Oregon 2025 Regular Session

Oregon Senate Bill SB959

Introduced
1/30/25  
Refer
1/30/25  
Refer
2/5/25  
Refer
2/5/25  
Report Pass
3/17/25  
Engrossed
3/18/25  
Refer
3/18/25  
Report Pass
5/6/25  
Enrolled
5/14/25  
Passed
5/22/25  
Chaptered
6/6/25  

Caption

Relating to alarm systems.

Impact

If enacted, SB 959 would significantly amend existing state laws related to warranty services, consumer rights in electronic repairs, and the responsibilities of OEMs. The bill specifically aims to eliminate obstacles that would inhibit independent repair businesses, ensuring they can obtain the necessary resources to repair consumer electronics effectively. This change could lead to a broader economic impact by enhancing competition and potentially lowering costs for consumers seeking repairs. Additionally, the law would prevent manufacturers from using software and other means to restrict repairs, thereby safeguarding owners' rights to their equipment.

Summary

Senate Bill 959 focuses on the rights of consumers and independent repair providers regarding consumer electronic equipment. It establishes requirements for original equipment manufacturers (OEMs) to make tools, parts, and documentation available to owners and independent repair providers at fair and reasonable terms. This access is crucial for enabling independent repair and maintaining consumer choice, particularly as technology becomes more complex and deeply embedded in everyday life. Its objective is to foster a more open repair market, reducing reliance on authorized service providers and promoting consumer empowerment in the repair process.

Sentiment

Discussions surrounding SB 959 indicate a largely positive sentiment among consumer advocacy groups and independent repair advocates who view the bill as a necessary measure for enhancing consumer rights. Supporters argue it levels the playing field, allowing independent repairs to thrive, which is particularly significant as consumer electronics become more integral to daily life. Conversely, some OEMs express concern, fearing that the bill might expose them to increased liability and undermine their intellectual property rights, leading to potential safety risks if unauthorized repairs are conducted.

Contention

Notable points of contention include debates about liability and safety. Opponents of the bill worry that while promoting repair rights is essential, it could inadvertently lead to safety issues if improperly trained individuals perform repairs on complex devices. Moreover, the debate around the extent to which manufacturers should disclose sensitive information, like trade secrets or proprietary technology needed for repairs, remains a crucial discussion point. OEMs push back against what they perceive as excessive requirements that could harm their business models, highlighting a tension between consumer rights and corporate interests.

Companion Bills

No companion bills found.

Similar Bills

HI HB415

Relating To Mobile Devices.

OR SB550

Relating to a right to repair consumer equipment.

CT SB00121

An Act Concerning The Fair Right To Repair Act.

ME LD1908

An Act to Require the Cooperation of Original Manufacturers of Electronic Devices to Facilitate the Repair of Those Devices by Device Owners and Independent Repair Providers

OR SB1596

Relating to a right to repair consumer electronic equipment.

OR SB542

Relating to a right to repair consumer electronic equipment; prescribing an effective date.

HI HB1405

Relating To Right To Repair.

HI HB53

Relating To Right To Repair.