Consumer Technology Association - Revision history

Sojourna at 02:36, 26 February 2026

2026-02-26T02:36:42Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 02:36, 26 February 2026
Line 4:		Line 4:
	\|Founded=1924		\|Founded=1924
	\|Industry=Electronics, Technology		\|Industry=Electronics, Technology
	\|Logo=~~Ctalogo~~.svg		\|Logo=CTA logo.svg
	\|ParentCompany=		\|ParentCompany=
	\|Type=Trade Association		\|Type=Trade Association

Banana: Removed 1 duplicate url-status parameter(s) from 1 citation(s) using CRWCitationBot

2026-02-16T06:21:46Z

Removed 1 duplicate url-status parameter(s) from 1 citation(s) using CRWCitationBot

← Older revision		Revision as of 06:21, 16 February 2026
Line 44:		Line 44:

	While these laws are on the books in Maine, e-waste recycling faces serious issues perpetuated by many of the same industry practices which make repair difficult, and is less complete of a solution than the legislation would suggest. "Smartphones are becoming lighter and slimmer, and ''their batteries are no longer removable'', making recycling much more difficult and labour-intensive. Manual sorting requires workers to be constantly exposed to toxic substances, albeit at a low level, over a long period, while these ''difficult-to-recycle electronic devices require facilities to constantly upgrade their machines to keep up with the changing technology'', lowering the incentive for businesses to recycle e-waste that is already difficult to disassemble" (emphasis added).<ref>{{Cite web \|author=Tin Lok Wu \|title=What Is E-Waste Recycling and How Is it Done? \|url=https://earth.org/what-is-e-waste-recycling/ \|website=Earth.org \|date=26 May 2022 \|access-date=10 Jul 2025 \|url-status=live \|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20220526003215/https://earth.org/what-is-e-waste-recycling/ \|archive-date=26 May 2022}}</ref> Additionally, outsourcing of e-waste recycling represents an environmental health disaster to less developed countries, leading to China banning the import of many categories of waste.<ref>{{Cite web		While these laws are on the books in Maine, e-waste recycling faces serious issues perpetuated by many of the same industry practices which make repair difficult, and is less complete of a solution than the legislation would suggest. "Smartphones are becoming lighter and slimmer, and ''their batteries are no longer removable'', making recycling much more difficult and labour-intensive. Manual sorting requires workers to be constantly exposed to toxic substances, albeit at a low level, over a long period, while these ''difficult-to-recycle electronic devices require facilities to constantly upgrade their machines to keep up with the changing technology'', lowering the incentive for businesses to recycle e-waste that is already difficult to disassemble" (emphasis added).<ref>{{Cite web \|author=Tin Lok Wu \|title=What Is E-Waste Recycling and How Is it Done? \|url=https://earth.org/what-is-e-waste-recycling/ \|website=Earth.org \|date=26 May 2022 \|access-date=10 Jul 2025 \|url-status=live \|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20220526003215/https://earth.org/what-is-e-waste-recycling/ \|archive-date=26 May 2022}}</ref> Additionally, outsourcing of e-waste recycling represents an environmental health disaster to less developed countries, leading to China banning the import of many categories of waste.<ref>{{Cite web
	\|title=Operation National Sword \|url=https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_National_Sword \|website=Wikipedia \|date= \|access-date=10 Jul 2025 ~~\|url-status=live~~ \|url-status=live \|archive-url=http://web.archive.org/web/20260207191211/https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_National_Sword \|archive-date=7 Feb 2026}}</ref> Right-to-repair stands to greatly reduce the generation of e-waste and make its recycling much more cost effective, at the expense of reducing the number of new devices purchased as replacements. Reduce, then reuse (repair or salvage parts) and then recycle.		\|title=Operation National Sword \|url=https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_National_Sword \|website=Wikipedia \|date= \|access-date=10 Jul 2025 \|url-status=live \|archive-url=http://web.archive.org/web/20260207191211/https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_National_Sword \|archive-date=7 Feb 2026}}</ref> Right-to-repair stands to greatly reduce the generation of e-waste and make its recycling much more cost effective, at the expense of reducing the number of new devices purchased as replacements. Reduce, then reuse (repair or salvage parts) and then recycle.

