WeVote
Log In

Bill

Bill

S 189

Establishes the police canine vest fund

2025 Regular Session Introduced by Joe Addabbo and 3 co-sponsors

Massachusetts' S.189 creates a digital right-to-repair: manufacturers must share parts, tools, and repair documentation with owners and independent repair providers on fair terms.

REFERRED TO FINANCE
0
WeVote Research Nonpartisan
Bill Summary · S 189

Summary — S.189 (2025): “An Act relative to digital right to repair”

Status: Introduced (Senate), referred to committees; last listed as REFERRED TO FINANCE
Introduced: January 22, 2025 (Senate Docket No. 732)
Primary sponsor (petition): Sen. Michael D. Brady (with Joanne M. Comerford and James B. Eldridge)
Note: provided bill text and header contain inconsistencies in short titles (see “Scope/Title” below).

Purpose / Intent

The bill establishes a state-level “digital right to repair” framework for consumer electronic devices sold, supplied, or used in Massachusetts. Its core intent is to require manufacturers to make parts, tools, and repair documentation available to device owners and independent repair providers on “fair and reasonable terms” so devices can be diagnosed, maintained, and repaired outside manufacturer-controlled channels.

Scope / Title

  • The bill inserts a new Chapter 93L, “Consumer Electronic Devices,” into the General Laws (placed after chapter 93K).
  • The bill text also includes a line stating it “may be cited as the Creating Opportunities for New Skills Training at Rural or Underserved Colleges and Trade Schools Act of 2025 and CONSTRUCTS Act of 2025,” which appears inconsistent with the petition and substantive text that focus on right-to-repair. This likely reflects a clerical error in the draft.

Key definitions (selected)

  • “Consumer Electronic Device” — tangible personal property that depends in whole or part on embedded digital electronics and is used for personal, family, or household purposes; sold/used in MA 180+ days after manufacture/sale.
  • “Manufacturer” — business selling, leasing, or supplying new consumer electronic devices or parts.
  • “Owner” — individual or business that lawfully acquires a portable wireless device used or purchased in MA.
  • “Independent repair provider” vs. “Authorized repair provider” — distinguishes unaffiliated repair businesses from those operating under a manufacturer’s licensing/branding.
  • “Parts,” “Tools,” and “Documentation” — defined to include replacement parts (new or used), diagnostic/calibration software/hardware, and manuals/schematics/security codes or passwords.
  • “Fair and reasonable terms” — cost and access equivalent to the most favorable terms the manufacturer provides to its authorized repair providers; documentation should be free except for reasonable physical copy costs.

Main provisions (present in text)

  • Section 2: Manufacturers must make documentation, parts, and tools (including updates) available to device owners and independent repair providers on fair and reasonable terms. Manufacturers need not provide parts no longer available to them.
  • Section 3 is present but truncated in the provided text; it appears intended to address sale/format/access of diagnostic or service information to third parties.

Who is affected

  • Required to comply: manufacturers of consumer electronic devices sold or supplied in Massachusetts.
  • Beneficiaries: device owners, independent repair shops and technicians, consumers seeking out-of-warranty or third‑party repairs.
  • Other stakeholders: authorized repair providers, retailers, and manufacturers’ service networks.

Procedural history / timeline (selected items provided)

  • 2025-01-22: Read twice; referred to Senate Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions (and introduced in Senate).
  • 2025-02-27: Referred to Committee on Consumer Protection and Professional Licensure; House concurrence listed same day (records appear inconsistent).
  • 2025-09-19 / 2025-09-29: Hearing scheduling and rescheduling entries (hearing set for 10/01/2025).
  • Multiple entries list “REFERRED TO FINANCE” (1/08/2025) — possible duplicate filings.

Potential impacts and issues

  • Consumer benefits: improved repair options, potentially lower repair cost, extended device lifespans, reduced e‑waste.
  • Independent repair sector: expanded access to parts/tools/documentation could increase business viability.
  • Manufacturer concerns: potential exposure of trade secrets, cybersecurity or safety risks if diagnostic tools or security codes are broadly released; compliance costs.
  • Legal/administrative: enforcement mechanisms, confidentiality carve-outs, and trade secret protections are critical but not fully visible in the truncated text.

Related bills & sponsors

  • Related/companion bills listed: HR 1055, A 2517; prior-session S 4392; docket SD 732 (replaces). Sponsors/cosponsors named in the provided metadata include Marsha Blackburn, Monica Martinez (primary), Jessica Scarcella‑Spanton, Dean Murray, and Joseph P. Addabbo Jr.

Note: The provided draft is partially truncated and contains some inconsistent metadata (titles, duplicate referrals). Summary focuses on the available Chapter 93L text requiring access to parts, tools, and documentation on fair and reasonable terms.

Compiled from official sources — confirm details with the bill’s official record.

Sign in to ask a question.