On July 1, 2024, the new Minnesota right to repair law took effect, resulting in a major shift in what information and materials product manufacturers must be ready to provide buyers and repair businesses. This new act, titled The Digital Fair Repair Act[1], is intended to provide buyers with the ability to conveniently repair the products they purchase, either by having them repaired by an independent repair company or doing it themselves. However, the statute does this by saddling manufacturers with heavy requirements. Called one of the broadest right to repair laws in the country[2], the new law requires manufacturers to make available to purchasers and repair providers documentation, parts, and tools for maintenance and repair purposes for any digital electronic equipment and parts for the equipment sold or used in Minnesota.[3] These documents (such as repair manuals), parts, and tools must be made available on “fair and reasonable terms.”[4]
What are “fair and reasonable terms?” How much information must be made available via documentation and manuals? Are manufacturers subject to any liability caused by repair and maintenance performed by independent repair shops or buyers? These are only some of the questions that The Digital Fair Repair Act raises. The Act answers some questions on its own, while others are left open-ended. Because of the newness of the Act, there have been no cases or court rulings as of yet to help interpret the Act and answer these open-ended issues. Any case brought under this statute will be a case of first impression. Perhaps, soon we will see case law start to develop and answer the questions that have yet to be answered. For now, however, this article is intended to give the reader a basic understanding of the statute to best prepare their business to comply with the Act and limit legal exposure.
What is The Digital Fair Repair Act?
The Digital Fair Repair Act is Section 325E.72 of the Minnesota Statutes. This act is a “Right to Repair” law, the type of which is gaining popularity throughout the country in states such as Colorado, New York and Massachusetts.[5] The purpose of laws like this is in the name; to give a buyer the “right to repair” products they own instead of being obligated to have the manufacturer or the manufacturer’s approved servicer fix them. Many manufacturers, like Apple, have software locks and specific hardware that make fixing devices almost impossible without having to take it into the company.[6] Under a Right to Repair law, companies are required to make available the necessary parts and manuals so that the owner of the equipment can make fixes themselves or hire an independent repair company to do it.
The Minnesota Digital Fair Repair Act applies to any digital electronic equipment and parts sold or used in Minnesota.[7] Digital electronic equipment “means any hardware product that depends, in whole or in part, on digital electronics embedded in or attached to the product in order for the product to function…”[8] Given the digital age we are in, this Act affects essentially all equipment or products we use professionally or in our everyday life.
Under the Act, manufacturers of digital electronic equipment sold or used in Minnesota must make available to the owner of the equipment or third-party repair provider of such equipment documentation, parts, and tools, including any updates to information or embedded software, for diagnostic, maintenance, or repair purposes.[9] These materials must be provided on “fair and reasonable” terms upon request.
The Act offers an explanation as to what “fair and reasonable” terms are. Mostly, parts must be offered at a fair price to both parties, and manufacturers cannot make the providing of parts conditional on obligations like licensing, registration, or mandating repairs be from certain providers.[10] When it comes to documentation, manufacturers must provide it at no charge unless it is requested as a physical copy. Then the reasonable costs of preparing and sending a physical copy may be charged.[11] These parts, tools, and documentation must be made available within 60 days after the first sale of the digital electronic equipment in Minnesota.[12] This timeline is very important because the law is retroactive. Even though it did not go into effect until July 1, 2024, the Act applies to equipment sold on or after July 1, 2021.[13]
So, if your business manufactures equipment with digital electronic functions, then you must make sure that within 60 days of first selling that product in Minnesota you have made available the appropriate documents, parts, and tools. If your business has been selling equipment since July 1, 2021, you do not have 60 days to assemble the proper materials that need to be made available; you need to have the proper documents, parts and tools, ready to go as soon as possible.
What documentation do manufacturers have to provide and how should they provide it?
Again, the Act requires manufacturers to make available documentation, including any updates to information or embedded software, for diagnostic, maintenance, or repair purposes. But what exactly does this mean?
