[soared]

This only makes sense if a company is no longer liable for damages if a product has been modified. Then we need to define for every product what is considered a modification, and figure out how to factually determine that.

It’s not as simple as it seems.

[analog31]

At least in the case of motorcycles, they are close enough to cars (and bicycles) that there is probably an extensive history of case law and perhaps even regulations already in place. Car makers are obligated to provide parts to third party mechanics and even consumers. So this is not uncharted legal territory.

If nothing else, other industries wrestling with right-to-repair should probably assume that they can model themselves after the automotive industry.

There are other industries that have long traditions of repairability, such as home appliances, gas powered garden equipment, and so forth. I've repaired most of the appliances in my house at some point. I've found replacement parts to be readily available and not exorbitant.

[petre]

> Car makers are obligated to provide parts to third party mechanics and even consumers

Same goes for John Deere.

[asiachick]

I don't know where to draw the line but assuming self driving cars are a thing they'll arguably need constant new data and constant updates so unlike most cars to date, they aren't things you'll just be able to buy and the sever your connection with the company you bought it from.

Motorcycles are probably different for the time being. Not expecting people to really want self driving motorcycles.

Like I said, I don't really know where to draw the line. I hate that my multi-colored LED lights have an app that talks to a server. I don't run that app, but my iPhone tells me I need up update the lights and to do so I need to get a 3rd party app. Is that another thing where regulation should require being able to update without an account or is the fact that they had to spend time making the update mean I need some kind of relationship with them?

[MrStonedOne]

>I don't know where to draw the line but assuming self driving cars are a thing they'll arguably need constant new data and constant updates so unlike most cars to date, they aren't things you'll just be able to buy and the sever your connection with the company you bought it from.

That sounds like an argument against self driving cars.

[wrycoder]

Try buying grease to lubricate your mixer from Kitchenaid!

[CSMastermind]

Is that a thing?

I just bought a new Kitchenaid mixer (albeit a commercial one) and it included instructions on how to tear it down for both maintenance and cleaning.

[wrycoder]

I’ve twice tried to buy grease from KA for my K45, a home machine. The second time I decided to be pretty persistent, just for amusement. I kept the associate tied up for half an hour, but, no, they won’t sell to a non-commercial customer. Reasons given were I could hurt myself or damage ‘my’ machine. I’d have to be a KA certified appliance repair shop.

Finally, food-grade grease appeared on Amazon, so I got that.

It’s very different for commercial users, because the machines have to be lubed regularly, and bakers can’t wait around.

(The famous third party service of McD’s ice cream machines comes to mind.)

[R0b0t1]

Just search for "food grade grease," no reason to go through Kitchenaid.

[mnadkvlb]

I will have to write-off my rights, if my 20 bucks coffee machine kills me due to using a re-usable cartridge instead of the one blessed by the vendor /s

[soared]

Consider if kuerig sells a commercial coffee maker to McDonald’s. McDonald’s modified the machine’s hold time to prolong the lifetime of coffee. McDonald’s serves scalding hot coffee to a customer, it spills, she sues.

From kuerig’s perspective it’s a better decision to build a machine that cannot be modified, as they may be at blame and will have to spend millions on lawyer fees proving McDonald’s modified and misused their product.

[deckeraa]

In that case Kuerig's legal argument would be straightforward:

- The injury due to the coffee burn was due entirely to the elevated temperature.

- The machine would not have served at the scalding temperature had McDonald's not made the modification.

- The modification was specifically made to raise the temperature to a level that turned out to be unsafe.

The question of whether a modification was made would almost certainly come out in court because a McDonald's employee would be unlikely to perjure themselves over it.

Therefore, all the liability would be on McDonald's.

Though I do see your point about legal costs being incurred even if the case of Kuering being completely innocent. It seems that having a culture instilled with a nebulous concept of "liability" encourages people to limit other's ability to take their own risks.

(Edit: formatting)

[blobbers]

I’m not even sure the liability should be on McDonalds. In stupid America, everyone tries to blame someone. Sometimes it’s just you spilled your own coffee on you. If it was a McDonald’s employee that spilled it on you, different story.

There doesn’t need to be “walk don’t run” signs everywhere, and liability waivers for every activity.

[coredog64]

Contemporaneous with the McD coffee case, there was a lady who sued Bunn-O-Matic as the deepest pockets in a similar coffee from a convenience store case. So there’s even settled case law WRT equipment manufacturer liability.

[Barrin92]

aren't we doing this already? When you try to overclock your CPU or GPU it says "if you do this you void your warranty", and that's pretty much it. It's not that simple but it's also not that hard, there's often a pretty big line between trivial modifications or modifications that might fry whatever device you're dealing with.

If there's a gray line it'll come down to some third party judging it but I don't think this is any different from say, verifying an insurance claim.