	More than a year after this testimony and the allegation that investments and lobbying for e-waste recycling more than makes up for anti-repair practices{{Citation needed}} (and the death of the bill in committee<ref>{{Cite web \|title=Summary \|url=https://legislature.maine.gov/LawMakerWeb/summary.asp?LD=1977&SessionID=13 \|website=Maine.gov \|date=16 Nov 2020 \|access-date=10 Jul 2025 \|url-status=live \|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20250711042403/https://legislature.maine.gov/LawMakerWeb/summary.asp?LD=1977&SessionID=13\|archive-date=11 Jul 2025}}</ref>), the ''Maine Monitor'' reported in that "Mainers are generating more electronic waste than ever. And no one knows what percentage of that waste is sent for recycling."<ref>{{Cite web		More than a year after this testimony and the allegation that investments and lobbying for e-waste recycling more than makes up for anti-repair practices{{Citation needed}} (and the death of the bill in committee<ref>{{Cite web \|title=Summary \|url=https://legislature.maine.gov/LawMakerWeb/summary.asp?LD=1977&SessionID=13 \|website=Maine.gov \|date=16 Nov 2020 \|access-date=10 Jul 2025 \|url-status=live \|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20250711042403/https://legislature.maine.gov/LawMakerWeb/summary.asp?LD=1977&SessionID=13\|archive-date=11 Jul 2025}}</ref>), the ''Maine Monitor'' reported in that "Mainers are generating more electronic waste than ever. And no one knows what percentage of that waste is sent for recycling."<ref>{{Cite web

Banana: Added archive URLs for 1 citation(s) using CRWCitationBot

2026-02-16T02:34:47Z

Added archive URLs for 1 citation(s) using CRWCitationBot

← Older revision		Revision as of 02:34, 16 February 2026
Line 44:		Line 44:

	While these laws are on the books in Maine, e-waste recycling faces serious issues perpetuated by many of the same industry practices which make repair difficult, and is less complete of a solution than the legislation would suggest. "Smartphones are becoming lighter and slimmer, and ''their batteries are no longer removable'', making recycling much more difficult and labour-intensive. Manual sorting requires workers to be constantly exposed to toxic substances, albeit at a low level, over a long period, while these ''difficult-to-recycle electronic devices require facilities to constantly upgrade their machines to keep up with the changing technology'', lowering the incentive for businesses to recycle e-waste that is already difficult to disassemble" (emphasis added).<ref>{{Cite web \|author=Tin Lok Wu \|title=What Is E-Waste Recycling and How Is it Done? \|url=https://earth.org/what-is-e-waste-recycling/ \|website=Earth.org \|date=26 May 2022 \|access-date=10 Jul 2025 \|url-status=live \|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20220526003215/https://earth.org/what-is-e-waste-recycling/ \|archive-date=26 May 2022}}</ref> Additionally, outsourcing of e-waste recycling represents an environmental health disaster to less developed countries, leading to China banning the import of many categories of waste.<ref>{{Cite web		While these laws are on the books in Maine, e-waste recycling faces serious issues perpetuated by many of the same industry practices which make repair difficult, and is less complete of a solution than the legislation would suggest. "Smartphones are becoming lighter and slimmer, and ''their batteries are no longer removable'', making recycling much more difficult and labour-intensive. Manual sorting requires workers to be constantly exposed to toxic substances, albeit at a low level, over a long period, while these ''difficult-to-recycle electronic devices require facilities to constantly upgrade their machines to keep up with the changing technology'', lowering the incentive for businesses to recycle e-waste that is already difficult to disassemble" (emphasis added).<ref>{{Cite web \|author=Tin Lok Wu \|title=What Is E-Waste Recycling and How Is it Done? \|url=https://earth.org/what-is-e-waste-recycling/ \|website=Earth.org \|date=26 May 2022 \|access-date=10 Jul 2025 \|url-status=live \|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20220526003215/https://earth.org/what-is-e-waste-recycling/ \|archive-date=26 May 2022}}</ref> Additionally, outsourcing of e-waste recycling represents an environmental health disaster to less developed countries, leading to China banning the import of many categories of waste.<ref>{{Cite web
	\|title=Operation National Sword \|url=https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_National_Sword \|website=Wikipedia \|date= \|access-date=10 Jul 2025 \|url-status=live}}</ref> Right-to-repair stands to greatly reduce the generation of e-waste and make its recycling much more cost effective, at the expense of reducing the number of new devices purchased as replacements. Reduce, then reuse (repair or salvage parts) and then recycle.		\|title=Operation National Sword \|url=https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_National_Sword \|website=Wikipedia \|date= \|access-date=10 Jul 2025 \|url-status=live \|url-status=live \|archive-url=http://web.archive.org/web/20260207191211/https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_National_Sword \|archive-date=7 Feb 2026}}</ref> Right-to-repair stands to greatly reduce the generation of e-waste and make its recycling much more cost effective, at the expense of reducing the number of new devices purchased as replacements. Reduce, then reuse (repair or salvage parts) and then recycle.

