I must be missing something here because you can find any part you need
to fix an iPhone on Ebay for cheap. iFixIt has tutorials for most of it.
Nothing is stopping you from fixing your phone (or having someone else do it) right now!
As
for the modern car? I have a Porsche that has it's own coding tools et
al, but I just bought a code reader and software off of Ebay for $35. So
nothing is stopping me from recoding things as I see fit.
Why does there need to be a law for this?
I agree with you - it is all doable now and people do it. There are a thousand small shops that can repair much of common damage on iPhones and all sorts of other glued and sealed or otherwise difficult to get at products. But companies actively work to limit user repairability. It is not just about iPhones, but toasters and vacuum cleaners etc, too. A law requiring companies to go out of their way too make products user repairable is required because repairing 'stuff' is unnecessarily difficult. I don't think it is a technical issue as much as a philosophical one and for that reason 'business' is unfit to make it.
I agree that manufacturers will not move on this unless pushed.
A simple example. Thermostat controlled fan heaters. They are largely designed with tamperproof screws and no access to the fan blades or the heat sensor. The result is the slow build up of dust on the fan blades and the sensor. Slow enough for the sensor to stop working correctly when the heater is out of warranty. When the heater turns itself off after a few minutes with the room still cold, most people start looking for new one, unaware that a simple cleaning operation could resolve the problem .
Apple will lose this eventually. They charge a fortune for repairs and have been caught hiding error code info to the detriment of professional repair shops. Consumers have no alternative but to pay hundreds for a logic board replacement even in the case where a cable is disconnected. In the case of water damage warranty is already lost so denying consumers the right to pay for it to be cleaned instead of being thrown away and a new one purchased is harmful for the environement. Apple will likely be forced to provide more realistic repair options rather than silly flat rate full replacements.
Why not just buy the AppleCare+ warranty and then its covered? Its a small price to pay vs paying for a repair. Its no different than anything else. If you don't think you need to buy an extended warranty (including accidental) then thats the risk you take. I would much rather have Apple do the repair vs Bob's screen repair in a mall where they take a shitty piece of glass and replace it where as if you go to Apple to get it repaired you're at least getting OEM parts put back in by experienced people and these people have the resources of Apple to fall back on.
As far as something like a home button well that's a security issue there because it has the finger print reader on it. I wouldn't want some $2 home button that looks just like the OEM one but works like shit, and could present itself to be a major security issue. You don't know where the sensor was made, how well it works, what data its recording, etc, etc. Again, I'd much rather have Apple do the repair.
Just because you buy something doesn't mean you have the right to get it repaired wherever you want under warranty. Apple isn't alone with this. One example I can think of is if you get a Dodge Charger or Challenger Hellcat the supercharger is a a sealed unit. If you open it, you void the warranty and as soon as a dealer sees it was opened they'll flag your VIN an no dealership can perform warranty work on it.
AppleCare+ is GREAT! I get it on all of my Apple products. But, after 24 months and a minute, it is gone. Gone like it had never existed. So, for any product over 2 years old, we are back to asking: How and Who can repair them?
I think what's happening is people get new phones and don't get AppleCare+ for one reason or another and then drop it and break the screen or get it wet and cry foul because its expensive to fix. In other words, Apple needs to make their products repairable and fixable because people are careless and don't want to spend the money for AppleCare+.
I suspect that one of the several reasons people don't get it is that they get their phone from a carrier who then pushes their own product instead of AppleCare+. Or, from a retailer who never mentions it. (And of course, there are always those who just don't want to pay for it and take the chance!).
But, unlike many on this site, I do not think that a $600+ product is disposable after two years.... When something happens to it, either from wear or from tear, there needs to be some reasonable recourse. For the most part, I find Apple repairs expensive but not prohibitive. So, knowing the trade-offs of an open architecture, I support keeping repairs under Apple.
Right to Repair makes sense for something like automobiles so people can have their vehicle serviced/repaired anywhere they want.
It doesn't make sense for something like an iPhone, which is an intricate piece of electronic hardware.
It's a bit naive to suggest that cars, as built today, are not "intricate piece[s] of [among other things] electronic hardware'... Many of them even have lithium battery technology, so the argument needs to differentiate on that point. Further, if Apple can train its own people to repair these devices, and can certify other parties, it might be reasonable to suggest that providing detailed manuals would, in fact, lead to the level of expertise required to repair them safely... It really appears more likely that Apple is concerned with its own repair/replace revenues, not solely with public safety.
