Re: Right to Repair (draft report by Productivity Commission)

On Fri, 2021-06-11 at 11:14 +1000, Info wrote:
> I am thinking about the following. Three submissions. Updates.
> Replaceability. Price disclosure.
> 
> * Manufacturers should state in the sales lit/specs exactly how long
> the customer will get updates 
> for BIOS/firmware/security.

Agree

> * If updates are not available for a reasonable time, say 10 years,
> the manufacturer should 
> facilitate an alternative. The alternative might be support for open
> source software.

Agree, i tried to argue a similar thing in my original submission,
especially in relation to software security, where the reasonable time
period should be the products physical life. It should be similar to
airbags, where manufacturers are responsible for the outcomes of
defective products, although probably not life threatening, bad
firmware for consumer devices can infringe on the owners fundamental
human rights.

> * All BIOS/firmware loaders should be open source to allow porting to
> any operating system.

I dont think they can/would mandate open source directly, but they can
recommend rules that make open source adoption the most logical way
forward.

In the report they also consider the view from "Industry" that their
are benefits to locking things down, which they dont necessarily find
to be the case.

> * The specs for all USB devices should include the USB ID.

This is the sort of outcomes i assume they want from adding fair use to
the copyright act; should be covered by the "assist repairers in
accessing repair information".


There is a fair bit to read in the initial report, it provides a lot of
context with existing consumer protection laws, plenty of digging to
do.


Glenn

_______________________________________________
linux-aus mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.linux.org.au/mailman/listinfo/linux-aus

To unsubscribe from this list, send a blank email to
linux-aus-unsubscribe-cunTk1MwBs8iFSDQTTA3OBCuuivNXqWP@public.gmane.org