Apple Right to Repair Lawsuit: Cases, State Laws, and EU Rules

Apple’s control over device repairs has produced a scattered but consequential legal record: a proposed consumer class action in Washington state, a landmark trademark case in Norway that repair advocates lost, an ongoing federal antitrust suit that touches Apple’s ecosystem but not repair directly, and a growing stack of state and EU laws that are doing what individual lawsuits largely have not. Anyone searching for the Apple right to repair lawsuit picture is really looking at several parallel tracks, and the outcomes so far cut in different directions.

Maxwell v. Apple: The Washington Class Action

In April 2025, Washington resident Cassaundra Maxwell filed a proposed class action against Apple in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California. The complaint alleged that Apple violated Washington’s Telephone Buyers’ Protection Act and the Washington Consumer Protection Act by failing to disclose repair costs, warranty terms, and the party responsible for repairs on iPhone packaging or through posted notices in retail stores.¹

The complaint pointed to the gap between purchase price and repair price. A standard repair on an iPhone 16, which retails for about $799, could run as high as $749. Maxwell alleged she would not have bought her iPhone 14, or would have paid less, had the required disclosures been provided.² The suit sought actual damages, treble damages, and statutory damages of $100 per violation on behalf of Washington iPhone purchasers within the statute of limitations.

The case did not last. Court records show Maxwell voluntarily dismissed the lawsuit on July 8, 2025, with no rulings, settlements, or motions to dismiss on the docket beforehand.³

Apple v. Huseby: The Norwegian Trademark Case

The most consequential repair-related lawsuit involving Apple did not come from a consumer. It came from Apple, and it targeted an independent repair shop.

Henrik Huseby ran a small shop in Ski, Norway. In 2017, Norwegian customs seized a shipment of 63 refurbished iPhone 6 and 6S screens he had imported from China, after Apple flagged them as counterfeit. The screens were typically original Apple LCDs fitted with replacement glass. Apple’s basis for the counterfeit claim was the presence of tiny Apple logos and QR codes on internal components that would be invisible once the screens were installed.⁴

Apple demanded Huseby stop using aftermarket parts and pay a settlement. He refused, saying he had never advertised the screens as genuine.⁵ Three courts weighed in over three years. The Oslo District Court sided with Huseby in 2018, finding no trademark violation because the logos were hidden inside the device. The Court of Appeal reversed that ruling in 2019. And in June 2020, the Supreme Court of Norway upheld the appeals decision, reasoning that the black ink covering the logos could be removed and that Huseby therefore had the potential to misuse Apple’s trademark. He was found to have violated Section 4 of Norway’s Trademark Law and ordered to pay Apple approximately €23,000.⁶

The Right to Repair Europe coalition called the ruling a “dark day,” arguing that because Apple refused to sell genuine spare parts to independent European repairers, shop owners were left choosing between inferior generic parts and legal risk on refurbished ones.⁵ The court also declined to weigh the environmental benefits of using refurbished components.⁶ Huseby’s defense drew about €10,000 in crowdfunding, but the financial strain was significant. An authorized iPhone 6s screen replacement in Norway cost about 2,699 NOK. Huseby charged 800 NOK.⁴

The DOJ Antitrust Case Is Not a Repair Case

Searches for Apple lawsuits often surface the Department of Justice’s March 2024 antitrust action, so it’s worth being direct about what that case covers. The DOJ accuses Apple of unlawfully monopolizing the U.S. smartphone market, focusing on app ecosystem restrictions and technical barriers to competing smartwatches, digital wallets, and messaging platforms. The complaint does not include specific claims about repair restrictions or aftermarket parts.⁷ The case remains in discovery as of mid-2026, with the parties disputing Apple’s requests for documents from 14 federal agencies.⁸

State Laws Doing What Lawsuits Have Not

Most of the legal pressure on Apple’s repair practices has come through legislation rather than litigation, and the sharpest fight has been over “parts pairing,” Apple’s use of software to link replacement components to a specific device through unique serial numbers. When a part is not validated, the device may show error messages, lose functionality, or refuse calibration. Repair advocates including iFixit have argued the practice puts an “expiration date” on iPhones by keeping refurbishers from reusing original parts from other devices.⁹