Wrong! Closed systems were instituted by Steve Jobs long before repair was even an issue. It has nothing to do with revenue. And actually, Jobs took flack for doing it because it LIMITED revenue! The public safety argument is thin. Jobs did it to improve and insure quality -- and of course, public safety is a subset of that.
I'm a Nebraskan, and I wholeheartedly support this legislation.
A bit of background that is ignored by the article though.
Yes, the proposed legislation would force Apple and others to open up to consumers and repair shops, but that was not where this began. Nebraska is one of the largest agriculture states in the nation. This legislation started with farmers. When Farmer Bob goes out and buys a new $300,000 combine to harvest the corn which ends up in your breakfast cereal, he can't repair the tractor on his own. He's forced to work through a dealer even for minor items because everything is tightly locked down both electronically and parts. The tractor's computer throws an error code? Farmer Bob has to pay a hefty diagnostic fee to the dealer just to find out it needs one little part. Then, he has to pay the dealer to come out to his farm and replace that one little part.
Imagine if every time a little light popped up on your car's dash board, you had to take it to an authorized dealer and ONLY an authorized dealer, pay a hefty diagnostic fee, and then can ONLY have it serviced there and you walk away $500 poorer, when all it needed was a $25 oxygen sensor and 20 minutes under the hood.
Would this legislation also affect phones, computers, etc.? Yes, it would. Fine. Awesome. Let me fix my own stuff! I'm competent. If I screw it up and burn down my house, that's on me, not Apple. If I'm not comfortable doing the work myself and I take it to Sam's Phone Fix-It and he screws it up, fine. He'll be hearing from my lawyer or my insurance company and they can sort it out.
Those are all good arguments for OPEN SYSTEMS. If you like them, buy a Windows or Android product. Starting with the Macintosh, Steve Jobs decided that Apple would go with CLOSED systems to insure quality. The repair cycle is just part of that closed system. ... People want Apple quality but don't like the trade-offs....
I'm all for it! No reason for Apple or others to make things so hard to tear apart! Especially these days when everything is so thin. Like an Air you should be able to take the bottom cover off and everything laid out and simply removed after a few screws from a single layer. Same for iPhone. Remove two screws, lift the screen, easily unplug, easily replace logic board, etc. No reason for gluing batteries in place, etc. If they can build it for beauty inside and out they can built it to be easily taken apart and repaired instead of the overly complicated ways they do now on purpose!
There's likely very good reason any glued components are glued. Phone get jostled, dropped, creating impacts that might shift internal components. And that could create exactly the tolerance issues that Samsung cited as causing battery fires.
On top of that, I believe the gluing at least around the case is part of the water proofing. Thats another thing about going to Bob's iPhone repair. They may not be able to make it seal back up properly. What if you got this iPhone off eBay or something not knowing it was opened and not properly sealed back up? So you get it wet thinking its not big deal when in fact that water leaked inside it. I can see legal issues with this already.
You raise a valid point but as I touched on earlier, we should be moving away from 'disposable' electronic devices and designing for repairability.
Consumer electronics are designed for very specific use cases -- size being perhaps foremost. As more functionality is embedded or put into silicon I don't see a reasonable expectation for users to be repairing their consumer electronics. Are you soldering components onto your mainboard? No, and nobody can reasonably expect any owner to do so. It's a silly waste of our time to argue that it's something Apple should design for.
Well I don't think anyone has specifically mentioned soldering nor that it is done by users.
That said, there are specialists that will look at solder joints under a microscope and reflow them if necessary. Of course accessibility is the first step of designing for repairability. If you go so thin so as to thwart accessibility, perhaps you've gone too far. That is the point.
I'm all for it! No reason for Apple or others to make things so hard to tear apart! Especially these days when everything is so thin. Like an Air you should be able to take the bottom cover off and everything laid out and simply removed after a few screws from a single layer. Same for iPhone. Remove two screws, lift the screen, easily unplug, easily replace logic board, etc. No reason for gluing batteries in place, etc. If they can build it for beauty inside and out they can built it to be easily taken apart and repaired instead of the overly complicated ways they do now on purpose!
There's likely very good reason any glued components are glued. Phone get jostled, dropped, creating impacts that might shift internal components. And that could create exactly the tolerance issues that Samsung cited as causing battery fires.