	More than a year after this testimony and the allegation that investments and lobbying for e-waste recycling more than makes up for anti-repair practices{{Citation needed}} (and the death of the bill in committee<ref>{{Cite web \|title=Summary \|url=https://legislature.maine.gov/LawMakerWeb/summary.asp?LD=1977&SessionID=13 \|website=Maine.gov \|date=16 Nov 2020 \|access-date=10 Jul 2025 \|url-status=live \|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20250711042403/https://legislature.maine.gov/LawMakerWeb/summary.asp?LD=1977&SessionID=13\|archive-date=11 Jul 2025}}</ref>), the ''Maine Monitor'' reported in that "Mainers are generating more electronic waste than ever. And no one knows what percentage of that waste is sent for recycling."<ref>{{Cite web		More than a year after this testimony and the allegation that investments and lobbying for e-waste recycling more than makes up for anti-repair practices{{Citation needed}} (and the death of the bill in committee<ref>{{Cite web \|title=Summary \|url=https://legislature.maine.gov/LawMakerWeb/summary.asp?LD=1977&SessionID=13 \|website=Maine.gov \|date=16 Nov 2020 \|access-date=10 Jul 2025 \|url-status=live \|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20250711042403/https://legislature.maine.gov/LawMakerWeb/summary.asp?LD=1977&SessionID=13\|archive-date=11 Jul 2025}}</ref>), the ''Maine Monitor'' reported in that "Mainers are generating more electronic waste than ever. And no one knows what percentage of that waste is sent for recycling."<ref>{{Cite web

Bythmusters: Added Cargo template in place of Infobox

2026-01-11T23:03:08Z

Added Cargo template in place of Infobox

← Older revision		Revision as of 23:03, 11 January 2026
Line 1:		Line 1:
	{{StubNotice}}		{{StubNotice}}
			{{CompanyCargo
	{{~~InfoboxCompany~~		\|Description=American trade association promoting business growth in the technology sector.
	\| ~~Name~~ = ~~Consumer~~ Technology ~~Association~~		\|Founded=1924
	\| ~~Type~~ = ~~Trade Organization~~		\|Industry=Electronics, Technology
	\| ~~Founded~~ = ~~1924~~		\|Logo=Ctalogo.svg
	\| ~~Industry~~ = ~~Electronics~~		\|ParentCompany=
	\| ~~Official~~ Website = https://www.cta.tech/		\|Type=Trade Association
	~~\| Logo = Ctalogo.svg~~		\|Website=https://www.cta.tech/
	}}		}}

Sojourna: clean-up

2025-07-11T04:55:51Z

clean-up

← Older revision		Revision as of 04:55, 11 July 2025
Line 2:		Line 2:

