this post was submitted on 09 Feb 2024
937 points (99.2% liked)

Technology

59161 readers
1813 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.

Our Rules

  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related content.
  3. Be excellent to each another!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
L3s@lemmy.world
L3s@fry.gs
L4s@fry.gs
L4s@lemmy.world
enu@lemmy.world
937
Apple Is Lobbying Against Right to Repair Six Months After Supporting Right to Repair (www.404media.co)
submitted 9 months ago by Squire1039@lemm.ee to c/technology@lemmy.world
67 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

Key Points:

  • Apple opposed a right-to-repair bill in Oregon, despite previously supporting a weaker one in California.
  • The key difference is Oregon's restriction on "parts pairing," which locks repairs to Apple or authorized shops.
  • Apple argues this protects security and privacy, but critics say it creates a repair monopoly and e-waste.
  • Apple claims their system eases repair and maintain data security, while Google doesn't have such a requirement
  • Apple refused suggestions to revise the bill
  • Cybersecurity experts argue parts pairing is unnecessary for security and hinders sustainable repair.
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Sanctus@lemmy.world 0 points 9 months ago (3 children)

Apple is a hardware company. They get the biggest bang from people buying their hardware. They aren't going to make this easy cause it quite literally means giving the shareholders less profit, which is illegal in the US.

[–] snooggums@kbin.social 8 points 9 months ago (2 children)

They aren’t going to make this easy cause it quite literally means giving the shareholders less profit, which is illegal in the US.

Making less profit than previous periods of time or even operating at a loss is not illegal in the US. Many companies have periods where they lose money or sacrifice short term profits for long term growth.

Investors with enough control might boot the leadership out, but they can also do that for whatever reason including unrealistic expectations.

[–] dustyData@lemmy.world 6 points 9 months ago (1 children)

Hell, some of the highest valued tech companies right now have never turned a profit in their entire existence.

[–] pivot_root@lemmy.world 7 points 9 months ago

Suckling the teat of VC firms and investors works really well until the money dries up. After that, enshittification. Lots and lots of enshittification.

[–] shalafi@lemmy.world 2 points 9 months ago

FFS sake, our CEO told the Board, for a couple of years, "We're gonna lose money to invest in $X, $Y and $Z." They applauded him. Out loud. Literal clapping.

(We accidently made profits for those years. Oops. But that's beside the point.)

[–] the_post_of_tom_joad@sh.itjust.works 7 points 9 months ago (1 children)

shareholders less profit, which is illegal in the US.

This is a bit of a misnomer. It is illegal for a company to deliberately lower share value, not to make a business move that ends up lowering share value.

[–] pivot_root@lemmy.world 5 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago)

Specifically, it's the fiduciary duty of the directors to act in the best interests of the shareholders.

In other words, the consumer doesn't matter, the employees don't matter beyond what the law mandates, and the quality of the product or service doesn't matter until it starts impacting profits or stock values. The only time these actually need to be given any consideration is when it would serve to benefit shareholders, such as with hiring skilled talent or before the company has a reputation for quality products.

[–] shalafi@lemmy.world 5 points 9 months ago

giving the shareholders less profit, which is illegal in the US

Cite me chapter and verse. Point to the illegality that hurt you.

https://uscode.house.gov/

This idea is a childish notion of how corporations work. And it's a lie. I'm not saying there's nuance here, I'm saying it's a LIE. But bullshit scores internet points!

https://www.nytimes.com/roomfordebate/2015/04/16/what-are-corporations-obligations-to-shareholders/corporations-dont-have-to-maximize-profits