Right-to-repairA legislative and consumer movement that asserts the legal right to repair and modify equipment and devices that people own, including access to repair documentation, spare parts, and the removal of software-based restrictions that prevent independent repair. legislation has been introduced in all 50 US states[s]. Only seven have passed comprehensive electronics repair laws. The math reveals a brutal reality: corporate repair monopoly tactics have killed or stalled dozens of state-level bills that would have given Americans the simple right to fix what they own. John Deere and Apple, two companies that could not be more different in their products, have deployed remarkably similar playbooks to maintain control over their repair ecosystems.
This is not a story about consumer protection or intellectual property. It is a story about money: how companies worth a combined $10.7 trillion[s] have systematically outspent, outmaneuvered, and outlasted grassroots repair advocates in state legislature after state legislature. The repair monopoly tactics are straightforward, effective, and increasingly difficult to justify as more Americans realize they cannot fix their own tractors, phones, or wheelchairs without permission from a corporation.
The Money Gap
In New York, lobbying disclosure records reveal the scale of the fight. Between January and April of one legislative session, companies and organizations opposing right-to-repair spent $366,634 on lobbyists. The Digital Right to Repair Coalition, representing independent repair shops, spent $5,042[s]. That is a 73-to-1 spending ratio. No citizen testified against the bill in Washington state; the only opposition came from corporations and trade groups[s].
General Electric alone spent more than $200,000 in 2018 to defeat New York’s repair bill[s]. Apple spent $9.36 million on lobbying in 2022[s]. The companies opposing repair rights include Apple, Microsoft, Amazon, Google, Tesla, Johnson & Johnson, AT&T, T-Mobile, Medtronic, Caterpillar, John Deere, General Electric, and Philips. These are not fringe actors. They represent industries Americans interact with daily, from smartphones to medical devices to farm equipment. Their repair monopoly tactics are funded by profit margins that dwarf the entire independent repair industry.
The Playbook: Fear, Carve-Outs, and Private Meetings
In 2017, Nebraska Senator Lydia Brasch introduced a “Fair Repair” bill that would have given farmers and consumers access to diagnostic tools and repair manuals. Apple dispatched Steve Kester, a state government affairs specialist, to visit her. His argument: passing the bill would make Nebraska “the mecca for bad actors” and make it “very easy for hackers to relocate to Nebraska.”[s]
Brasch, a farmer with 15 years of software industry experience, was unimpressed. “They were surprised to learn I’ve worked in the technology field,” she said. Apple’s fallback offer was blunter: “They said just take out the ‘phone’ part of the bill and we’ll go away.”[s] The bill died. John Deere and Apple had joined forces to oppose it[s], marking an unlikely alliance between a tractor manufacturer and a smartphone maker united by the same goal: keeping repair locked down.
New York eventually passed a repair bill in 2022, but not without casualties. Senator Patricia Fahy, who sponsored the legislation, described the process bluntly: “We ran into the buzzsaw immediately from John Deere and Caterpillar, so we stripped out large equipment and we will fight that another day.”[s] Medical equipment and home appliances were also removed. The bill that passed covered smartphones, not tractors. Repair monopoly tactics had successfully narrowed its scope.
In Colorado, a 2021 repair bill died after testimony that included a former governor, Roy Romer, who happened to be a John Deere dealer[s]. The repair monopoly tactics worked: legislators voted 12-1 to indefinitely postpone the bill despite hours of testimony from wheelchair users, disability advocates, and a nine-year-old environmental activist. One legislator said she had “so many unanswered questions” yet asked none during the hearing[s].
Repair Monopoly Tactics at Scale: The John Deere Model
John Deere’s approach to repair monopoly tactics has been so aggressive that the Federal Trade Commission sued the company in January 2025. The FTC’s complaint alleged that “for decades, Deere’s unlawful practices have limited the ability of farmers and independent repair providers to repair Deere equipment, forcing farmers to instead rely on Deere’s network of authorized dealers for necessary repairs.”[s]
The mechanism is software. Deere’s fully functional diagnostic tool, Service ADVISOR, is available only to authorized dealers. A stripped-down version exists for farmers, but it cannot perform all repairs. The FTC found that Deere maintains “100% market share” in repairs requiring the full tool and can charge “higher prices” as a result[s].
