"Not long ago, a shade-tree mechanic with average skills could fix whatever was wrong with your car. These days, cars are far more advanced. On-board computers allow cars to diagnose themselves for most common problems and make engines run more efficiently while squeezing out more power than ever before."
- Not long ago, computers weren't integrated into every single device we use on a daily basis. But that isn't really the important part. The important part is that people built all of the super complex systems you're referencing. Are you saying that the shade tree mechanic is incapable of learning how a computer works for some reason? Project much Mr. Probably Over 60? You do know that literal children learn how to use programs like Blender just so that they can step up their meme game right? Oh wait, no you don't because you're living in the 1990s before the average citizen had a grasp on the transformative technologies in our pockets.
"All this advanced technology has put the shade-tree mechanic pretty much out of business. Working on a car today requires advanced training and technical ability. The technology inside and outside the car consists of patented software, chip designs and proprietary systems. But the benefit to consumers has been enormous. These inventions are covered by patents to encourage and reward innovation."
- So, what you're saying is that the shade tree mechanic, the small business owner or guy doing cheaper than the dealer repairs on the side, isn't important in our communities? You're saying that if I am the shade tree mechanic then I shouldn't be able to work on my own car? You're saying that because there's a chip in my dog that I should be paying a licensed feces disposal technician to clean up my yard? You're saying that in my desktop computer, which is all chips and patented software and proprietary systems, I shouldn't be trusted to swap my mechanical hard-drive with a solid-state? You know what hurts consumers? Monopolies. That's what you're supporting.
"American innovation is dependent on the protection of intellectual property. It encourages innovation by discouraging theft. But there are those who are philosophically opposed to intellectual property protection. Left-leaning public interest law firms and activist groups led by U.S. PIRG, an association of public-interest law firms, have been trying for years to undermine intellectual-property protection through “right to repair” campaigns in state legislatures. During this legislative session they are pushing their anti-innovation agenda in the guise of a “right to repair” advanced medical devices."
- It's not though. Read literally anything about American dominance around 'innovation' and you'll see why the systems you're defending are successful. Offshoring, a broken financial system, reserve currency, fractional reserve lending, stock manipulation, regulatory capture, predatory acquisitions, and abusive hiring practices. That's how corporations work and it's also how your business (lobbying) works, so no wonder you're not bringing it up. The kind of innovation that really matters comes from the shade tree mechanic. Why would the Apple or Siemens executive care about how frequently a screw head strips out in a specific model? They only care about next quarter financials. Want to know who cares about stripped screws? The shade tree mechanic. Want to know who historically has designed and patented the solutions to these problems that are then licensed or acquired by major corporations? The shade tree mechanics.
"In my state, Texas, Rep. Thresa Meza has introduced a bill this session titled the Medical Device Right to Repair Act. This bill would require manufacturers of highly advanced medical devices like MRI machines, CT scanners and PE-scan systems to disclose confidential and patented design and service information."
- So you're fear mongering then.
"A “right to repair” sounds reasonable, but forcing manufacturers to disclose their proprietary technologies would erode the incentive for innovation and endanger patients. Today the Food and Drug Administration regulates and monitors medical-device safety. The FDA demands that original equipment manufacturers follow its guidelines regarding software updates, patches and more-comprehensive repair jobs. The uncertified third-party service providers who would conduct repairs if these bills pass aren’t regulated by the FDA. There’s no assurance they will follow FDA standards."
- That's not what the bill says and, since you obviously read it before making the reference (I hope), you know that.
"Forcing disclosure of these advanced medical technologies and opening them up to uncertified technicians may also represent a cybersecurity threat. You may be troubled by the idea that voting machines can be hacked, but what about opening up MRI machines and PET scanners? Patients could be endangered by sabotaged medical devices, but they might also suffer from malfunctions that cause inaccurate test results and thus unidentified medical problems. Such concerns also include direct theft of American innovation by bad actors seeking advanced U.S. technology, such as China."
- More fear-mongering along with the funniest thing I've ever heard as an appeal to conservatives. Voting machines? Buddy, you know that most conservatives WANT INSIGHT for the voting machines right? You know that right? Right? Most conservatives would trust that shade tree mechanic working on equipment more than the dealer because they have a path to address grievances that way instead of being met with a million dollar legal team and a decade long fight over a defect in a product. If the shade tree mechanics had been servicing the voting machines (without abusive NDAs of course) maybe they could have pointed out the modicum of security flaws that exist in them.
"'Right to repair' sounds sympathetic but it’s a wolf in sheep’s clothing. It’s not being pushed by small repair businesses but by ideological public-interest law firms and activists as an attack on intellectual property."
- I am a small repair business and I am pushing it. Every small repair business I know is pushing it in every state. The only reason anyone else is involved is because the result would benefit consumers (what a horrible evil goal for law firms to pursue) and because of people like you, LOBBYISTS.
"State legislators in Texas and elsewhere would be making a terrible mistake by falling for this bait and switch, risking the health of patients and opening up the medical device industry to dangerous and unfair vulnerabilities."
"Mr. Giovanetti is president of the Institute for Policy Innovation."
- Proof positive of your status as a lobbyist.