An Act to create 218.0170 of the statutes; Relating to: the right to repair motor vehicles and providing a penalty. (FE)
SB129 would create a new state right-to-repair law for motor vehicles by adding s. 218.0170 to the Wisconsin statutes. The bill requires manufacturers to provide vehicle owners, and in many cases independent repair businesses and parts companies, access to vehicle-generated data, critical repair information, and repair tools needed to diagnose, service, calibrate, and repair vehicles. It also bars manufacturers from using technological or legal barriers that interfere with that access, from steering owners away from repair providers of their choice, and from mandating specific brands or types of parts, tools, or equipment except in limited circumstances such as recalls and warranty repairs.
The bill defines key terms broadly, including aftermarket parts, telematics systems, vehicle-generated data, service providers, and motor vehicle repair facilities. It also requires access to wireless or telematics-based data through a standardized access platform, and it voids contract terms that would waive or limit the manufacturer’s obligations under the new section. Manufacturers that violate the law would face forfeitures of up to $10,000 per violation, with each prohibited act and each day of knowing noncompliance treated as separate violations.
If enacted, SB129 would significantly expand statutory rights for vehicle owners and independent repair actors in Wisconsin by limiting manufacturer control over diagnostics, repair data, and repair ecosystems. It would affect motor vehicle manufacturers most directly, but also benefit owners, lessees, aftermarket parts manufacturers, remanufacturers, repair facilities, distributors, service providers, and equipment manufacturers by guaranteeing access to information and tools on fair, reasonable, and nondiscriminatory terms. The bill would also invalidate contrary contract provisions and create a new civil forfeiture penalty for noncompliance.
The available record shows no committee transcript or recorded votes, so there is no documented floor or committee debate to gauge detailed sentiment. The bill’s introduction with multiple bipartisan cosponsors suggests at least some cross-party interest in the issue, but the measure ultimately failed to pass pursuant to Senate Joint Resolution 1. Overall, the bill appears to have been framed as a consumer choice and independent repair access measure, with no formal recorded opposition or support statements in the provided materials.
The main points of contention likely center on the scope of manufacturer obligations and the balance between repair access and vehicle cybersecurity. The bill requires broad access to data and tools and limits manufacturers’ ability to recommend or require specific parts or repair channels, which could concern manufacturers and dealer networks that rely on proprietary systems and branded service guidance. At the same time, the bill preserves an exception for cryptographic or technological protections needed to secure vehicles and safety-critical systems, indicating that cybersecurity and data security were likely important countervailing concerns. Another likely dispute is the practical and financial burden of providing standardized, nondiscriminatory access to telematics and repair information.