A BILL to amend and reenact § 59.1-200 of the Code of Virginia and to amend the Code of Virginia by adding in Title 59.1 a chapter numbered 60, consisting of sections numbered 59.1-614 through 59.1-617, relating to Digital Right to Repair Act; access to diagnostics, tools, service documentation, and firmware; penalties.
HB1251 would create a new Virginia “Digital Right to Repair Act” and tie violations of that act to the Virginia Consumer Protection Act. The bill requires original equipment manufacturers that sell or supply covered digital electronic equipment in Virginia to make available, on fair and reasonable terms, the documentation, parts, tools, and related updates needed for diagnosis, maintenance, and repair. It also requires access to special documentation, parts, and tools needed to disable and reset electronic security locks or other security-related functions, while allowing reasonable charges for printed copies of documentation.
The bill defines key terms such as original equipment manufacturer, independent repair provider, owner, tool, part, and equipment, and it carves out several exclusions. It would not require disclosure of trade secrets except as necessary to provide repair materials, would not require access that compromises cybersecurity or reveals personally identifiable information, and would not apply to agricultural equipment, video game consoles, energy storage systems, critical infrastructure, or most motor vehicle products other than diagnostic software. It also limits application to medical devices where federal law would not permit the requirement.
In addition to the new repair-rights chapter, HB1251 amends § 59.1-200, Virginia’s prohibited practices statute, to add violations of the new chapter as a prohibited consumer practice. That means manufacturers or others who fail to comply could face enforcement under the Virginia Consumer Protection Act, including its remedies and penalties. The bill also appears to broaden the consumer-protection framework by placing right-to-repair obligations alongside a long list of existing deceptive or unlawful business practices.
The overall sentiment reflected in the available record is limited but appears procedural rather than divided: the bill was introduced and referred to the House Committee on Labor and Commerce, where it was left. No committee transcript or recorded votes are available in the provided materials, so there is no documented floor debate or formal vote history to indicate broader support or opposition. Based on the bill’s structure, it is clearly intended to expand consumer and independent repair access, while preserving manufacturer protections for trade secrets, cybersecurity, and certain regulated products.
The main points of contention likely center on whether manufacturers should be compelled to provide repair materials and security-reset tools to independent repair providers and owners, and whether the bill’s fair-and-reasonable pricing standard is sufficiently specific. Other likely concerns include the scope of exclusions, especially for motor vehicles, medical devices, and products tied to cybersecurity or critical infrastructure, as well as the practical effect of making noncompliance a consumer-protection violation.
HB1251 would add a new chapter to Title 59.1 establishing enforceable repair-access rights for owners and independent repair providers, and it would amend Virginia’s consumer protection law so that violations of the chapter are treated as prohibited practices under § 59.1-200. The bill would affect original equipment manufacturers, independent repair businesses, owners of covered equipment, and enforcement agencies by creating a statutory duty to provide repair documentation, parts, tools, and certain lock-reset information on fair and reasonable terms, subject to specified exclusions and limitations.
The available record suggests the bill was treated as a consumer-rights and repair-access measure, but there is no transcript or vote history showing active debate or a recorded partisan split. Its referral and subsequent status of being left in the Labor and Commerce Committee indicate that it did not advance in the available legislative history. The bill’s design reflects a pro-repair, pro-consumer orientation while also incorporating manufacturer-friendly carveouts for trade secrets, cybersecurity, and sensitive product categories.
Likely areas of contention include the burden on original equipment manufacturers to provide parts, tools, firmware, and diagnostic documentation to independent repair providers; whether the bill’s “fair and reasonable terms” standard is too vague or too restrictive; and whether the security-lock and firmware provisions could create cybersecurity or intellectual-property risks. Additional debate may arise over the exclusions for motor vehicles, agricultural equipment, video game consoles, energy storage systems, critical infrastructure, and medical devices, as well as the decision to enforce the chapter through the Virginia Consumer Protection Act.