It’s not as simple as it seems.
If nothing else, other industries wrestling with right-to-repair should probably assume that they can model themselves after the automotive industry.
There are other industries that have long traditions of repairability, such as home appliances, gas powered garden equipment, and so forth. I've repaired most of the appliances in my house at some point. I've found replacement parts to be readily available and not exorbitant.
Same goes for John Deere.
Motorcycles are probably different for the time being. Not expecting people to really want self driving motorcycles.
Like I said, I don't really know where to draw the line. I hate that my multi-colored LED lights have an app that talks to a server. I don't run that app, but my iPhone tells me I need up update the lights and to do so I need to get a 3rd party app. Is that another thing where regulation should require being able to update without an account or is the fact that they had to spend time making the update mean I need some kind of relationship with them?
That sounds like an argument against self driving cars.
I just bought a new Kitchenaid mixer (albeit a commercial one) and it included instructions on how to tear it down for both maintenance and cleaning.
From kuerig’s perspective it’s a better decision to build a machine that cannot be modified, as they may be at blame and will have to spend millions on lawyer fees proving McDonald’s modified and misused their product.
- The injury due to the coffee burn was due entirely to the elevated temperature.
- The machine would not have served at the scalding temperature had McDonald's not made the modification.
- The modification was specifically made to raise the temperature to a level that turned out to be unsafe.
The question of whether a modification was made would almost certainly come out in court because a McDonald's employee would be unlikely to perjure themselves over it.
Therefore, all the liability would be on McDonald's.
Though I do see your point about legal costs being incurred even if the case of Kuering being completely innocent. It seems that having a culture instilled with a nebulous concept of "liability" encourages people to limit other's ability to take their own risks.
(Edit: formatting)
If there's a gray line it'll come down to some third party judging it but I don't think this is any different from say, verifying an insurance claim.
