Right now it’s implied the manufacturer has the right of refusal.
Right now they are explicitly forbidden from voiding a warranty due to third party parts or repairs. And they already have every right to refuse warranty service due to defective third party parts or repairs.
I'm sure someone else will be along in good time to deal with this nonsense.
I wouldn't call it nonsense. It's not clear the patent system is doing society any good (to me anyway), and it is clear it is causing harm. From what I've seen, no patents at all would be better than what we have now.
Because I’m not talking about certified auto shops. I’m talking about uncertified ones
So am I. There is no need to be certified to repair something.
The auto industry has AST. Go to a non-ast shop, there aren’t many, and it’s on you fir what happens.
No, it isn't. I can do work on my in-warranty car myself, and unless the manufacturer can demonstrate that the work that I did is what caused the problem, they are prohibited by federal law from voiding my warranty.
So if you bring your 6 month old Chevy to a third party shop that isn’t certified to fix a defect, say, bad air bag censor, and it causes other problems how does Chevy have any out on further, free, repair?
Again, they are free to deny warranty claims due to faulty third party or personal repairs. They are NOT free to deny warranty claims unrelated to those repairs.
If the principles are beneficial to the company, fine. And I don't just mean in terms of money; maybe a company would give up some money in order to do something in a more ethical manner, or some such. I am skeptical that the principle of controlling everything no matter the cost is beneficial to Nintendo, their customers, society, or anyone else. If you can make the case that hamstringing free marketing in order to maintain control for the sake of control (or if you can come up with some other reason they would want to do this) by all means have at it. I also acknowledge the possibility they have motivations or influences that none of us will ever know that would make this a perfectly reasonable decision. But that doesn't seem like the most likely explanation to me.
It takes skilled professionals to correctly seal a phone.
Manufacturers should never be on the line for water damage when a non-certified tech has opened the phone.
Manufacturers are already free to deny warranty claims for this reason. Nothing about that would change with right to repair.
To think that there won’t be a rush of botched repairs attempted when the unskilled, untrained, masses begin tinkering.
Just look at the car market now. Third party repair shops literally everywhere, as well as people working on their own cars. Are car makers awash in bogus warranty claims? No, of course not. There will be a few at the margins, but that is no reason to screw over millions of consumers like you want to do.
If you bring your in warranty item to a non-licensed shop or fix it yourself it should absolutely positively undeniably set in law remove the manufacturers’ warranty requirements
Absolutely not. This has been fought already, and the Magnusson-Moss Warranty Act prohibits that behavior.
And JD, LG, and Apple shouldn’t be forced to fix it for free after you screw up the job.
They aren't. The warranty covers defects in workmanship or materials, and nothing else. If you punch a hole in your oil pan trying to do your own oil change, the manufacturer has no obligation to fix what you broke. If, on the other hand, you bring in your car for warranty work and it has an aftermarket oil filter on it, they cannot and should not be able to deny your warranty.
Nintendo's customers care a great deal about how much attention the publicity event gets, and are closely watching the view counters* and making decisions based on that information
"The counters are all that matters" In other words, it doesn't matter how many people actually see the marketing material, or what they think of it, or word of mouth advertising. All that matters is visitor counts on the web site.
That is what you're going to defend as "correct"?
* which I doubt are even made public, which completely invalidates this whole claim
Re: Re: Isn't that hard at all, or beating a dead horse
The trouble is, you only need to fill your petrol car every week or three under normal usages, not every day...so those per car numbers are much less friendly.
If we can figure out how to let most people charge at home (or at least have the option of charging at home or at work), it won't matter so much. That's not an easy job though.
While true, that's a slightly different issue. It would be great if Apple made products easy to repair and upgrade, but at minimum they should not be stepping in to prevent others from doing it - even if it remains difficult.
Re: Re: Re: Re: Electromobility isn't that easy after all.
If a family just needs their car for a family excursion intercity once a year...then the switch isn't happening.
Except that most people in a position to consider an electric car have multiple vehicles. The BEV need not be able to do everything that all of their current cars do, it just needs to be able to replace one of them.
As for replacing one car with an EV...that's assuming a large entry-level cost is paid
People do buy new cars, and they are expensive regardless.
But yea, the switch won't be a major issue...for about 10-20% of the citizenry.
I think you're being overly pessimistic, but ranges are increasing and more models are coming out all the time, including cheaper ones. My main concerns are whether there will be a viable used market for BEVs given battery degradation, and what about people who can't charge at home? If those can be solved, we'll be fine.
On the post: Shake Shack Manager Sues NYPD Officers, Union Reps For Falsely Claiming His Business Sold Cops Poisoned Shakes
Re:
Did they? Because if not, then the example is meaningless.
On the post: Buried Apple Privacy Scandal Undermines Its Attacks On Right To Repair Legislation
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: RTR and Warranty
Right now they are explicitly forbidden from voiding a warranty due to third party parts or repairs. And they already have every right to refuse warranty service due to defective third party parts or repairs.
On the post: Think Tech Companies Are Too Monopolistic? Then Stop Giving Them Patent Monopolies
Re:
I wouldn't call it nonsense. It's not clear the patent system is doing society any good (to me anyway), and it is clear it is causing harm. From what I've seen, no patents at all would be better than what we have now.
On the post: Most Used Electric Car Buyers Have No Way To Confirm Vehicle Battery Health
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Typical lying tree hugge
I think you should go back and re-read my comments. I never accused you of lying.
On the post: Buried Apple Privacy Scandal Undermines Its Attacks On Right To Repair Legislation
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: RTR and Warranty
So am I. There is no need to be certified to repair something.
