Disincentivizing Innovation, and Privacy

drafting/outline.typ

@@ -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