FTC Pushed To Crack Down On Companies That Ruin Hardware Via Software Updates Or Annoying Paywalls

We've noted for years how you no longer really own the things you buy. Whether it's smart home hardware that becomesuseless paperweightswhen the manufacturer implodes, or post-purchase firmware updates that activelymake your device less useful, you simply never know if the product you bought yesterday will be the same product tomorrow.

Now a coalition of consumer groups, activists, and lawmakers are pushing the FTC to crack down on smart" device manufacturers that suddenly pull support for products or make them less useful - either by simply removing features or hiding them behind annoying new subscription paywalls.

In a letter sent last week to key FTC officials, a coalition of seventeen different groups (including Consumer Reports, iFixit, and US PIRG) requested that the agency take aim at several commonplace anti-consumer practices, including software tethering" (making hardware useless or less useful later via firmware update), or the act of suddenly locking key functionality behind subscriptions:

Both practices are examples of how companies are using software tethers in their devices to infringe on a consumer's right to own the products they buy. While the FTC has taken some limited actions with regard to this issue, a lack of clarity and enforcement has led to an
ecosystem where consumers cannot reliably count on the connected products they buy to last.

The letter cites numerous instances of consumer harms Techdirt has covered at length, ranging from Peloton's recent decision to charge used bike owners a $95 fee for no coherent reason, to the smart" baby bassinet maker that recently decided to paywall most of the device's most popular features.

The letter correctly points out that this environment, where consumers are constantly shelling out significant money for devices that can be killed or rendered less useful (often without clear communications to end users), is resulting in a death by a thousand cuts" for consumer rights. And, the groups note, it's likely to only get worse without clear guidance and enforcement by the FTC.

The FTC has occasionally made inquiries in this space, but often only superficially. For example the FTC launched an investigation into Google's decision to turn Revolv smart home hardware into useless crap but then took no substantive action and implemented no meaningful consumer reforms.

But the (intentionally) underfunded, understaffed, and endlessly embattled agency only has so many resources, and struggles to tackle even far more pressing issues like widespread monopolization or privacy violations. Still, some federal guidance and a few warnings would probably go a long way in a smart" hardware sector that's become a hot mess in the cloud computing age.