On top of that, I believe the gluing at least around the case is part of the water proofing. Thats another thing about going to Bob's iPhone repair. They may not be able to make it seal back up properly. What if you got this iPhone off eBay or something not knowing it was opened and not properly sealed back up? So you get it wet thinking its not big deal when in fact that water leaked inside it. I can see legal issues with this already.
You raise a valid point but as I touched on earlier, we should be moving away from 'disposable' electronic devices and designing for repairability.
Consumer electronics are designed for very specific use cases -- size being perhaps foremost. As more functionality is embedded or put into silicon I don't see a reasonable expectation for users to be repairing their consumer electronics. Are you soldering components onto your mainboard? No, and nobody can reasonably expect any owner to do so. It's a silly waste of our time to argue that it's something Apple should design for.
Well I don't think anyone has specifically mentioned soldering nor that it is done by users.
That said, there are specialists that will look at solder joints under a microscope and reflow them if necessary. Of course accessibility is the first step of designing for repairability. If you go so thin so as to thwart accessibility, perhaps you've gone too far. That is the point.
The repair you've described is not a reasonable one to expect consumers to do. If an electronics specialist can do it, so be it, but it's not reasonable and detracts from my device's value to me to limit how small and compact my devices can be because you want some specialist somewhere to be able to reflow components with a microscope. It's absurd. That's the point.
Should a Pacemaker be engineered bigger or compromised in some other way solely to make it easier for your local repairman to service it? Or should it be engineered in the best way possible for its job to be done?
I'm all for it! No reason for Apple or others to make things so hard to tear apart! Especially these days when everything is so thin. Like an Air you should be able to take the bottom cover off and everything laid out and simply removed after a few screws from a single layer. Same for iPhone. Remove two screws, lift the screen, easily unplug, easily replace logic board, etc. No reason for gluing batteries in place, etc. If they can build it for beauty inside and out they can built it to be easily taken apart and repaired instead of the overly complicated ways they do now on purpose!
There's likely very good reason any glued components are glued. Phone get jostled, dropped, creating impacts that might shift internal components. And that could create exactly the tolerance issues that Samsung cited as causing battery fires.
On top of that, I believe the gluing at least around the case is part of the water proofing. Thats another thing about going to Bob's iPhone repair. They may not be able to make it seal back up properly. What if you got this iPhone off eBay or something not knowing it was opened and not properly sealed back up? So you get it wet thinking its not big deal when in fact that water leaked inside it. I can see legal issues with this already.
You raise a valid point but as I touched on earlier, we should be moving away from 'disposable' electronic devices and designing for repairability.
Consumer electronics are designed for very specific use cases -- size being perhaps foremost. As more functionality is embedded or put into silicon I don't see a reasonable expectation for users to be repairing their consumer electronics. Are you soldering components onto your mainboard? No, and nobody can reasonably expect any owner to do so. It's a silly waste of our time to argue that it's something Apple should design for.
Well I don't think anyone has specifically mentioned soldering nor that it is done by users.
That said, there are specialists that will look at solder joints under a microscope and reflow them if necessary. Of course accessibility is the first step of designing for repairability. If you go so thin so as to thwart accessibility, perhaps you've gone too far. That is the point.
The repair you've described is not a reasonable one to expect consumers to do. If an electronics specialist can do it, so be it, but it's not reasonable and detracts from my device's value to me to limit how small and compact my devices can be because you want some specialist somewhere to be able to reflow components with a microscope. It's absurd. That's the point.
Should a Pacemaker be engineered bigger or compromised in some other way solely to make it easier for your local repairman to service it? Or should it be engineered in the best way possible for its job to be done?
Well, like I said, I haven't asked for component level repair, only commented that it was an option. Pacemakers aren't consumer electronics and I have no plans to take my father in law to a bucket shop to have him opened up.
I'm all for it! No reason for Apple or others to make things so hard to tear apart! Especially these days when everything is so thin. Like an Air you should be able to take the bottom cover off and everything laid out and simply removed after a few screws from a single layer. Same for iPhone. Remove two screws, lift the screen, easily unplug, easily replace logic board, etc. No reason for gluing batteries in place, etc. If they can build it for beauty inside and out they can built it to be easily taken apart and repaired instead of the overly complicated ways they do now on purpose!
Snarky comment of the day: If you could can do that you should go work for Apple or any other phone maker. I would buy that phone.
Right to Repair makes sense for something like automobiles so people can have their vehicle serviced/repaired anywhere they want.
It doesn't make sense for something like an iPhone, which is an intricate piece of electronic hardware.
