thewayne: (Default)
The Librarian of Congress said it was okay to bypass the DMCA lockdown on McDonald's machines and similar machines in all restaurants.

Which is a good thing. But it's not nearly the win that was needed.

The DMCA is the Digital Millennia Copyright Act, passed in 1998, and was used to lock down a variety of technologies to prevent copying, even when people have Fair Use Doctrine rights to make copies. It allows manufacturers to charge exorbitant repair fees, and if the makers are slow to respond to repair calls, well there's FA that the owner/renter/lessee of the equipment can do. They are completely encumbered by the digital lock - it is a felony to bypass it and make repairs on your own.

For example, John Deere has screwed over farmers by charging high prices for repairs and being slow to respond to repair calls, in many cases causing crop loss.

In this specific case regarding McDonald's ice cream machines, I've written about this before. The machine isn't your typical ice cream machine in that it contains a pasteurization component. The store receives its milk, dumps it in, it's pasteurized, then churned. And the machine breaks regularly. AND, like Deere, the company is slow to respond to calls. AND because the machine is locked down under a digital system, it's pretty much impossible for the franchise operator to know what went wrong, much less fix it and clear the codes.

Fans of McDonald's ice cream went to the extreme of putting up web sites that would tell you when a particular location's machine was down so you could reroute and get your frozen dessert elsewhere.

The Librarian of Congress has said this is pretty stupid and carved out an exemption for such machines from the DMCA law. I love this line from the article: "Manufacturers opposed the exemption, but it received support from the Department of Justice Antitrust Division, the Federal Trade Commission, and the National Telecommunications and Information Administration."

But here's where it all falls down. The tools needed to bypass the DMCA lockdown are NOT exempted, both the physical and electronic/digital tools. So iFixit can't sell a McDonald's Fixit kit. Theoretically each franchise will have to figure it out for themselves and can't share that information.

But we know that isn't what's going to happen. Forums will pop up and share the information. And get swatted down by the machine's maker. And re-emerge with even more information.

Very short-sighted of the Librarian of Congress to not authorize the tools to effectuate the actual repair process.

https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2024/10/us-copyright-office-frees-the-mcflurry-allowing-repair-of-ice-cream-machines/

https://www.404media.co/it-is-now-legal-to-hack-mcflurry-machines-and-medical-devices-to-fix-them/
thewayne: (Default)
Well, that didn't take long! The guy who discovered the tiny little clause in G's terms and conditions posted a video. When a Google spokesdrone was asked about it, they replied "If a customer sends their Pixel to Google for repair, we would not keep it regardless of whether it has non-OEM parts or not. In certain situations, we won't be able to complete a repair if there are safety concerns. In that case, we will either send it back to the customer or work with them to determine next steps. Customers are also free to seek the repair options that work best for them. We are updating our Terms and Conditions to clarify this."

Just a bit more reasonable!

The truth is, none of the phone makers really want you repairing your phones. If they had their way, the phones would be epoxied closed with no screws, and any attempt to open them would irrevocably destroy the innards and you'd have to buy a new one. But we don't want to spend big bucks for new batteries or displays. But the reality is that Google wants you to pay upwards of $300 for a new screen for a Pixel 6 when the same amount of money will get you a used one in pretty good shape from EBay.

Personally, with one exception, I've never had a problem with used or refurbished gear that I've purchased. I know which way I'd go.

Now, will Samsung change their ways?

https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2024/06/google-changes-repair-policy-after-criticism-of-third-party-parts-ban/
thewayne: (Default)
If you send your phone in to Google, THEY CAN FLAT-OUT KEEP YOUR PHONE FOR NON-OEM PARTS!

From the article, "As YouTuber Louis Rossmann discovered, Google’s service and repair terms and conditions contain a concerning stipulation. The document states that Google will keep your device if a non-OEM part is found. You can see the excerpt below." (excerpt in the linked article)

The terms and conditions went into effect last July.

So, in the Samsung case, the repair shops are being ordered to destroy your personal property. In this Google case, it's theft. There's something called First Sale Principle, in that if you buy something, you own it - it is your property and you can do whatever you want with it. Both Google and Samsung are clearly violating this. There's going to be some serious class action law suits over this if anyone's property is stolen or destroyed following these rules.

