Washington State Joins Right-to Repair-Movement

On May 19, 2025, Washington Governor Bob Ferguson signed into law the Right to Repair Act, which will require original manufacturers of digital electronic products to make available certain parts, tools, and documentation for the diagnosis, maintenance, or repair of digital electronic products to independent repair providers on fair and reasonable terms.

By taking this action, Washington joins recent efforts by New York, California, Colorado, Oregon, and Minnesota to pass “right to repair” laws, with the stated goals of giving more control to consumers and reducing e-waste. Additionally, the Federal Trade Commission has launched investigations and at least one recent lawsuit against manufacturers regarding restrictions imposed on consumers over repairs.

Key Provisions of the Washington Act:

1. Access to Repair Information and Tools: Effective January 1, 2026, original manufacturers must provide independent repair providers and product owners with access to parts, tools, and documentation necessary for the diagnosis, maintenance, and repair of digital electronic products. This access must be on fair and reasonable terms.
2. Documentation and Tools: As of the effective date, manufacturers must ensure that all necessary documentation and tools are available to independent repair providers and owners. This requirement includes making documentation available at no charge, except for reasonable costs associated with physical copies.
3. Prohibition on Parts Pairing: The Act prohibits original manufacturers from using “parts pairing” to inhibit the installation or functionality of replacement parts by independent repair providers or owners, including a prohibition on using misleading alerts or warnings about unidentified parts. Washington is the third state to prohibit parts pairing, mirroring recently-adopted laws in Oregon and Colorado in addressing this common problem.
4. Privacy and Security: Repair providers must inform customers how to protect their privacy and security during repairs. Such disclosures may include recommending data backup and providing information on legal rights to privacy under Washington law.
5. Exemptions: The Act does not apply to certain products, including medical devices, motor vehicles, and public safety communications equipment. Additionally, it exempts products like video game consoles and certain off-road equipment from the requirements.

Recent FTC Actions:

While various versions of a federal right-to-repair act have been introduced in the past several years, no federal law has been adopted. Instead, the Federal Trade Commission has attempted to use the FTC Act and the Magnuson-Moss Warranty Act to address specific violations on a case-by-case basis.

For example, in January 2025, the FTC sued Deere and Company under the FTC Act regarding Deere’s actions that limit the use of a software tool to diagnose and repair electronic issues. The FTC argues that Deere impermissibly restricts access to the software to just Deere-affiliated dealers and will not permit independent repair shops to use the software tools, even though these independent repair shops may be less expensive and closer to the consumer. Multiple parties are also suing Deere and Company in a separate lawsuit brought in 2022 under the Sherman Act regarding Deere’s efforts to limit access to Deere’s proprietary repair tools.

Finally, in July 2024, the FTC staff issued warnings to eight companies about restrictive language in their limited warranties. According to the FTC, the companies may have been in violation of the Magnuson-Moss Warranty Act because their warranty provisions contained language that the consumer would void the warranty if (i) they did not install replacement parts from the original manufacturer and/or (ii) there is evidence that the consumer attempted to repair the product and broke existing protective seals put into place by the original manufacturer. The FTC warned the companies that FTC staff would monitor their efforts to bring their warranties into compliance.

Key Takeaways:

While there is some evidence that the new administration may not be as active in enforcing consumer product laws, it is clear that various states are filling the void. Combined, the six states that have passed right-to-repair acts represent 25% of the US population overall and two of the most populous states (California and New York). Thus, similar to other consumer protection regulations adopted in California or New York, companies will likely take the easier path of modifying their policies for all U.S.-sold products to comply with California and/or New York law, including:

1. Warranty Language: Companies should review their product warranties to ensure that they do not contain provisions that would violate a consumer’s access to parts, tools, and documentation through independent repair shops. Of special concern are those states that would require access to parts, tools, and documentation beyond the period currently specified in their warranties. For example, California requires access for “at least seven years after the last date a product model or type was manufactured, regardless of whether the seven-year period exceeds the warranty period for the product”;
2. Coordination with Repair Shops: Companies should take steps to ensure that they coordinate the disclosure requirements with their authorized repair shops to ensure that consumers receive accurate information regarding their right to seek alternative services;
3. Supply Chain: To the extent that companies rely extensively on authorized repair shops, they should examine their current supply chain and distribution networks to ensure that necessary parts and documentation are timely available to independent repair shops upon request; and
4. IP Protection: The right-to-repair laws make clear that original manufacturers are not required to turn over their protected intellectual property in connection with requests from independent repair shops and consumers. Companies should take steps to audit their existing IP inventory and determine the necessary steps to protect their IP to the fullest extent. They should also be prepared to defend against requests to turn over intellectual property that is otherwise protected under existing federal or state law.

In light of the recent legislative actions, companies should review their product lines and authorized repair policies to determine if changes are required before additional states join the right-to-repair movement.