No it isn't intricate piece of electronics - Apple made it this way which is foolish idea that seems to perpetuate expensive purchase of replacement devices. Battery is to be replaced. As far as car if you break windshield you do not replace car or go to manufacturer for part - trust me I did it few months ago. No they did not use OEM part, but equivalent which could be even improved from OEM (many aftermarket brake parts are higher quality than OEM - performance brakes for example... if you can afford them). Same with iPhone if you drop you should be able to ask locar repair shop and not even the same part could be installed. Mods are on you. Hell I might even need to install different antenna so , wht is the big deal?
I'm not sure how a private company can be compelled to make sure that it establishes independent private companies to handle repairs. If a sompany wants to become an authorized repair center, they are certainly welcome to apply, take the courses, and pay the fees.
I'm all for it! No reason for Apple or others to make things so hard to tear apart! Especially these days when everything is so thin. Like an Air you should be able to take the bottom cover off and everything laid out and simply removed after a few screws from a single layer. Same for iPhone. Remove two screws, lift the screen, easily unplug, easily replace logic board, etc. No reason for gluing batteries in place, etc. If they can build it for beauty inside and out they can built it to be easily taken apart and repaired instead of the overly complicated ways they do now on purpose!
I don't think you understand the issue here. Apple has all the reasons to refuse Right to Repair, because not only it solved any solution, it created even more problems. I am all for simplicity and authentication.
My iPhone 4s and 5s was repared by a trusted and very compitent third party shop giving it extra years of use for me. If I followed Apple's advice I would have bought a new one every three years and that would have been wasteful.
Apple is such a hair trigger target for litigation when any problem is found with their phone whether it's real or perceived that they will be able to use that as a reason why taking repairs out of their hands or the hands of approved repairers should be resisted. Rightly or wrongly I think that this point will resonate. It's a tiny bit like the way Donald Trump's hate filled comments about Muslims before the election came back to bite him regarding the recent appeals court ruling.
I must be missing something here because you can find any part you need
to fix an iPhone on Ebay for cheap. iFixIt has tutorials for most of it.
Nothing is stopping you from fixing your phone (or having someone else do it) right now!
As
for the modern car? I have a Porsche that has it's own coding tools et
al, but I just bought a code reader and software off of Ebay for $35. So
nothing is stopping me from recoding things as I see fit.
Why does there need to be a law for this?
I agree with you - it is all doable now and people do it. There are a thousand small shops that can repair much of common damage on iPhones and all sorts of other glued and sealed or otherwise difficult to get at products. But companies actively work to limit user repairability. It is not just about iPhones, but toasters and vacuum cleaners etc, too. A law requiring companies to go out of their way too make products user repairable is required because repairing 'stuff' is unnecessarily difficult. I don't think it is a technical issue as much as a philosophical one and for that reason 'business' is unfit to make it.
Why don't you instead go and buy products that are easy to repair yourself instead of requiring the government to make a law to FORCE companies to make their products repairable. Use the Free Market and vote with your wallet. You nanny state dems are so unbelievable leaning on government force, which is immoral, instead of just supporting other companies or creating a product yourself. If you don't like what a certain manufacture has to offer THEN DON'T BUY IT. Apple isn't holding a gun to your head to buy their products, but you're perfectly willing to hold a gun to theirs (literally) to force them to comply with your ideology? This is capatilism, not facism.
Hey, buddy. keep your politics and straw man arguments downs, it has nothing to do with "dems" (the right to repair thing is not in the platform )
Your fracking senseless rant is absurd considering your sacks of putrid shits that's about to completely gut the EPA created by... Nixon (new law in congress) while at the same time making laws forcing woman to carry rapists children (in Arkansas).
So please frac off before I really blow your self serving inanity about "nanny state" (sic) sky high.
Hahaha everything you just said is not at all an argument against mine. How is it a senseless rant? Forcing Apply to comply with something just because you want it is immoral. If you want a repairable smartphone you should make one yourself and let the free market decide which is best. The reason it is a nanny state decision is because Apple is doing something you don't agree with so your first solution is to run to government (aka the nanny) and cry and moan to get Apple to do what you want rather than take your money elsewhere. It' so hypocritical that you are more than willing to FORCE Apple to go along with what you want, but you are against Apple forcing you to go along with what they want which they can't do because they have competition.
If enough people want this, then they should stop buying iPhones until they do. Hit them in their bottom line, not create more senseless laws.