As one Slashdot commenter said, it would be akin to taking your car into a dealership and they refusing to return it because you had a brake job done at Pep Boys or some place.

https://www.androidauthority.com/google-keeps-phones-with-non-oem-parts-3448350/

https://mobile.slashdot.org/story/24/06/03/2025211/google-can-keep-your-phone-if-you-send-it-in-for-repair-with-non-oem-parts
thewayne: (Default)
Yes, it's a little more complicated than that.

Every three years the Copyright Office can be petitioned for exemptions to the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA) to allow people to fix things that they own that are locked behind flimsy digital shields to ensure the maker gets a tithe whenever things need repair. The current round has the DOJ and FTC asking for four exemptions, for: "commercial soft serve machines; proprietary diagnostic kits; programmable logic controllers; and enterprise IT."

The reason for the McDonald's ice cream machines is pretty simple. Corporate requires that franchisees buy one specific brand of machine. Not only is it prone to breaking down, the company that makes them and services them is notorious for taking its time to fix them - sometimes up to NINETY DAYS according to letters of complaint! THAT is a lot of lost revenue for a franchise! It's so bad that there is a web site that you can check to see if the ice cream machine at your local McD's is working or not.

The problem is that the maker has put the diagnostic codes behind a ridiculous digital encryption system and locked them in a DMCA claim. If you break them, you risk being sued. Which, of course, they have been hacked and decoded. A company made a decoder and is involved in a legal battle with the maker. A DMCA waiver exempting the machines would nullify the battle, make the decoder legal, and mean that any decent commercial/industrial appliance repairman with the decoder could repair the machines, greatly reducing downtime.

Is the machine special? Not particularly. The only thing unique about it is that it has a pasteurization system so that the franchises can use non-pasteurized milk. Me, personally, I'd much rather pasteurization take place at the dairy, not at a local McDonald's. But that's just me. I can just picture a teenager accidentally dropping a big carton of milk, it splitting open, and now you have unpasteurized milk all over the place.

https://www.theverge.com/2024/3/14/24101023/ftc-doj-comment-dmca-ifixit-ice-cream-machines
thewayne: (Default)
And they petition the Librarian of Congress to allow store franchisees to repair them.

The machines, made by Taylor, are plagued by breakdowns. And Taylor charges $350 PER FIFTEEN MINUTES TO FIX THEM. The machines are locked by DMCA, and franchise owners are locked by their McDonald's contracts to buy the Taylor machines, so they're screwed into paying absolutely outrageous repair fees to fix the damn things. It's estimated that an eighth of ALL McDonalds ice cream machines in the ENTIRE USA are broken at any time, and that Taylor makes 25% of their money from these service calls!

Every three years, the Librarian of Congress can make changes to the Digital Millennium Copyright Act, one of the significant changes in the previous batch was to allow people to repair their own game consoles. iFixit, along with the interest group Public Knowledge are petitioning the copyright office for an exemption to allow these things to be repaired by franchisees. A company has made a Raspberry Pi board that can diagnose what is wrong with the machine, so naturally Taylor is suing them for $900mill.

One thing that does make the machine somewhat special is it has a pasteurizer to process the milk product overnight. Seems like it would be a lot easier to use a simpler, more reliable, machine and buy pre-pasteurized ingredients for the machine and save a lot of bother up and down the line. The upshot that is commonly believed is that the C-Suite is probably receiving kickbacks from Taylor to keep the machines in place and let the franchise operators eat the cost. Everybody profits, except the restaurants and the tired parents driving around to multiple McD's trying to find a working ice cream machine.

Funny how no other fast food operator seems to have this problem.

https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2023/08/mcdonalds-ice-cream-machine-teardown-shows-error-codes-dmca-keep-it-broken/

May 2025

S M T W T F S
    1 23
45678910
1112 131415 1617
18 19 20 212223 24
25262728 293031

Syndicate

RSS Atom

Most Popular Tags

Style Credit

Expand Cut Tags

No cut tags
Page generated May. 30th, 2025 03:29 pm
Powered by Dreamwidth Studios
OSZAR »