The Act describes documentation as “a manual, diagram, reporting output, service code description, schematic diagram, or similar information made available to facilitate diagnostic, maintenance, or repair services…”[14] Therefore, for any equipment that the manufacturer sells in Minnesota, there must also be a corresponding manual (or other form of document) to facilitate either the owner or a third-party repair person in maintaining and repairing the equipment.
How should these manuals be made available? The Act allows for either print or non-print format. The easiest and most efficient way manufacturers can make the manuals available is by publishing them on their website. However, be prepared to make available a printed version as well, because if a printed version is requested it must be provided.
Now come some questions that the Act does not provide clear guidance on. For whom should the documentation be written for? How understandable must it be? Some concerns that the Act does not directly address are those of language and comprehension level. The Act provides that documentation must be available in a fair and reasonable manner but only goes so far as to apply “fair and reasonable” to the cost of the documentation. However, the definition the Act provides us for “documentation” is that of a manual, diagram, schematic, or other information that a manufacturer would make available to an authorized repair provider.[15] An authorized repair provider is an individual or business that has an agreement with the manufacturer for a license or a trademark to offer repair services for a manufacturer’s equipment.[16] A manufacturer also counts as an authorized repair provider if it does not have such an agreement and provides repair services itself. [17]
The Act requires that the manufacturer provide to buyers and third-party repairers the same documentation and manuals that the manufacturer would provide its authorized repair providers or keep on hand for itself to assist in repairs. So, when confronting concerns over language and comprehension level that the manuals should be written in, it should be addressed from the standpoint of what is typically provided by a manufacturer to its authorized repair providers. These manuals are typically written for use by professionals in the field of digital electronic equipment repairs. Thus, manufacturers do not have to worry about lowering the comprehension level of their manuals down to, say, a third grade reading level in order to comply with the law. However, manufacturers should not take measures to raise the comprehension level of their documentation so high that third-party repair providers and owners cannot understand the documents. An attempt like this to circumvent the Act’s requirements is most certainly a violation of the right to repair law.
Just as manufacturers should take measures to make sure documents and manuals are understandable by their authorized repair providers and generally understandable to third-party repair providers and buyers of the equipment, manufacturers should consider the languages its documentation is available in. The Act provides no guidance on this question. Minnesota is a state of many languages. English and Spanish are primarily spoken and we often see manuals and directions printed in these two languages when assembling furniture or using power tools. However, there are many more languages spoken in the state. For example, the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources now prints its hunting and fishing regulation handbooks in Hmong, Karen, and Somali. In making sure the proper documentation is available under the Act, manufacturers should keep this in mind. Generally, a company should at least have copies in English and Spanish but consider the demographic make-up of your clientele. If there are other languages you are aware customers or third-party repair providers use, have documentation available in those translations.
Are there any limitations or exclusions to what manufacturers must provide?
Yes, several. The Act limits the information that must be provided to exclude the divulging of a trade secret or licensing of any intellectual property to buyers or a third-party repair provider.[18] Additionally, manufacturers are not required to make available any materials for the purpose of making modifications to the equipment.[19] Manufacturers also do not have to sell service parts if those parts are no longer provided by the manufacturer or made available to authorized repair providers by the manufacturer.[20] Further, the Act does not require manufacturers to make available special documentation, tools, and parts that would disable or override antitheft security measures set by the owner of the equipment without the owner’s authorization.[21]
There are also many types of manufacturers that are excluded under the Act and are not required to make available any documentation, parts, or tools. The following is a non-exhaustive list of manufacturers not subject to the Act: manufacturers of motor vehicles (and dealers); medical devices and equipment; off-road or nonroad equipment, such as farm implements and machinery, construction equipment, turf and yard equipment, portable generators, marine, all-terrain sports, and recreational equipment, internal combustion engines, generators, and power tools; video game consoles; energy storage systems; and cybersecurity.[22]
Can a manufacturer be subject to liability based on a manual or parts it has made available?
