\n<\/p>\n
The Oregon House this week passed a right to repair bill by nearly a 3-to-1 margin at 42 votes to 13. If signed into law, the northwestern state wouldn\u2019t be the first the union to pass a right to repair bill (more like the fourth), but the legislation contains aggressive language that goes beyond those on the books. As a result, manufacturers are split.<\/p>\n
Google gave the bill a full-throated endorsement<\/a>, back in January. An executive for the software giant called Oregon\u2019s \u201ca compelling model for other states to follow,\u201d in an open letter.<\/p>\n Apple, which had previously penned an open letter in support of California\u2019s legislation, has been less enthusiastic. It\u2019s a stark contrast, particularly the similarities between the bills. In fact, Oregon based much of their legislation on the one penned by their neighbor to the south. The company insists that \u2013 as with the California law \u2013 it\u2019s mostly<\/em> in favor with Oregon\u2019s approach.<\/p>\n \u201cApple agrees with the vast majority of Senate Bill 1596,\u201d John Perry, Apple senior manager, Secure System Design, said in a testimony to state lawmakers last month. \u201cI have met with Senator [Janeen] Sollman several times and appreciate her willingness to engage in an open dialogue. Senate Bill 1596 is a step forward in making sure that the people of Oregon, myself included, can get their devices repaired easily and cost effectively.\u201d<\/p>\n Apple\u2019s big sticking point with the bill comes down to what is known as \u201cparts pairing.\u201d The practice requires the use of proprietary components in order for the repaired device to function as intended. Perry cited biometrics as a particular source of concern, noting,<\/p>\n Under SB 1596\u2019s current parts pairing wording, Apple could be required to allow third-party biometric sensors to work in our devices without any form of authentication, which could lead to unauthorized access to an individual\u2019s personal data.This would be an incredible disservice to consumers not just in Oregon, but worldwide, as we do not have the ability to restrict such provisions regionally.<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n The practice has, however, long been a cause of concern among repair advocates. PIRG (Public Interest Research Group) has petitioned the FTC for a ban of what it calls \u201cone of the most pernicious obstacles to right to repair.\u201d<\/p>\n\n