In recent years, several states have enacted “Right to Repair” laws that aim to provide individuals and businesses unaffiliated with the manufacturers of devices with access to additional information, software, and tools for repairing devices.  The recent trend has been to pass repair legislation covering a broad array of digital electronic devices with limited exclusions, such as exclusions for medical devices, critical infrastructure, and gaming consoles.  For example, last year Colorado enacted its Consumer Right to Repair Digital Electronic Equipment Act, which broadly covers “digital electronic equipment” with several specific exemptions.  

Two separate repair bills are now advancing in Florida.  One targets repair of motorized wheelchairs (the Motorized Wheelchair Right to Repair Act) while the other targets repair of portable wireless devices and agricultural equipment (the Portable Wireless Device Repair Act and the Agricultural Equipment Fair Repair Act).  While these bills do not include the exemptions enacted in other states, the ladder bill limits its scope by defining “portable wireless device” to mean “a product that includes a battery, microphone, speaker, and display designed to send and receive transmissions through a cellular radio telephone service.”  But the law could still be interpreted broadly.  For example, while it may not be the intent, the bill would arguably cover connected cars.  

As the state law right to repair thicket grows, manufacturers should prepare to navigate the nuanced differences between different state laws.  If Florida passes independent repair laws for different categories of equipment, that will only add to the complex landscape.  As one example, Florida's pending Portable Wireless Digital Repair Act would require manufacturers to even divulge trade secrets in certain circumstances (Section 6: “This part does not require a manufacturer to divulge a trade secret, except as necessary to provide documentation, parts, and tools on fair and reasonable terms”) while its Agricultural Equipment Fair Repair Act would not require manufactures to divulge trade secrets (Section 8: "(4) This section may not be construed to do any of the following: (a) Require an original equipment manufacturer to divulge a trade secret.").  Now is a good time for manufacturers to consider their trade secret strategies in view of the evolving legal landscape.