Some liability protection for manufacturers is provided under the Act. No manufacturer shall be liable for any damage or injury caused to any equipment, person, or property that happens as a result of a repair, maintenance, or modification by a buyer or third-party repair provider.[23]
In other words, someone who is performing repairs on equipment with the aid of a manual or parts provided by the manufacturer cannot sue the manufacturer if there is damage or injury. However, what if there is a question as to the quality of the manual or parts provided?
Again, we look at the requirements of making everything available in a fair and reasonable manner. As long as a manufacturer follows the Act and provides manuals as they would to authorized repair providers, and parts at a reasonable and fair price with no strings attached, then they will not be subject to liability. However, this liability protection only goes so far as to provide protection against improper installation and repairs performed by buyers and repair providers. Manufacturers will still most assuredly be subject to a product liability claim if the parts they distribute in compliance with the Act are in themselves defective and as a result cause injury or loss.
Conclusion
The Minnesota Digital Fair Repair Act is one of the broadest Right to Repair laws in the country. As such, there are a lot of new requirements of manufacturers, and they need to be aware of them. However, the Act only covers so many of the questions that we have. As issues crop up and courts start to make more and more rulings, we will start to have our questions answered. Until then, the best practice is to be compliant in making manuals, schematics, parts and tools available to customers and repair shops. Be overinclusive in considering what to make available, such as the language of manuals and the amount/what type of parts to have on hand. With the Act in effect, any customer or repair provider can request these documents and parts at any given moment. Make sure that you have manuals and other information ready and accessible, and an inventory of parts and tools that you will be able to conveniently distribute. If you are lacking in one of these areas, start preparing and organizing information for online or print availability. Begin analyzing what digital electronic equipment and parts may be needed for repairs and increase inventory in those areas.
Although the Digital Fair Repair Act is very broad and makes heavy requirements of manufacturers, it is not an insurmountable law dooming manufacturing companies to fail. As long as a manufacturer distributes documentation, parts, and tools in a fair and reasonable manner to repair providers and its customers then it will be in compliance under the Act.
[1] Minn. Stat. § 325E.72, subd. 1.
[2] Elain S. Povich, Minnesota’s new ‘right to repair’ law is the broadest one yet, Minnesota Reformer (Feb. 1, 2025, 3:19 PM), https://minnesotareformer.com/2023/05/30/minnesotas-new-right-to-repair-law-is-the-broadest-one-yet/.
[3] Minn. Stat. § 325E.72, subd. 3.
[4] Id.
[5] Elain S. Povich, Minnesota’s new ‘right to repair’ law is the broadest one yet, Minnesota Reformer (Feb. 1, 2025, 3:19 PM), https://minnesotareformer.com/2023/05/30/minnesotas-new-right-to-repair-law-is-the-broadest-one-yet/.
[6] Andrew Hazzard, Can you fix it? Yes, you can. Minnesota’s Right to Repair bill is now in effect., Sahan Journal (Feb. 1, 2025, 3:22 PM), https://sahanjournal.com/climate-environment/right-to-repair-new-minnesota-law-consumer-electronics/.
[7] Minn. Stat. § 325E.72, subd. 3.
[8] Id. at subd. 2(e).
[9] Id. at subd. 3.
[10] Id. at subd. 2(h).
[11] Id. at subd. 2(h)(2)(ii)(B)(3).
[12] Id. at subd. 3(b).
[13] Id. at subd. 8.
[14] Id. at subd. 1(f).
[15] Id. at subd. 2(f).
[16] Id. at subd. 2(b)(1).
[17] Id.
[18] Id. at subd. 5(a).
[19] Id. at subd. 5(d).
[20] Id. at subd. 5(e).
[21] Id. at subd. 5(f).
[22] Id. at subd. 6.
[23] Id. at subd. 7.
