Massachusetts business organizations oppose “Right to Repair” legislation
Several Massachusetts technology and business organizations have joined forces in opposing proposed legislation that would restrict automakers’ IP rights.
June 14, 2011 at 07:43 AM
2 minute read
The original version of this story was published on Law.com
Massachusetts' so-called “Right to Repair” legislation has been met by major opposition from some of the states' largest technology and business organizations, the Massachusetts Auto Coalition announced today. The opposing organizations, which include the Associated Industries of Massachusetts, Massachusetts Biotechnology Council, Massachusetts Medical Device Industry Council and Massachusetts High Technology Council, argue that the bill would weaken intellectual property protections, forcing companies to release patented technology, copyrighted software and trade secrets.
If passed, the “Right to Repair” legislation would require companies to release trade secrets to any “motor vehicle owner” who requests access to them. Brad McDougall, associate VP for government affairs of Associated Industries of Massachusetts says the “Right to Repair” bill could have negative consequences for business statewide.
“Not only is 'Right to Repair' not needed, it carries a host of unintended consequences that are bad for business in Massachusetts, particularly industries that rely on legal protections for intellectual property, trade secrets, copyrighted and confidential information,” he said in a statement. “Passage of this bill could result in a reduction of in-state investment by both global corporations and homegrown firms, killing jobs and hurting Massachusetts' growing innovation economy.”
Although the “Right to Repair” legislation specifically targets the auto industry, opponents say passage of the bill would establish a dangerous precedent, possibly paving the way for similar legislation affecting other industries, such as a pharmaceuticals, biotechnology, medical devices and computer software.
“The Mass High Tech Council works to strengthen the competitive advantage of member companies and the regional technology economy,” said Jim Rooney, VP of the Massachusetts High Technology Council. “Right to Repair's passage could impact other industries and harm efforts to enhance cost-competitiveness, advance the transfer of technology, and develop new education opportunities and talent that currently sets Massachusetts apart from other states and economies in the nation.”
Supporters of the bill argue that manufacturers' concerns are addressed in section 4 of the proposed legislation. Opponents counter that the protections are inadequate and do not protect against third-party disclosures made by “motor vehicle owners” who request information. Furthermore, they say that, if passed, the legislation will prompt a flood of IP lawsuits that would clog Massachusetts courts and burden manufacturers with unnecessary legal fees.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllGC With Deep GM Experience Takes Legal Reins of Power Management Giant
2 minute readLegal Departments Gripe About Outside Counsel but Rarely Talk to Them
4 minute read'Serious Disruptions'?: Federal Courts Brace for Government Shutdown Threat
3 minute readUS Reviewer of Foreign Transactions Sees More Political, Policy Influence, Say Observers
Trending Stories
- 1Call for Nominations: Elite Trial Lawyers 2025
- 2Senate Judiciary Dems Release Report on Supreme Court Ethics
- 3Senate Confirms Last 2 of Biden's California Judicial Nominees
- 4Morrison & Foerster Doles Out Year-End and Special Bonuses, Raises Base Compensation for Associates
- 5Tom Girardi to Surrender to Federal Authorities on Jan. 7
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250