• dangil@alien.topB
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    That’s just the beginning.

    What we need is the right to own our devices. No strings attached

    And the means to keep they operating without depending on the maker.

    • thunderplacefires@alien.topB
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Ok hear me out. This is all because the Chinese do not care about US Copyright laws.

      Corporations are terrified of releasing specs and instructions to build products with a “pay us if you use our trademarked designs” clause. Chinese copycat companies will not obey. You, the consumer, will have a hard time telling the real deal from the fake (cheaply made) knockoff.

      The company that designed the product will not get paid and is at risk of their name being tarnished by bad / fake products. This is a lose-lose for a lot of companies, especially tech companies.

      I just read a whole other news article and comments about people complaining about the lack of quality of Intel chips. This is a product the company has control over. Fake products flooding the market isn’t good for our safety (especially when it comes to cars) or the US economy.

      I agree we shouldn’t be beholden to subscription fees and other faulty “old tech” issues but until a US startup pops who is willing to play nice with corporations’ legal trademarks we aren’t going to see the right to repair movement go anywhere.

      • ReapingKing@alien.topB
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        This is easy. Usually you fix problems like that through trade restrictions or tariffs. Country won’t do business on your terms? Make it cheaper to stay in line than not.

    • hishnash@alien.topB
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      so you saying the maker must open source all the software and IP and internal deisnges of every chip not to mention provide the tooling and rigs they used to make them for free to any factory that wants to make rip offs?

      • MilesSand@alien.topB
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        No, I’m pretty sure what they said is the thing in their post, not the different thing in yours

      • strshp_enterprise@alien.topB
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        Microsoft and Apple are destroying innovation, and have so for decades. It’s what monopolies and oligopolies do. We need a phone with an open-source publicly funded platform that doesn’t gatekeep development.

        • hishnash@alien.topB
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          that is very different form forcing the existing platforms to open source… publicly funding the development of a open platform is rather different to writing ga law that just removes all the existing IP from a privately funded company.