongs-dont-make-a-right-to-repair/},
|
||||
title = {Two Wrongs Don’t Make a Right to Repair},
|
||||
note = {Accessed 16 Oct. 2025},
|
||||
url = {https://cei.org/studies/two-wrongs-dont-make-a-right-to-repair/},
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
@online{unintended-consequences,
|
||||
@@ -108,79 +108,156 @@
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
@online{john-deere-accused,
|
||||
note = {Accessed 16 Oct. 2025},
|
||||
title = {John Deere accused of ‘excluding’ right-to-repair language in its manuals},
|
||||
author = {Justine Calma},
|
||||
url = {https://www.theverge.com/2024/10/3/24260513/john-deere-right-to-repair-elizabeth-warren-clean-air-act},
|
||||
title = {John Deere accused of ‘excluding’ right-to-repair language in its manuals},
|
||||
note = {Accessed 16 Oct. 2025},
|
||||
year = {2024},
|
||||
author = {Justine Calma},
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
@online{john-deere-sued,
|
||||
note = {Accessed 16 Oct. 2025},
|
||||
url = {https://www.apnews.com/article/deere-farm-repair-tractors-monopoly-85c18d35a1e0999decb535aa5d7c358e},
|
||||
year = {2025},
|
||||
title = {FTC sues Deere & Co. for monopolizing farm-equipment repair market},
|
||||
author = {John O'connor},
|
||||
year = {2025},
|
||||
url = {https://www.apnews.com/article/deere-farm-repair-tractors-monopoly-85c18d35a1e0999decb535aa5d7c358e},
|
||||
note = {Accessed 16 Oct. 2025},
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
@online{apple-supports,
|
||||
author = {Diccon Hyatt},
|
||||
year = {2023},
|
||||
url = {https://www.investopedia.com/apple-surprisingly-supports-white-house-right-to-repair-law-8382562},
|
||||
note = {Accessed 16 Oct. 2025},
|
||||
title = {Apple Surprisingly Supports White House "Right to Repair" Law},
|
||||
note = {Accessed 16 Oct. 2025},
|
||||
url = {https://www.investopedia.com/apple-surprisingly-supports-white-house-right-to-repair-law-8382562},
|
||||
year = {2023},
|
||||
author = {Diccon Hyatt},
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
@online{judge-dismisses,
|
||||
title = {Mass. judge dismisses final 'right to repair' law challenges},
|
||||
year = {2025},
|
||||
url = {https://www.wbur.org/news/2025/02/12/massachusetts-right-to-repair-carr-law-challenges-dismissed},
|
||||
author = {Chris Lisinski},
|
||||
title = {Mass. judge dismisses final 'right to repair' law challenges},
|
||||
note = {Accessed 16 Oct. 2025},
|
||||
year = {2025},
|
||||
author = {Chris Lisinski},
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
@online{economic-downsides,
|
||||
year = {2023},
|
||||
note = {Accessed 16 Oct. 2025},
|
||||
title = {The Economic Downsides of “Right-to-Repair”},
|
||||
author = {Ike Brannon and Kerri Seyfert},
|
||||
note = {Accessed 16 Oct. 2025},
|
||||
url = {https://documents.nam.org/COMM/NAM-3740-Right%20to%20Repair%20Paper%20R4%20V1%20FIN.pdf},
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
@online{what-is-right-to-repair,
|
||||
title = {What is Right to Repair? An introduction for curious people.},
|
||||
year = {2020},
|
||||
author = {Louis Rossman},
|
||||
title = {What is Right to Repair? An introduction for curious people.},
|
||||
url = {https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Npd_xDuNi9k},
|
||||
note = {Accessed 16 Oct. 2025},
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
@online{repair-org,
|
||||
title = {We Need Right To Repair},
|
||||
author = {repair.org},
|
||||
year = {2025},
|
||||
title = {We Need Right To Repair},
|
||||
note = {Accessed 16 Oct. 2025},
|
||||
url = {https://www.repair.org/},
|
||||
author = {repair.org},
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
@online{2012-mass-laws,
|
||||
author = {Tyson Fisher},
|
||||
title = {Federal court rejects challenge to Massachusetts’ stricter right-to-repair law},
|
||||