Oregon’s Parts-Pairing Ban

Oregon became the first state to ban parts pairing directly when Governor Tina Kotek signed SB 1596 on March 28, 2024. The law prohibits manufacturers from using software to block independent repairs, restrict non-original parts, or trigger error messages when unauthorized components are installed. It applies to devices manufactured on or after January 1, 2025, with penalties beginning in 2027.¹⁰

Apple opposed the bill. John Perry, the company’s Platform Architecture Secure Systems Design Manager, testified that Apple agreed with the “vast majority” of SB 1596 but was concerned about allowing “unauthorised parts, such as biometric sensors” as replacements.¹¹ Senior FTC officials wrote to Oregon legislators in February 2024 supporting the bill and stating that Apple’s parts-pairing requirements “drive up consumer costs and impede competition from small repair businesses.”¹² Apple indicated it would comply and later updated its software so that non-paired parts could be installed and function.¹³

Other States That Have Enacted Repair Laws

At least seven states have enacted right-to-repair laws covering consumer electronics:

California (SB 244) requires repair resources for seven years for products over $100, and three years for products costing $50 to $99.99.
Colorado covers digital electronics, agricultural equipment, and powered wheelchairs, and bans parts pairing for devices manufactured or used in the state after January 1, 2026, with an exemption for biometric authentication components.
Minnesota requires manufacturers to share software, diagnostics, and documentation on fair and reasonable terms.
New York’s Digital Fair Repair Act mandates that manufacturers share repair information and parts for most electronics.
Oregon bans parts pairing outright for devices manufactured after January 1, 2025.
Texas (HB 2963) was signed on June 22, 2025, effective September 1, 2026, and covers consumer electronics valued over $50, though it does not ban parts pairing.¹⁴
Maine has also enacted right-to-repair legislation.¹⁵

Not every state effort has succeeded. Florida’s SB 1132, which would have required access to repair parts, tools, and records for smartphones and tablets, failed to receive a hearing in the state House in 2025. Reporting showed that Apple lobbyists worked to narrow the bill’s scope to already-authorized providers and strip language that would have allowed consumers and independent shops to sue manufacturers in state court.¹⁶

The FTC Has Not Sued Apple

The Federal Trade Commission has treated repair restrictions as a policy priority but has not brought a specific enforcement action against Apple. In May 2021, the FTC published “Nixing the Fix,” a report to Congress finding “scant evidence” for manufacturers’ justifications for repair restrictions, including arguments based on intellectual property, safety, and cybersecurity. The report singled out smartphone manufacturers as a group.¹⁷ Two months later, the Commission unanimously adopted a policy statement committing to increased enforcement against illegal repair restrictions.¹⁸

The FTC’s subsequent enforcement actions targeted Harley-Davidson, Weber-Stephen Products, and MWE Investments for conditioning warranties on brand-name parts or authorized service, in violation of the Magnuson-Moss Warranty Act.¹⁹ In July 2024, the agency sent warning letters to eight additional companies about potentially illegal warranty-voiding practices. No smartphone manufacturers were named.²⁰

EU Rules Now Binding on Apple

Two EU regulatory instruments now apply directly to Apple’s business in Europe. Ecodesign requirements for smartphones and tablets, issued in June 2023, took effect June 20, 2025. Manufacturers must make spare parts and repair instructions available to professional repairers for seven years after a device model leaves the market. Required parts include batteries, cameras, charging ports, buttons, microphones, and speakers. Manufacturers must also provide the software or firmware needed to use serialized parts, and they must deliver security and functionality updates for at least five years after a device stops being sold.²¹

