FTC urged to make smart devices say how long they will be supported

For some of us, few things are more infuriating than when a gadget stops working due to a software change. As we've frequently covered here at Ars, startups and big tech companies are guilty of rendering hardware obsolete and/or stripping it of core functions. A pile of activists are urging the Federal Trade Commission to get involved.

In a letter sent today to Samuel Levine, director of the FTC's Bureau of Consumer Protection, and Serena Viswanathan, associate director of the FTC's Division of Advertising Practices, representatives from 17 groups, including Consumer Reports, the US PIRG, and iFixit, urged the FTC for "clear guidance" around software tethering. Software tethering, per the letter, is "making functions of a device reliant on embedded software that ties the device back to a manufacturer’s servers.” As it stands, the practice is hurting customers with "unfair and deceptive practices," such as suddenly locking features behind a subscription—like the Snoo smart bassinet recently did—or bricking already-purchased devices, which Spotify did with its Car Thing.

The letter to the FTC argues that such practices hinder owners' ability to own their hardware.

"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 reads.

“Death by a thousand cuts”

The letter, which includes signatures from members of the Electronic Frontier Foundation, Software Freedom Conservancy, and Repair Cafe, compared the loss of features on already-purchased devices to "death by a thousand cuts." In addition to losing what users may consider critical functionality, the devices may also lose resale value when their capabilities are changed after purchase.

Last month, for example, Peloton made it so that secondhand Pelton exercise equipment won't work until the new owner pays a $95 "used equipment activation fee." This move was criticized as hurting the secondhand market, which benefits consumers and helps the smart, pricey devices avoid becoming e-waste.

The letter cites numerous devices that were suddenly hindered significantly—or completely—by software updates. For example, the letter, citing Ars' reporting, points to Oral-B toothbrushes losing Amazon Alexa functionality. It also notes bricked Google Dropcams, Amazon Halos, and many more examples (in some, but not all examples, customers have been offered a refund).

Proposed FTC guidance

The letter suggests FTC guidance that the authors believe could help shoppers decide if a smart gadget is worth investing in. This includes requiring "disclosure of a guaranteed minimum support time on the product packaging":

Activists are also asking the FTC to "require companies to ensure that the core functionality of a product will work even if the Internet connection fails or the software stops getting updated" and to "encourage tools and methods that enable reuse if software support ends."

"Tools could include upgrades to hardware so manufacturers can continue software support, or software that would allow consumers to repurpose the hardware for offline use, and should be continually available for the reasonably likely lifespan of the hardware," the letter reads.

Finally, the FTC should "protect 'adversarial interoperability'" in order to improve reuse options and "conduct an educational program to encourage manufacturers to build longevity into the design of their products."

When asked about the likelihood of the FTC getting involved with these concerns, Lucas Rockett Gutterman, Designed to Last Director with U.S. PIRG and one of the letter's signatories, pointed to the FTC's 2016 investigation of Nest Labs' shutdown of the Revolv Smart Home Hub. Although the FTC didn't take enforcement, it said that it was concerned that "unilaterally rendering the devices inoperable would cause unjustified, substantial consumer injury that consumers themselves could not reasonably avoid."

"Problems caused by software tethering have only gotten worse since then, and it's time for the FTC to act," Gutterman told Ars Technica.

He also pointed to action that the FTC took against Harley-Davidson. In 2022, the FTC said that the company was voiding warranties if people used third-party parts or dealers for repairs:

What if instead of voiding warranties, Harley-Davidson wrote software to deactivate its motorcycles if it detected [third-party hitches]? Or the motorcycle wouldn't start because a software service had ended? Would the motorcycle giant have been able to get away with it? That would be absurd. If voiding warranties due to attaching third-party products is illegal, then software lockouts should be illegal as well.

Buying smart gadgets can be risky

As right-to-repair activists push for government involvement, the question of how and to what degree companies should be held legally accountable for ongoing smart gadget functionality and support grows. The use of software and the Internet by everyday objects is getting more common as tech and non-tech companies push products with a connected angle to pique interest and deliver new, trendy features. However, these smart devices risk becoming e-waste that's hard to measure. Further complicating matters, the reasoning behind bricking products can vary.

For example, some printer companies are known to brick already-purchased printers' ability to use third-party ink cartridges. This is ostensibly an attempt to make more money in a declining industry.

Other times, as the letter to the FTC notes, the bricked devices result from a failed company. The discontinuation of products could also be tied to a generally successful company having problems in other areas, leading to culled budgets, reduced feature sets, and shelved products. And there are times when products released as a marketing gimmick or as a novelty stop being supported post-purchase.

With bricked products putting the burden of failed businesses, changing economics, and/or shifting company priorities on users, buying a smart device can not only feel risky but dumb. Companies should consider helping to alleviate that risk by engaging in some of the letter's suggestions, like designing for longevity and promising minimum support times, without being mandated to.