url = {https://landline.media/federal-court-rejects-challenge-to-massachusetts-stricter-right-to-repair-law/},
|
||||
year = {2025},
|
||||
journal = {},
|
||||
url = {https://landline.media/federal-court-rejects-challenge-to-massachusetts-stricter-right-to-repair-law/},
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
@online{part-pairing,
|
||||
url = {https://www.ifixit.com/News/69320/how-parts-pairing-kills-independent-repair},
|
||||
year = {2023},
|
||||
url = {https://www.ifixit.com/News/69320/how-parts-pairing-kills-independent-repair},
|
||||
author = {Lauren Greenlee},
|
||||
title = {How Parts Pairing Kills Independent Repair},
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
@online{itu,
|
||||
title = {The Global E-waste Monitor 2024},
|
||||
url = {https://www.itu.int/en/ITU-D/Environment/Pages/Publications/The-Global-E-waste-Monitor-2024.aspx},
|
||||
author = {International Telecommunication Union},
|
||||
year = {2025},
|
||||
title = {The Global E-waste Monitor 2024},
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
@report{ftc_nixing_fix_2021,
|
||||
url = {https://www.ftc.gov/system/files/documents/reports/nixing-fix-ftc-report-congress-repair-restrictions/nixing_the_fix_report_final_5521_630pm-508_002.pdf},
|
||||
title = {Nixing the Fix: An FTC Report to Congress on Repair Restrictions},
|
||||
year = {2021},
|
||||
author = {{Federal Trade Commission}},
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
@article{sia_2018,
|
||||
year = {2018},
|
||||
title = {SIA Opposes Right to Repair Legislation},
|
||||
url = {https://www.securityindustry.org/2018/02/01/sia-opposes-right-to-repair-legislation/},
|
||||
author = {{Security Industry Association}},
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
@article{ecmag_2023,
|
||||
author = {{Electrical Contractor Magazine}},
|
||||
year = {2023},
|
||||
title = {Exemptions in Right-to-Repair Bills: Broad Legislation Poses Security Risks},
|
||||
url = {https://www.ecmag.com/magazine/articles/article-detail/exemptions-in-right-to-repair-bills-broad-legislation-poses-security-risks},
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
@report{mn_repair_myths_2022,
|
||||
year = {2022},
|
||||
title = {Right to Repair: Myths and Facts},
|
||||
url = {https://www.house.mn.gov/comm/docs/xYUGG4YqN0_T7WiKfJTh3w.PDF},
|
||||
author = {{Minnesota House of Representatives}},
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
@article{decoupled_futures_2023,
|
||||
author = {{decoupled futures}},
|
||||
title = {So Rich, We Throw Gold Away – Right to Repair as Innovation Policy},
|
||||
url = {https://decoupledfutures.org/right-to-repair-as-innovation-policy/},
|
||||
year = {2023},
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
@article{springer_public_domain_2021,
|
||||
year = {2021},
|
||||
url = {https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s40319-021-01120-3},
|
||||
journal = {International Review of Intellectual Property and Competition Law},
|
||||
number = {10},
|
||||
title = {Preserving the Public Domain: Limits on Overlapping Copyright and Trade Secret Protection of Software},
|
||||
author = {Lunney, Glynn S.},
|
||||
volume = {52},
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
@article{oup_copy_right_to_repair_2023,
|
||||
author = {Cunningham, Ben},
|
||||
journal = {Journal of Intellectual Property Law \& Practice},
|
||||
volume = {18},
|
||||
title = {Achieving a (copy)right to repair for the EU’s green economy},
|
||||
url = {https://academic.oup.com/jiplp/article/18/5/344/7147057},
|
||||
pages = {344--357},
|
||||
number = {5},
|
||||
year = {2023},
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
@article{arsTechnica2022computerRepairSnooping,
|
||||
author = {Zack Whittaker},
|
||||
title = {Half of computer repairs result in snooping of sensitive data, study finds},
|
||||
journal = {Ars Technica},
|
||||