I must be missing something here because you can find any part you need
to fix an iPhone on Ebay for cheap. iFixIt has tutorials for most of it.
Nothing is stopping you from fixing your phone (or having someone else do it) right now!
As
for the modern car? I have a Porsche that has it's own coding tools et
al, but I just bought a code reader and software off of Ebay for $35. So
nothing is stopping me from recoding things as I see fit.
Why does there need to be a law for this?
I agree with you - it is all doable now and people do it. There are a thousand small shops that can repair much of common damage on iPhones and all sorts of other glued and sealed or otherwise difficult to get at products. But companies actively work to limit user repairability. It is not just about iPhones, but toasters and vacuum cleaners etc, too. A law requiring companies to go out of their way too make products user repairable is required because repairing 'stuff' is unnecessarily difficult. I don't think it is a technical issue as much as a philosophical one and for that reason 'business' is unfit to make it.
Why don't you instead go and buy products that are easy to repair yourself instead of requiring the government to make a law to FORCE companies to make their products repairable. Use the Free Market and vote with your wallet. You nanny state dems are so unbelievable leaning on government force, which is immoral, instead of just supporting other companies or creating a product yourself. If you don't like what a certain manufacture has to offer THEN DON'T BUY IT. Apple isn't holding a gun to your head to buy their products, but you're perfectly willing to hold a gun to theirs (literally) to force them to comply with your ideology? This is capatilism, not facism.
It is not a free market.
If it were everybody would suffer.
There is consumer legislation to protect your rights as a consumer.
There are health regulations to protect your health.
There is environmental legislation to control what goes into products and their impact on the environment together with how those products are disposed of.
If it were not for legislation you would have lead everywhere and would not remember what you ate for breakfast. You would also probably have a 60 day unenforceable warranty.
Legislation does not force Apple. If forces industry (and consumers).
You don't have any proof that everyone would suffer in a free market so don't spout such ignorance. Hong Kong has the most free economy in the world and is one of the strongest cities in the world. There are some things I don't want to wait on the free market to solve for sure, but something like this we don't need another law for. They aren't killing people, and they still offer a warranty these repairs and in some cases giving out brand new phones.
Phines arent like cars and we shouldn't expect Apple to proved parts that are already in short supply to 3rd party questionable repair shops.
It's a bit naive to suggest that cars, as built today, are not "intricate piece[s] of [among other things] electronic hardware'...etc.
I really doubt this. How much do they make in repairs? Is it even a line item in their earnings statements? Not new sales, which are eternal, but repairs?
It's certainly part of the profit picture of the retail stores doing the repairs, the prices of which they control by limiting competition. And if repair prices, sans competition, discourage the repair, then new sales result sooner than they might otherwise, and we can certainly see "line item" profits for sales. Most of us take a lot of pride in how long we can run these "devices", when we feel the occasional repair is cost effective...but, if we feel it isn't?
Wrong! Closed systems were instituted by Steve Jobs long before repair was even an issue.
When, my friend, has repair NOT been an issue with these or any retail products? Only one time: before you sell your first item... So, only in that sense did "closed systems" come first.
I must be missing something here because you can find any part you need
to fix an iPhone on Ebay for cheap. iFixIt has tutorials for most of it.
Nothing is stopping you from fixing your phone (or having someone else do it) right now!
As
for the modern car? I have a Porsche that has it's own coding tools et
al, but I just bought a code reader and software off of Ebay for $35. So
nothing is stopping me from recoding things as I see fit.
Why does there need to be a law for this?
I agree with you - it is all doable now and people do it. There are a thousand small shops that can repair much of common damage on iPhones and all sorts of other glued and sealed or otherwise difficult to get at products. But companies actively work to limit user repairability. It is not just about iPhones, but toasters and vacuum cleaners etc, too. A law requiring companies to go out of their way too make products user repairable is required because repairing 'stuff' is unnecessarily difficult. I don't think it is a technical issue as much as a philosophical one and for that reason 'business' is unfit to make it.
Why don't you instead go and buy products that are easy to repair yourself instead of requiring the government to make a law to FORCE companies to make their products repairable. Use the Free Market and vote with your wallet. You nanny state dems are so unbelievable leaning on government force, which is immoral, instead of just supporting other companies or creating a product yourself. If you don't like what a certain manufacture has to offer THEN DON'T BUY IT. Apple isn't holding a gun to your head to buy their products, but you're perfectly willing to hold a gun to theirs (literally) to force them to comply with your ideology? This is capatilism, not facism.
