Referred to the House Committee on Energy and Commerce.
Requires original equipment manufacturers (OEMs) of digital electronic equipment to provide documentation, diagnostic tools, parts, and updates to independent repair providers and owners on fair and reasonable terms.
Prohibits parts pairing or other mechanisms that prevent or degrade replacement parts or limit who may repair devices.
Enforcement is through the Federal Trade Commission, with parallel state attorney general authority; certain sectors are exempted (motor vehicles, medical devices, off-road vehicles, and emergency safety communications).
Narrow regulatory change with moderate controversy; success likely depends on bipartisan dealmaking and countering industry resistance.
Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill sets out a clear substantive regime imposing obligations on OEMs, defines key terms, enumerates prohibited practices, and delegates enforcement to the FTC with an ancillary role for State attorneys general. It includes several clauses anticipating common boundary issues (trade secrets, industry exclusions, liability limits).
Liberals emphasize environmental and consumer benefits
Liberals emphasize environmental and consumer benefits
Generally supportive as a strong right-to-repair measure that increases consumer choice and reduces electronic waste.
Sees benefits for independent repair shops, affordability, and product longevity.
Will worry about the bill's liability limitations and whether the trade-secret exception is too broad in practice.
Cautiously favorable: recognizes consumer benefits and competition gains but emphasizes careful implementation.
Wants clear regulatory definitions of 'fair and reasonable' and robust FTC rulemaking to avoid unintended consequences.
Concerned about safety, privacy, and reasonable protection for legitimate trade secrets.
Likely opposed as an overreach that forces disclosure of proprietary information and imposes regulatory burdens on manufacturers.
Views compelled sharing of diagnostics and parts as a threat to intellectual property and cybersecurity.
May welcome limits on OEM liability but generally prefers market-driven solutions and stronger trade-secret protections or narrower scope.
Reached or meaningfully advanced
Reached or meaningfully advanced
Still ahead
Still ahead
Still ahead
Narrow regulatory change with moderate controversy; success likely depends on bipartisan dealmaking and countering industry resistance.
The bill has not accumulated any surfaced votes yet.
Liberals emphasize environmental and consumer benefits
Narrow regulatory change with moderate controversy; success likely depends on bipartisan dealmaking and countering industry resistance.
Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill sets out a clear substantive regime imposing obligations on OEMs, defines key terms, enumerates prohibited practices, and delegates enforcement to the FTC with an anc…
Go beyond the headline summary with full stakeholder mapping, legislative design analysis, passage barriers, and lens-by-lens tradeoff breakdowns.