year = {2022},
|
||||
month = nov,
|
||||
day = {22},
|
||||
url = {https://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2022/11/half-of-computer-repairs-result-in-snooping-of-sensitive-data-study-finds/},
|
||||
note = {Accessed: 2025-11-13}
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
@misc{ceci2022privacyelectronicsrepairindustry,
|
||||
title={No Privacy in the Electronics Repair Industry},
|
||||
author={Jason Ceci and Jonah Stegman and Hassan Khan},
|
||||
year={2022},
|
||||
eprint={2211.05824},
|
||||
archivePrefix={arXiv},
|
||||
primaryClass={cs.CR},
|
||||
url={https://arxiv.org/abs/2211.05824},
|
||||
}
|
||||
@@ -183,4 +183,67 @@
|
||||
url = {https://www.itu.int/en/ITU-D/Environment/Pages/Publications/The-Global-E-waste-Monitor-2024.aspx},
|
||||
author = {International Telecommunication Union},
|
||||
year = {2025},
|
||||
}
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
@report{ftc_nixing_fix_2021,
|
||||
title = {Nixing the Fix: An FTC Report to Congress on Repair Restrictions},
|
||||
author = {{Federal Trade Commission}},
|
||||
year = {2021},
|
||||
url = {https://www.ftc.gov/system/files/documents/reports/nixing-fix-ftc-report-congress-repair-restrictions/nixing_the_fix_report_final_5521_630pm-508_002.pdf},
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
@article{sia_2018,
|
||||
title = {SIA Opposes Right to Repair Legislation},
|
||||
author = {{Security Industry Association}},
|
||||
year = {2018},
|
||||
url = {https://www.securityindustry.org/2018/02/01/sia-opposes-right-to-repair-legislation/},
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
@article{ecmag_2023,
|
||||
title = {Exemptions in Right-to-Repair Bills: Broad Legislation Poses Security Risks},
|
||||
author = {{Electrical Contractor Magazine}},
|
||||
year = {2023},
|
||||
url = {https://www.ecmag.com/magazine/articles/article-detail/exemptions-in-right-to-repair-bills-broad-legislation-poses-security-risks},
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
@report{mn_repair_myths_2022,
|
||||
title = {Right to Repair: Myths and Facts},
|
||||
author = {{Minnesota House of Representatives}},
|
||||
year = {2022},
|
||||
url = {https://www.house.mn.gov/comm/docs/xYUGG4YqN0_T7WiKfJTh3w.PDF},
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
@article{cato_right_to_repair_2024,
|
||||
title = {A Criticism of Right to Repair Laws},
|
||||
author = {{Cato Institute}},
|
||||
year = {2024},
|
||||
url = {https://www.cato.org/regulation/spring-2024/criticism-right-repair-laws},
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
@article{decoupled_futures_2023,
|
||||
title = {So Rich, We Throw Gold Away – Right to Repair as Innovation Policy},
|
||||
author = {{decoupled futures}},
|
||||
year = {2023},
|
||||
url = {https://decoupledfutures.org/right-to-repair-as-innovation-policy/},
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
@article{springer_public_domain_2021,
|
||||
title = {Preserving the Public Domain: Limits on Overlapping Copyright and Trade Secret Protection of Software},
|
||||
author = {Lunney, Glynn S.},
|
||||
journal = {International Review of Intellectual Property and Competition Law},
|
||||
volume = {52},
|
||||
number = {10},
|
||||
year = {2021},
|
||||
url = {https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s40319-021-01120-3},
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
@article{oup_copy_right_to_repair_2023,
|
||||
title = {Achieving a (copy)right to repair for the EU’s green economy},
|
||||
author = {Cunningham, Ben},
|
||||
journal = {Journal of Intellectual Property Law \& Practice},
|
||||
volume = {18},
|
||||
number = {5},
|
||||
pages = {344--357},
|
||||
year = {2023},
|
||||
url = {https://academic.oup.com/jiplp/article/18/5/344/7147057},
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
Reference in New Issue
Block a user