The EU’s Directive on common rules promoting the repair of goods (Directive 2024/1799), adopted in June 2024, adds a second layer. It requires manufacturers to repair products within a reasonable time and at a reasonable price, prohibits hardware or software that impedes repair unless justified by “legitimate and objective factors,” and mandates access to spare parts at reasonable prices. Member states must transpose and begin applying the directive by July 31, 2026.²² The Right to Repair Europe Coalition has noted loopholes, particularly the provision that lets manufacturers determine what counts as “a reasonable price for a spare part.”²³ As of June 2025, Apple appeared close to meeting the ecodesign requirements, and no enforcement actions had been reported.²¹

What Has Actually Changed at Apple

The legal and legislative pressure has produced concrete changes in Apple’s repair practices, though advocates disagree on how meaningful they are. Apple launched its Self Service Repair program on April 27, 2022, giving consumers access to genuine parts, tools, and manuals for certain iPhone and Mac repairs. It has since expanded to 40 products across 33 countries.²⁴

In April 2024, Apple announced it would support the use of genuine used Apple parts in repairs, allow on-device calibration of used components including biometric sensors, and drop the requirement that customers provide a device serial number when ordering most parts. Apple also extended its Activation Lock feature to individual iPhone parts to deter theft of components from stolen phones.²⁴ As of March 2026, used genuine parts are supported on iPhone 15 through iPhone 17 series models and iPhone Air, covering batteries, displays, cameras, speakers, and several other components. Repairs performed with used parts are not covered by Apple’s warranty or AppleCare plans.²⁵

Apple endorsed California’s SB 244 in 2023 and, in October of that year, VP of Service Brian Naumann announced Apple’s support for a “uniform federal law” balancing repairability with product integrity, data security, and physical safety, saying the company would follow California’s requirements nationwide.²⁶ Gay Gordon-Byrne, executive director of Repair.org, called Apple’s overall shift “modest,” attributing it to legislative momentum rather than a change of position.²⁷

1
ClassAction.org. Washington Consumer Alleges Apple Illegally Failed to Disclose iPhone Repair Cost Warranty Info Before Purchase
2
ClassAction.org. Maxwell v Apple Inc Complaint
3
CourtListener. Maxwell v Apple Inc Docket
4
Repair.eu. Apple Crushes One Man Repair Shop
5
Techdirt. Norway Supreme Court Signs Off on Apples Harassment of Independent Repair Shop
6
University of Oslo. Apple Uses Trademark Law
7
Reuters. Apple Loses Bid to Dismiss US Smartphone Monopoly Case
8
9to5Mac. Apple Says US Is Refusing to Produce Federal Agency Documents in DOJ Antitrust Case
9
Repair.eu. Apples Self Repair Programme Is Not the Right to Repair We Need
10
Trellis. Apple Loses Oregons New Right to Repair Law
11
Techfinitive. Parts Pairing and the Apple iPhone 16
12
MLex. Apples Parts Pairing Raises Repair Prices Stifles Competition US FTC Officials Tell Oregon Legislature
13
U.S. PIRG. State of Right to Repair
14
Consumer Reports. Consumer Reports Applauds Texas Legislature for Passing Right to Repair Bill
15
Built In. Right to Repair
16
Jason Garcia Substack. Apple Quietly Lobbied to Stop Right to Repair
17
FTC. Nixing the Fix An FTC Report to Congress on Repair Restrictions
18
FTC. FTC to Ramp Up Law Enforcement Against Illegal Repair Restrictions
19
FTC. FTC Says Companies Warranty Restrictions Were Illegal
20
FTC. FTC Warns Companies Stop Warranty Practices That Harm Consumers Right to Repair
21
Apple Insider. EU Repair Laws Start June 20 How Compliant Is Apple
22
European Commission. Directive on Common Rules Promoting the Repair of Goods
23
Trellis. Tech Companies Brace for the New EU Right to Repair Law
24
Apple Newsroom. Apple to Expand Repair Options With Support for Used Genuine Parts
25
Apple Support. About Used Genuine Apple Parts
26
CNBC. Apple Lines Up to Support Nationwide Right to Repair Legislation
27
Waste Dive. Right to Repair Apple California Michigan Massachusetts Pennsylvania