kept pace with the evolving consumer goods repair market. Even when a warranty does not explicitly require that repairs be performed by the original equipment manufacturer (OEM) using OEM parts, many manufacturers restrict independent repair and repair by consumers through:
- Product designs that complicate or prevent repair;
- Unavailability of parts and repair information;
- Designs that make independent repairs less safe;
- Policies or statements that steer consumers to manufacturer repair networks;
- Application of patent rights and enforcement of trademarks;
- Disparagement of non-OEM parts and independent repair;
- Software locks and firmware updates; or
- End User License Agreements.
Manufacturers explain that these repair restrictions often arise from their desire to protect intellectual property rights and prevent injuries and other negative consequences resulting from improper repairs.
The report is divided into nine sections. The first describes Section 102(c) of the MMWA and the Commission’s record of enforcing this provision. Section Two provides an analysis of the competition issues related to repair markets. Section Three describes staff’s information gathering efforts, including a description of the Workshop and comments. Section Four catalogues the types of repair restrictions employed by manufacturers. Section Five describes the explanations manufacturers offer for repair restrictions. Section Six examines the arguments of repair advocates.
The final sections of this report propose ways to expand consumers’ repair and maintenance options. Section Seven describes several approaches that could increase consumers’ choice in repair markets. Section Eight focuses on challenging issues that would need to be considered by industry, regulators, and legislators that attempt to expand consumers’ repair choices.
Finally, in Section Nine, we conclude by explaining that, based on the record before us, it is clear that repair restrictions have diluted the effectiveness of Section 102(c) and steered consumers into manufacturers’ repair networks or to replace products before the end of their useful lives. Based on a review of comments submitted and materials presented during the Workshop, there is scant evidence to support manufacturers’ justifications for repair restrictions.[1] Moreover, the specific changes that repair advocates seek to address manufacturer repair restrictions (e.g., access to information, manuals, spare parts, and tools) are well supported by comments submitted for the record and testimony provided at the Workshop. While the car manufacturing industry has taken important steps to expand consumer choice, other industries that impose restrictions on repairs have not followed suit. The Commission will consider reinvigorated regulatory and law enforcement options, as well as consumer education. In addition to the FTC’s pursuit of efforts under its authority, the Commission stands ready to work
- ↑ Commissioner Wilson and Commissioner Phillips note that the report excludes from the scope of its coverage an analysis of manufacturers’ intellectual property rights, which may provide legitimate justification for some repair restrictions.
6
