03/05/2026
WARNING: Incoming Rant.
The Right to Repair movement is one of the most important policy discussions affecting equipment owners today, yet many people still misunderstand what it’s actually about.
Modern Right to Repair efforts largely began in the automotive industry in the late 1990s and early 2000s. Independent repair shops and consumer groups pushed back against manufacturers restricting access to diagnostic tools, software, and service information. The basic principle was simple: if you own a vehicle or piece of equipment, you should have the freedom to choose where and how it is repaired.
This isn’t just about do-it-yourself repairs. It’s about maintaining consumer choice and fair competition. Independent repair businesses must have access to the same service information, software, and parts that manufacturers provide to their dealerships. Without that access, equipment owners are effectively locked into a single repair channel.
A major milestone came with the Massachusetts automotive Right to Repair law, which required manufacturers to make service information available to independent repair shops. That law eventually helped establish a national framework where automakers agreed to provide independent repair access to the same service information used by dealerships.
However, a gray area is emerging that risks complicating the discussion: emissions systems and regulatory compliance. Some recent legislation, including proposals related to agricultural equipment, has raised questions about whether Right to Repair should extend to modifying or removing emissions systems.
This risks pulling the conversation off course.
Right to Repair was never intended to be a pathway for bypassing environmental regulations. The core idea is repair access and ownership rights, not altering regulated systems. If the movement becomes framed around emissions removal, it risks dividing supporters and undermining the broader goal.
The real focus should remain clear:
Owners should have the right to repair the equipment they purchase
Independent shops should have access to the tools and information needed to perform those repairs
Consumers should have the freedom to choose where their equipment is serviced
The stakes are only increasing as equipment becomes more software-driven.
The next generation of vehicles and machinery—especially electrified platforms—relies heavily on proprietary software for diagnostics, calibration, firmware updates, and component replacement. If independent shops are locked out of these systems, they may also be locked out of servicing electrified equipment entirely.
That could concentrate repair capability within a small number of manufacturer-approved channels. For equipment owners, that means:
Higher repair costs
Longer wait times for service
Fewer repair options
Equipment being scrapped prematurely when repair isn’t available
And this problem isn’t limited to vehicles.
The same issues are already emerging in consumer electronics, appliances, and other technology products. Many modern devices—from smartphones and laptops to refrigerators and washing machines—use proprietary software, paired components, and restricted parts distribution.
Without meaningful repair access, products increasingly become disposable rather than repairable, which affects both small repair businesses and long-term sustainability.
A Real-World Example
We are already seeing what happens when manufacturer support disappears.
When Fisker Inc. filed for bankruptcy in 2024, thousands of owners were left with vehicles that rely heavily on proprietary software systems. With the manufacturer gone, many owners suddenly faced the possibility that their vehicles might not be serviceable in the long term.
Historically, independent repair shops filled that gap. Even after manufacturers stopped supporting older models, the aftermarket could keep equipment running through documentation, parts networks, and diagnostic tools.
But if those systems are locked behind proprietary software with no documentation, that safety net disappears. When software moves into legacy status without support or documentation, technicians have no way to build workarounds or maintain those systems.
In those cases, otherwise functional equipment can end up being scrapped simply because it can’t be repaired.
In my opinion , repairability isn’t just a policy issue—it’s part of the philosophy behind what we do. Equipment owners deserve the ability to maintain the machines they rely on, and independent repair shops play an important role in keeping that ecosystem healthy.
Right to Repair isn’t about avoiding regulations or changing how products are designed. It’s about preserving ownership, competition, and the ability to keep equipment working long after it leaves the factory.
Ownership should mean the ability to maintain and repair what you’ve purchased—not just until the manufacturer decides to support it.
Sources
Federal Trade Commission – Nixing the Fix: An FTC Report to Congress on Repair Restrictions (2021)
The Repair Association – Right to Repair policy and legislation overview
Massachusetts Motor Vehicle Owners’ Right to Repair Act (2012)
Industry reporting on the bankruptcy of Fisker Inc. and the challenges facing vehicle owners afterward
Send a message to learn more