In April 2026, Deere settled a separate class-action lawsuit for $99 million and agreed to provide repair tool access for up to a decade, while admitting no wrongdoing[s]. The company’s official position remains that it supports farmer repair; a spokesperson said Deere wants farmers “to be able to fix their equipment” and that existing agreements with farm groups make state laws unnecessary[s]. The FTC lawsuit and class-action settlement suggest otherwise.
Apple’s Strategic Flip: California Yes, Oregon No
Apple’s position on repair has become a case study in selective cooperation. In August 2023, the company surprised advocates by endorsing California’s SB 244, a right-to-repair bill[s]. Senator Susan Eggman called it “the power of the movement” and praised Apple for “leading among their peers.”
Six months later, Apple opposed Oregon’s right-to-repair bill. The reason: Oregon’s SB 1596 targeted “parts pairingA hardware restriction that prevents a device from functioning normally when a component is replaced with a non-original part, often enforced through software verification that detects third-party components and disables features or displays warnings.,” a practice Apple considers essential. Parts pairing is among the most sophisticated repair monopoly tactics in use today: software that verifies whether replacement components are manufacturer-approved. Kyle Wiens, CEO of iFixit, testified that swapping identical screens between two brand-new iPhones could cause both phones to malfunction because Apple requires components to carry specific digital signatures[s].
John Perry, Apple’s “principal secure repair architect,” told Oregon legislators that parts-pairing restrictions “will undermine the security, safety, and privacy of Oregonians by forcing device manufacturers to allow the use of parts of unknown origin.”[s] Apple declined to testify publicly at roundtables and instead met privately with individual lawmakers[s]. Oregon passed the bill anyway, becoming the first state to ban parts pairing[s]. Google, notably, endorsed the Oregon legislation that Apple opposed, calling it “a compelling model for other states to follow.”[s]
The Steel Man: Security, Safety, and IPIntellectual property in the film industry, referring to existing stories, characters, or brands used as the basis for movies rather than original content.
The arguments against repair rights deserve honest consideration. Companies claim that unrestricted access to diagnostic tools creates security vulnerabilities, that untrained repairs can cause fires or injuries, and that repair manuals expose trade secrets. These concerns are not entirely fabricated.
But they do not withstand scrutiny. The 2012 Massachusetts automotive right-to-repair law required carmakers to share diagnostic tools with independent shops. Massachusetts has not become a “mecca for car hackers.” Wheelchair users like Kenny Maestas, who testified in Colorado, waited 63 days for an authorized technician to change a battery; his family could have done it in two[s]. When a wheelchair user’s chair caught fire after an authorized repair improperly installed batteries, the safety argument collapsed entirely[s].
Tony Baker, a Nebraska politician who provided information solutions to the US military, told legislators that different access levels for different users is standard practice in secure systems. “The bottom line is there are a very large variety of engineering solutions to accommodate these issues that could be put in place,” he said[s]. The security argument is not a technical barrier; it is repair monopoly tactics dressed in technical language.
Where This Leaves Consumers
As of 2026, seven states have passed comprehensive electronics right-to-repair laws: New York, California, Connecticut, Minnesota, Oregon, Colorado, and Washington[s]. One in five Americans now lives in a state with repair protections[s]. Federal bills are advancing in Congress with bipartisan support. The National Federation of Independent Business says 89% of its members support right-to-repair legislation[s].
The tide may be turning, but the corporate repair monopoly tactics that killed 44 state bills have not disappeared. Companies continue to lobby, carve out exceptions, and meet privately with legislators. The same playbook that worked in Nebraska in 2017 is being deployed in statehouses today, adapted but not abandoned. The question is whether lawmakers will keep listening to $10.7 trillion worth of opposition, or to the wheelchair users, farmers, and repair shop owners who just want to fix what they already paid for.
