Apple Makes Independent Repair Shops Sign Draconian Contracts to Get Official Parts

Apple last summer announced a new Independent Repair Provider Program that provides independent repair businesses with the genuine Apple parts, tools, repair manuals, and training provided to Apple Authorized Service Providers.

The change came amid Right to Repair laws being proposed in multiple states, which Apple has lobbied hard against. Right to Repair laws would require Apple to provide parts, manuals, and more to allow repairs to be done by any repair shop, so Apple decided to get ahead of those laws with its own program.

Image via iFixit

As it turns out, to participate in the Independent Repair Provider Program, repair shops need to sign a contract that's highly invasive and has been described as "crazy" by lawyers and repair advocates.

Motherboard shared details on the contract, which stipulates that repair shops have to agree to unannounced audits and inspections by Apple to determine if they're using "prohibited" repair components, which can result in fines.

Even if a shop leaves the program, Apple can continue to inspect it for up to five years. Repair shops are required to share information about their customers with Apple, including names, phone numbers, and home addresses.

Customers who receive service from an independent repair shop have to sign an acknowledgement that they understand they're not receiving repairs from an Apple Authorized shop and that Apple won't warranty the repair, which as right to repair advocate Nathan Proctor told Motherboard, is essentially requiring them to advertise against themselves.

Shops that partner with Apple for supplies must avoid all "prohibited products," which includes both counterfeit parts and "products or service parts that infringe on Apple's intellectual property," which legal experts believe is ambiguous wording. Apple is also able to seize any prohibited products, which is a potential problem because many repair shops also repair non-Apple devices.
"That is an ambiguous, subjective, and potentially very broad definition," said Aaron Perzanowski, a law professor at Case Western Reserve University. "As a result, it gives Apple a lot of leverage over the companies that sign this agreement."
Repair businesses that violate Apple's rules can be forced to pay Apple $1,000 for every transaction during an audit period if more than two percent of business transactions involve "prohibited products."

Kit Walsh, an attorney with the EFF, told Motherboard that Apple has the power to "impose potentially business-destroying costs and penalties on the repair shop," and that shops who sign Apple's repair notice and then do repairs on non-Apple devices do so at their own peril.

Some repair shops contacted by Motherboard said they would not agree to join Apple's program due to the "onerous" terms of the contract, but others "valued the opportunity" to get parts from Apple.

Apple declined to answer specific questions from Motherboard about the contract that it provides to repair shops, but did not dispute the accuracy of the contract terms the site shared. Apple in a statement said that it is working with interested parties and plans to update the language in its materials based on feedback.
"We are committed to giving our customers more options and locations for safe and reliable repairs," Apple told Motherboard in a statement. "Our new independent repair provider program is designed to give repair businesses of all sizes access to genuine parts, training and tools needed to perform the most common iPhone repairs. We are excited by the initial response and high level of interest. We are working closely with interested parties and we will update language in our materials to address their feedback."
Though Apple has launched the Independent Repair Program, it continues to fight against Right to Repair legislation through trade groups that represent it, and the IRP is used as evidence that consumers have a wide range of choice when it comes to repair options.

For more on the terms of the contract, thoughts from Right to Repair advocates, and Apple's efforts to lobby against Right to Repair laws, check out Motherboard's full article.

Top Rated Comments

(View all)

2 weeks ago
This is, why 2020 has become like 1984.
Rating: 41 Votes
2 weeks ago
Basically , if you sign it ,you become Apple biatch
Rating: 30 Votes
2 weeks ago
Imagine repairing your own car and then GM fines you for using aftermarket parts.
Rating: 25 Votes
2 weeks ago
If the customer consents then the rest is moot. Apple should have no say in repairs and be required by law (since that's what it takes) to provide parts to shops or even consumers (outside of warranty).
Rating: 17 Votes
2 weeks ago
There goes Apple being Appholes again.
Rating: 17 Votes
2 weeks ago


Imagine you take your GM to an authorized GM repair shop only to find out that they used FORD parts or KIA parts in your automobile. How would that make you feel?


It depends, do they require me to pay up to 30% of the vehicles cost for an extended warranty? If you can repair my car for less than GM, do I really care if I have a KIA alternator? I brought my car in so you could get it running, not impress me with your "authorized" part.
Rating: 17 Votes
2 weeks ago
Draconian? These types of conditions are pretty common in many industries. The 5 years after leaving seems odd, but I haven't see anywhere that’s been confirmed as true.
Rating: 9 Votes
2 weeks ago
The unannounced audits? Fine, what's the point of an announced audit? If you announce it, any violators will clean up their act for the audit period.

I do have an issue with the rules that can cause a shop to get into trouble if they repair non-Apple devices as well. As well as sharing the customer info.... I am sure that is to put into a database so if they do take their device to an Apple Store, they can go, " Well warranty is now void due to taking it to Joe Repair Shop!" If they want to be able to do that, track the parts, not the customer.
Rating: 8 Votes
2 weeks ago
On Apple's site ('https://support.apple.com/irp-program') for the Independent Repair Program, under What are the Requirements, it lists the following:

"Technician Certification
Participating service companies using iPhone genuine parts are required to have Apple-certified technicians perform the repairs.

Becoming certified to repair Apple products requires passing exams through an online Authorized Testing Center. Certifications are updated on a per product basis annually. The certification exam fees are waived for businesses that have been approved to be an Independent Repair Provider."


Given that Apple controls the components they are providing to the repair shop, the training and certification the repair technicians are receiving, and disallows the use of any non-genuine/unauthorized parts in device repair - why exactly should this be out of warranty?

It seems to me Apple is trying to benefit from a level of control they would get if they owned these shops while ignoring all of the downsides that would rightfully earn them that control.
Rating: 5 Votes
2 weeks ago


....
Customers who receive service from an independent repair shop have to sign an acknowledgement that they understand they're not receiving repairs from an Apple Authorized shop and that Apple won't warranty the repair, which as right to repair advocate Nathan Proctor told Motherboard, is essentially requiring them to advertise against themselves.


Communicating the truth to your customers is now "advertising against themselves". Amusing that this is suppose to be a consumer benefit driven thing but when it comes to blow smoke at the consumer all of a sudden it is "onerous" and "invasive".


Shops that partner with Apple for supplies must avoid all "prohibited products," which includes both counterfeit parts and "products or service parts that infringe on Apple's intellectual property," which legal experts believe is ambiguous wording.


Really. The first relatively obviously applies to Apple's custom parts which is the main core access issue. " ... infringe on Apples IP... " is typically folks are in a IP legal action with Apple. Again this is likely scoped to the custom Apple parts that the program is designed to give access to.

It is only pull the sentence completely out of all surrounding context and start arm flapping about extra expansive connotations that it gets ambiguous. The scoped context here isn't ambiguous unless want to start standing on head and inventing stuff.


Apple is also able to seize any prohibited products, which is a potential problem because many repair shops also repair non-Apple devices.


and how many custom Apple parts fit into other non-Apple devices ?

And how many industry standard parts that Apple uses ( e.g, DIMMs in iMac , Mini, Mac Pro) have custom Apple IP in them? They are trying to trott out some bogie man argument that if Apple gives you a DIMM somehow they can attack any non-Apple product with a DIMM in it. ... just looney toons. Not what the contract is talking about unless invent new contexts to insert carefully crafted subsections into.
Rating: 5 Votes

[ Read All Comments ]