No, it isn't. I can do work on my in-warranty car myself, and unless the manufacturer can demonstrate that the work that I did is what caused the problem, they are prohibited by federal law from voiding my warranty.
https://www.ncconsumer.org/news-articles-eg/making-the-most-of-your-auto-warranty.html
Again, they are free to deny warranty claims due to faulty third party or personal repairs. They are NOT free to deny warranty claims unrelated to those repairs.
On the post: Nintendo Hates You And The Company Most Certainly Does Not Want You To Co-Stream 'Nintendo Direct'
Re: Re: Re: Okay, they hate fans. So?
If the principles are beneficial to the company, fine. And I don't just mean in terms of money; maybe a company would give up some money in order to do something in a more ethical manner, or some such. I am skeptical that the principle of controlling everything no matter the cost is beneficial to Nintendo, their customers, society, or anyone else. If you can make the case that hamstringing free marketing in order to maintain control for the sake of control (or if you can come up with some other reason they would want to do this) by all means have at it. I also acknowledge the possibility they have motivations or influences that none of us will ever know that would make this a perfectly reasonable decision. But that doesn't seem like the most likely explanation to me.
On the post: Nintendo Hates You And The Company Most Certainly Does Not Want You To Co-Stream 'Nintendo Direct'
Re: Okay, they hate fans. So?
The argument is not that they are not or shouldn't be allowed to do it, just that it's dumb.
On the post: Buried Apple Privacy Scandal Undermines Its Attacks On Right To Repair Legislation
Re: Re: Re: RTR and Warranty
Manufacturers are already free to deny warranty claims for this reason. Nothing about that would change with right to repair.
Just look at the car market now. Third party repair shops literally everywhere, as well as people working on their own cars. Are car makers awash in bogus warranty claims? No, of course not. There will be a few at the margins, but that is no reason to screw over millions of consumers like you want to do.
On the post: Nintendo Hates You And The Company Most Certainly Does Not Want You To Co-Stream 'Nintendo Direct'
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
How does things being tight make it a good idea to shoot yourself in the foot?
On the post: Buried Apple Privacy Scandal Undermines Its Attacks On Right To Repair Legislation
Re: RTR and Warranty
Absolutely not. This has been fought already, and the Magnusson-Moss Warranty Act prohibits that behavior.
They aren't. The warranty covers defects in workmanship or materials, and nothing else. If you punch a hole in your oil pan trying to do your own oil change, the manufacturer has no obligation to fix what you broke. If, on the other hand, you bring in your car for warranty work and it has an aftermarket oil filter on it, they cannot and should not be able to deny your warranty.
On the post: Nintendo Hates You And The Company Most Certainly Does Not Want You To Co-Stream 'Nintendo Direct'
Re: Re: Re: Re:
(it's tp btw)
He claimed that:
That is what you're going to defend as "correct"?
* which I doubt are even made public, which completely invalidates this whole claim
On the post: Most Used Electric Car Buyers Have No Way To Confirm Vehicle Battery Health
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Typical lying tree hugger
Were you on something when you wrote that? I have no idea what you're trying to say.
On the post: Nintendo Hates You And The Company Most Certainly Does Not Want You To Co-Stream 'Nintendo Direct'
Re: Re:
Ahhhh, the stupid, it burns!
On the post: Most Used Electric Car Buyers Have No Way To Confirm Vehicle Battery Health
Re: Re: Isn't that hard at all, or beating a dead horse
If we can figure out how to let most people charge at home (or at least have the option of charging at home or at work), it won't matter so much. That's not an easy job though.
On the post: Buried Apple Privacy Scandal Undermines Its Attacks On Right To Repair Legislation
Re: Re: Re: Rapidly becoming academic
While true, that's a slightly different issue. It would be great if Apple made products easy to repair and upgrade, but at minimum they should not be stepping in to prevent others from doing it - even if it remains difficult.
On the post: Will Congress' Big New Push On Antitrust Actually Solve Any Competition Issues?
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: 'Monopolies are bad! .. for thes
Are you the AC I was replying to, or are you just sliding into the comment thread randomly?
On the post: Most Used Electric Car Buyers Have No Way To Confirm Vehicle Battery Health
Re: Re: Re: Re: Electromobility isn't that easy after all.
Except that most people in a position to consider an electric car have multiple vehicles. The BEV need not be able to do everything that all of their current cars do, it just needs to be able to replace one of them.
People do buy new cars, and they are expensive regardless.
I think you're being overly pessimistic, but ranges are increasing and more models are coming out all the time, including cheaper ones. My main concerns are whether there will be a viable used market for BEVs given battery degradation, and what about people who can't charge at home? If those can be solved, we'll be fine.
On the post: Will Congress' Big New Push On Antitrust Actually Solve Any Competition Issues?
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: 'Monopolies are bad! .. for these specif
You sure are going to a lot of trouble to defend Comcast for someone who doesn't have time to care about his cable bill.
On the post: Most Used Electric Car Buyers Have No Way To Confirm Vehicle Battery Health
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Isn't that hard at all, or beating a dea
Why? Do you go on long trips in both of your cars at the same time?
Because they work great for what most people do with at least one of their cars.
On the post: Most Used Electric Car Buyers Have No Way To Confirm Vehicle Battery Health
Re: Re: Re: Re: Isn't that hard at all, or beating a dead horse
If you have only one vehicle and do a lot of road trips, a BEV is not for you. But I doubt that is a lot of people.
Next >>