It is not a free market.
If it were everybody would suffer.
There is consumer legislation to protect your rights as a consumer.
There are health regulations to protect your health.
There is environmental legislation to control what goes into products and their impact on the environment together with how those products are disposed of.
If it were not for legislation you would have lead everywhere and would not remember what you ate for breakfast. You would also probably have a 60 day unenforceable warranty.
Legislation does not force Apple. If forces industry (and consumers).
You don't have any proof that everyone would suffer in a free market so don't spout such ignorance. Hong Kong has the most free economy in the world and is one of the strongest cities in the world. There are some things I don't want to wait on the free market to solve for sure, but something like this we don't need another law for. They aren't killing people, and they still offer a warranty these repairs and in some cases giving out brand new phones.
Phines arent like cars and we shouldn't expect Apple to proved parts that are already in short supply to 3rd party questionable repair shops.
I find it ironic that you ask for 'proof'. What would you define as proof?
Last time I checked, the US was using antibiotics as growth accelerators in poultry. Something that is completely banned in the EU. Who benefits from that situation? IIRC, Avian Flu was first detected in Hong Kong.
Even during the great depression, food was destroyed to keep prices higher.
The sugar lobby has kept sugar away from medical legislation for decades even though refined sugar is a proven slow killer. The pharmaceutical industry on the other hand, demonised cholesterol and built a mult-billion dollar statins industry to fight something that wasn't a proven killer, and probably does more harm than good. Who benefits from that?
There was uproar in the EU when it was revealed that one of the key points of trade negotiations with the US was a change in approval terms for certain products. They would be put on the market and removed if they were found to be harmful. After the fact, as opposed to being fully tested beforehand.
History is full of cases were self regulation has not worked. I could write a book on banking abuse, for example.
'Free market' is rather a loose term but in the context you are using it, it would not be good for users.
Comments
A simple example. Thermostat controlled fan heaters. They are largely designed with tamperproof screws and no access to the fan blades or the heat sensor. The result is the slow build up of dust on the fan blades and the sensor. Slow enough for the sensor to stop working correctly when the heater is out of warranty. When the heater turns itself off after a few minutes with the room still cold, most people start looking for new one, unaware that a simple cleaning operation could resolve the problem .
But, unlike many on this site, I do not think that a $600+ product is disposable after two years.... When something happens to it, either from wear or from tear, there needs to be some reasonable recourse. For the most part, I find Apple repairs expensive but not prohibitive. So, knowing the trade-offs of an open architecture, I support keeping repairs under Apple.
... People want Apple quality but don't like the trade-offs....
That said, there are specialists that will look at solder joints under a microscope and reflow them if necessary. Of course accessibility is the first step of designing for repairability. If you go so thin so as to thwart accessibility, perhaps you've gone too far. That is the point.
Should a Pacemaker be engineered bigger or compromised in some other way solely to make it easier for your local repairman to service it? Or should it be engineered in the best way possible for its job to be done?
If enough people want this, then they should stop buying iPhones until they do. Hit them in their bottom line, not create more senseless laws.
Phines arent like cars and we shouldn't expect Apple to proved parts that are already in short supply to 3rd party questionable repair shops.
And if repair prices, sans competition, discourage the repair, then new sales result sooner than they might otherwise, and we can certainly see "line item" profits for sales.
Most of us take a lot of pride in how long we can run these "devices", when we feel the occasional repair is cost effective...but, if we feel it isn't?
Only one time: before you sell your first item...
So, only in that sense did "closed systems" come first.
Last time I checked, the US was using antibiotics as growth accelerators in poultry. Something that is completely banned in the EU. Who benefits from that situation? IIRC, Avian Flu was first detected in Hong Kong.
Even during the great depression, food was destroyed to keep prices higher.
The sugar lobby has kept sugar away from medical legislation for decades even though refined sugar is a proven slow killer. The pharmaceutical industry on the other hand, demonised cholesterol and built a mult-billion dollar statins industry to fight something that wasn't a proven killer, and probably does more harm than good. Who benefits from that?
There was uproar in the EU when it was revealed that one of the key points of trade negotiations with the US was a change in approval terms for certain products. They would be put on the market and removed if they were found to be harmful. After the fact, as opposed to being fully tested beforehand.
History is full of cases were self regulation has not worked. I could write a book on banking abuse, for example.
'Free market' is rather a loose term but in the context you are using it, it would not be good for users.