Colorado’s progressive right-to-repair laws, which empower consumers and independent shops to fix electronics, agricultural equipment, and even wheelchairs, are under threat. A new bill, SB26-090, backed by major tech companies like Cisco and IBM, seeks to exempt “critical infrastructure” technology from these repair rights. This move would effectively let manufacturers control who fixes essential devices, potentially stifling competition and raising costs.
The Fight Over Repair Rights
Since 2022, Colorado has been a leader in right-to-repair legislation, granting individuals access to tools, parts, and instructions for fixing their own equipment. This has spurred similar bills across the US, with eight states now having right-to-repair laws in place. Danny Katz, executive director of CoPIRG, emphasizes Colorado’s position: “We should be proud of leading the way.”
However, manufacturers resist these laws, as they profit from restricted repair monopolies. The current pushback comes in the form of SB26-090, which would exclude “information technology equipment used in critical infrastructure” from repair protections.
Vague Language, Broad Control
The bill’s language is deliberately vague. “Critical infrastructure” isn’t clearly defined, potentially encompassing a wide range of devices, from servers to ordinary computers depending on how manufacturers interpret it. Nathan Proctor of Pirg points out this ambiguity: “It sounds scary to lawmakers, but it just means the internet.”
This vagueness allows companies to decide which devices they provide repair access for, effectively undermining consumer rights. As Gay Gordon-Byrne of the Repair Association stated during a hearing, “The definition of critical infrastructure is completely inadequate.”
Cybersecurity as a Justification
Companies like IBM cite cybersecurity concerns, arguing that open repair access could create vulnerabilities. However, advocates counter that restricting repairability increases risks. If critical systems fail, delays for manufacturer approval can be catastrophic. Kyle Wiens of iFixit argues that “obscurity is not security,” and that the bill is driven by financial interests.
What This Means
Colorado’s bill is a test case. If passed, it could set a precedent for manufacturers to roll back repair rights nationwide. The lobbying power of tech giants is clear, but advocates remain defiant. As Proctor states, “We cannot stop until this problem is addressed.”
The fight over right-to-repair is escalating, with manufacturers actively seeking to control the flow of repairs and maintain their profits. The outcome in Colorado will likely influence the future of repair legislation across the US.
