SB 1564 creates a Missouri “right to repair” framework for a broad range of products, excluding motor vehicles. It defines key terms such as manufacturer, owner, independent repair provider, authorized repair provider, embedded software, service parts, remote diagnostics, and trade secret, and then gives product owners and independent repair providers rights to access the same diagnostic and repair information that manufacturers provide to their own authorized repair channels. The bill also requires manufacturers to make service parts, diagnostic tools, firmware updates, and related documentation available on fair and reasonable terms, and in the same manner and time as they are made available to authorized repair providers.
The bill includes several limits and carve-outs. It does not require disclosure of trade secrets, does not override existing authorized repair agreements, and does not require access to nondiagnostic or nonrepair information. It also exempts products under a valid warranty, medical devices and related medical-setting software or equipment, and central station security devices and alarm systems. If a manufacturer fails to comply, an owner or independent repair provider must first give written notice and a 30-day opportunity to cure before filing in circuit court. The attorney general is assigned enforcement authority, and each violation carries a $500 fine deposited into the county school fund.
SB 1564 would add two new sections to Chapter 407 of the Missouri Revised Statutes, creating enforceable statutory rights for owners and independent repair providers to obtain repair information, diagnostic tools, firmware updates, and service parts from manufacturers. It would also establish a private complaint process, attorney general enforcement, and a civil penalty structure, while preserving trade secret protections and excluding certain regulated products and systems. The bill would primarily affect manufacturers, authorized repair providers, independent repair businesses, product owners, and the attorney general’s office.
Based on the bill text and the absence of recorded committee testimony or votes in the provided materials, the overall sentiment appears supportive of expanding consumer and independent repair access. The bill’s structure suggests a policy goal of improving repairability and competition in the repair market while trying to address manufacturer concerns through exemptions for trade secrets, warranties, and sensitive security or medical products. No contrary viewpoints are documented in the supplied context, so there is no recorded opposition or amendment debate to indicate broader controversy.
The main points of contention likely center on how far manufacturers must go in sharing diagnostic information, software, and parts, and whether the required terms are truly “fair and reasonable.” Manufacturers may be concerned about protection of trade secrets, cybersecurity, warranty administration, and the burden of supporting aftermarket repair channels, while independent repair providers and consumers would favor broader access and standardized formats. The bill attempts to balance those interests by excluding trade secrets, limiting access during valid warranties, and carving out medical and security systems, but those same carve-outs could also be debated as too broad or too narrow.