Canada Passes New Right To Repair Rules With the Same Old Problem (theregister.com) 16
An anonymous reader quotes a report from The Register: Royal assent was granted to two right to repair bills last week that amend Canada's Copyright Act to allow the circumvention of technological protection measures (TPMs) if this is done for the purposes of "maintaining or repairing a product, including any related diagnosing," and "to make the program or a device in which it is embedded interoperable with any other computer program, device or component." The pair of bills allow device owners to not only repair their own stuff regardless of how a program is written to prevent such non-OEM measures, but said owners can also make their devices work with third-party components without needing to go through the manufacturer to do so.
Bills C-244 (repairability) and C-294 (interoperability) go a long way toward advancing the right to repair in Canada and, as iFixit pointed out, are the first federal laws anywhere that address how TPMs restrict the right to repair -- but they're hardly final. TPMs can take a number of forms, from simple administrative passwords to encryption, registration keys, or even the need for a physical object like a USB dongle to unlock access to copyrighted components of a device's software. Most commercially manufactured devices with proprietary embedded software include some form of TPM, and neither C-244 nor C-294 place any restrictions on the use of such measures by manufacturers. As iFixit points out, neither Copyright Act amendments do anything to expand access to the tools needed to circumvent TPMs. That puts Canadians in a similar position to US repair advocates, who in 2021 saw the US Copyright Office loosen DMCA restrictions to allow limited repairs of some devices despite TPMs, but without allowing access to the tools needed to do so. [...]
Canadian Repair Coalition co-founder Anthony Rosborough said last week that the new repairability and interoperability rules represent considerable progress, but like similar changes in the US, don't actually amount to much without the right to distribute tools. "New regulations are needed that require manufacturers and vendors to ensure that products and devices are designed with accessibility of repairs in mind," Rosborough wrote in an op-ed last week. "Businesses need to be able to carry out their work without the fear of infringing various intellectual property rights."
Bills C-244 (repairability) and C-294 (interoperability) go a long way toward advancing the right to repair in Canada and, as iFixit pointed out, are the first federal laws anywhere that address how TPMs restrict the right to repair -- but they're hardly final. TPMs can take a number of forms, from simple administrative passwords to encryption, registration keys, or even the need for a physical object like a USB dongle to unlock access to copyrighted components of a device's software. Most commercially manufactured devices with proprietary embedded software include some form of TPM, and neither C-244 nor C-294 place any restrictions on the use of such measures by manufacturers. As iFixit points out, neither Copyright Act amendments do anything to expand access to the tools needed to circumvent TPMs. That puts Canadians in a similar position to US repair advocates, who in 2021 saw the US Copyright Office loosen DMCA restrictions to allow limited repairs of some devices despite TPMs, but without allowing access to the tools needed to do so. [...]
Canadian Repair Coalition co-founder Anthony Rosborough said last week that the new repairability and interoperability rules represent considerable progress, but like similar changes in the US, don't actually amount to much without the right to distribute tools. "New regulations are needed that require manufacturers and vendors to ensure that products and devices are designed with accessibility of repairs in mind," Rosborough wrote in an op-ed last week. "Businesses need to be able to carry out their work without the fear of infringing various intellectual property rights."
A bit off-topic, but... (Score:2, Interesting)
About a couple of days ago I was watching a French channel where they invited a bunch of economists to talk about the usual topics, and one of the economists made a declaration that I rarely got to witness on TV. The modern economy is dying, and we need to let it die so that a new one can be born.
The post WW2 economy was built on consumption, with the yuppie generation peeking that mentality and starting a trend of senseless consumption. Gadgets that exist entirely to be sold and bought with the expectation
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2, Redundant)
The way I see it, it's going to peak at some point, with the clash between what customers want and what companies want being too great. Customers are getting less and less disposable income, so the companies are going to be forced to oblige.
It's going to be interesting seeing how all of this turns out.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
A bit of a shill, but the clothing that I have purchased from the likes of L.L.Bean and Orvis seem to be lasting pretty well (decades) for me.
Re: (Score:2)
Just be prepared for a smaller economy with fewer jobs though.
Repair has gotten less and less accessible not so much due to IP restrictions but shear complexity. A mechanic doesn't repair computer modules or batteries, they just toss and replace them.
Re: (Score:2)
shear complexity. A mechanic doesn't repair
People who want to act like dumb machines are going to get themselves replaced by said dumb machines. What sets a human apart (for the moment) from a machine is the ability to learn and apply concepts to new problems. If you refuse to use that ability, you're no better than the machine and far more expensive to maintain.
Not saying that people who act like this should be left to die or anything of the sort, but companies are profit seekers. In the US, companies don't even have net societal good as a goal.
Headline (Score:2)
Headline needs some punctuation.
Re: (Score:1)
Headline needs some punctuation.
Under this new legislation you'll be able to fix it yourself.
Businesses need to be able to carry out their work (Score:2)
but citizens don't and should be made to observe even more copyright extensions so upper class transnational corporations can plunder our culture for their profit
we rent, we lease, we subscribe, we don't own or control or own stuff, slaves don't have property rights
welcome to economic slavery and classism in action
just saying
Really get rid of anti-repair DRM (Score:5, Interesting)
Simple law: He who holds the keys is responsible for repair. The OEM is perfectly free to DRM the crap out of every system in the car or appliance, but in doing so, they commit to a lifetime (of the buyer) warranty. Don't want that? Hand the keys and key management over to the buyer.
Then, same deal for the diagnostics.
Re: (Score:2)
Better solution when dealing with MBAs: They can have TMPs or they can have copyright (and patent) protection, but not both. Then the market will decide. Encrypt that ebook? When someone cracks it - and someone will - it is in the public domain.
Re: (Score:2)
This is pretty much exactly how trade secrets vs copyright/patent works - and has worked for centuries
The current setup really does allow the worst offenders to have their cake and eat it too
Re: (Score:2)
Nah, we want all the perks of the rentseeker model and none of the obligations, thanks. Oh, and we'll be charging full price up front but you get zero First Sale doctrine (CAN equivalent assumed).
In related news ... (Score:3)