HR-7404-119
Referred to the House Committee on Energy and Commerce.
Sponsored by Joseph Morelle (D-NY)
What it does
This bill would require manufacturers of digital electronic equipment to provide owners and independent repair shops with access to documentation, parts, tools, and diagnostic information needed to repair their products, on fair and reasonable terms. It would prohibit manufacturers from using software-based "parts pairing" or other mechanisms to block third-party repairs, degrade device performance after independent repair, or display false warnings about non-manufacturer parts. The Federal Trade Commission would enforce the law, and state attorneys general could bring civil actions as well. The bill explicitly excludes motor vehicles, medical devices, aircraft, and emergency communications equipment.
Who benefits
Consumers who own digital electronics (smartphones, laptops, appliances, farm equipment, etc.) and want cheaper or more convenient repair options. Independent repair shops and technicians who currently cannot access manufacturer tools or parts. Small electronics repair businesses that compete with manufacturer-authorized service networks. Low-income consumers who rely on affordable third-party repairs to extend device life. Rural residents with limited access to authorized service centers. Environmental advocates who argue longer device lifespans reduce electronic waste. Third-party parts manufacturers and suppliers who would gain a larger market.
Who is hurt
Original equipment manufacturers (e.g., Apple, Samsung, John Deere) who currently profit from authorized repair networks and parts sales. Authorized repair providers whose competitive advantage over independent shops would be reduced. Manufacturers may argue they bear increased liability exposure for safety or data issues arising from independent repairs, even with the bill's liability shield. Cybersecurity researchers and manufacturers who argue that mandatory disclosure of security tools and documentation could create new attack surfaces. Consumers who experience device failures or data breaches from poorly performed independent repairs, though the bill limits manufacturer liability in those cases.
Supporters argue
Supporters argue that manufacturers have systematically locked consumers out of repairing products they own, forcing them into expensive authorized service channels or premature device replacement. They contend that parts pairing — software that disables or degrades a device when a non-OEM part is installed — serves no legitimate technical purpose and functions purely to suppress competition. They point to FTC findings (2021 "Nixing the Fix" report) that repair restrictions cost consumers billions annually and disproportionately harm low-income households and rural communities with limited access to authorized service centers.
Opponents argue
Opponents argue that requiring manufacturers to disclose proprietary diagnostic tools, security codes, and schematics to any independent provider creates serious cybersecurity and safety risks, particularly for devices that handle sensitive personal data. They contend that parts pairing serves legitimate functions — such as ensuring battery safety and camera calibration — and that blanket prohibitions could expose consumers to harm from substandard third-party components. They further argue that mandatory sharing of technical documentation on "fair and reasonable" terms, a standard the FTC would define, constitutes a taking of intellectual property and raises nondelegation concerns under the post-Loper Bright framework.
Constitutional context
Congress's authority to regulate manufacturer conduct in interstate commerce rests on the Commerce Clause (Art. I, §8, cl. 3), which Wickard v. Filburn (1942) broadly construed to cover economic activity with aggregate effects on interstate markets. The bill delegates rulemaking authority to the FTC to define implementing regulations; under Loper Bright v. Raimondo (2024), courts would independently review whether the FTC's rules stay within the statutory authority Congress granted, rather than deferring to the agency's interpretation.
Checks and balances
The FTC gains new enforcement and rulemaking authority under this bill; checks include judicial review of FTC rules under the post-Loper Bright independent-judgment standard, concurrent state attorney general enforcement, and the bill's explicit trade secret carve-out limiting the scope of mandatory disclosure.
Historical precedent
Several states — including New York (Digital Fair Repair Act, 2022) and Colorado — have enacted right-to-repair laws for consumer electronics, and the EU adopted a right-to-repair directive in 2024, though no prior federal law has imposed these requirements on digital electronics manufacturers broadly.