	{{InfoboxCompany		{{InfoboxCompany
	\| Name = Consumer ~~Protection~~ Association		\| Name = Consumer Technology Association
	\| Type = Trade Organization		\| Type = Trade Organization
	\| Founded = 1924		\| Founded = 1924
Line 8:		Line 8:
	\| Official Website = https://www.cta.tech/		\| Official Website = https://www.cta.tech/
	\| Logo = Ctalogo.svg		\| Logo = Ctalogo.svg
	}}The '''Consumer Technology Association'''~~<ref>https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Consumer_Technology_Association</ref>~~ ('''CTA''') is a ~~standard~~ and ~~[[wikipedia:Trade_organization~~\|trade organization]]. Their mission statement<ref>https://www.cta.tech/</ref> ~~is "to help innovators of all sizes grow their business."~~ They are active lobbyists for a wide variety of issues<ref>https://www.cta.tech/Advocacy</ref> but often do this by representing large tech companies in legal battles against the right to repair. While the American consumer may have various feelings about their trade policy, immigration, or patent reform stances, all of us are harmed by their consistent defense of restrictive licensing and built-in blocks for independent repair.<!--To save you guys the trouble, here's every relevant video regarding CTA.		}}

			The '''{{Wplink\|Consumer Technology Association}}''' (or '''CTA''') is both a standards and {{Wplink\|Trade organization\|trade organization}}. Their mission statement is "to help innovators of all sizes grow their business."<ref>{{Cite web \|title=The Association for Technology \|url=https://www.cta.tech/ \|website=CTA \|date=3 Apr 2025 \|access-date=10 Jul 2025 \|url-status=live \|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20250403032902/https://www.cta.tech/ \|archive-date=3 Apr 2025}}</ref> They are active lobbyists for a wide variety of issues,<ref>{{Cite web
			\|title=Advocates for Innovation \|url=https://www.cta.tech/Advocacy \|website=CTA \|date=2 Apr 2025 \|access-date=10 Jul 2025 \|url-status=live \|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20250402231921/https://www.cta.tech/advocacy/ \|archive-date=2 Apr 2025}}</ref> but often do this by representing large tech companies in legal battles against the [[right to repair]]. While the American consumer may have various feelings about their trade policy, immigration, or patent reform stances, all of us are harmed by their consistent defense of restrictive licensing and built-in blocks for independent repair.<!--To save you guys the trouble, here's every relevant video regarding CTA.

	Not directly related according to video directory, but likely important for context:		Not directly related according to video directory, but likely important for context:
Line 33:		Line 36:
	==Lobbying==		==Lobbying==

	==History of ~~Deception~~==		==History of deception==

	==Testimonies==		==Testimonies==

	====Right to ~~Repair~~ in Maine (LD1977 SP679 "An Act To Ensure a Consumer's Right To Repair Certain Electronic Products")====		===Right-to-repair in Maine===
	~~The~~ CTA's VP of Environmental Affairs and Industry Sustainability testified that "[the] issue that's been raised about e-waste and concern about how not passing legislation like this might increase e-waste, I would remind the committee that Maine has a robust e-waste law and program in place<ref>https://www.maine.gov/dep/waste/ewaste/index.html</ref>... ...we are not looking at a situation where e-waste in Maine [is] going into landfills." While these laws are on the books in Maine, e-waste recycling faces serious issues perpetuated by many of the same industry practices which make repair difficult, and is less complete of a solution than the legislation would suggest. "Smartphones are becoming lighter and slimmer, and ''their batteries are no longer removable'', making recycling much more difficult and labour-intensive. Manual sorting requires workers to be constantly exposed to toxic substances, albeit at a low level, over a long period, while these ''difficult-to-recycle electronic devices require facilities to constantly upgrade their machines to keep up with the changing technology'', lowering the incentive for businesses to recycle e-waste that is already difficult to disassemble."<ref>https://earth.org/what-is-e-waste-recycling/</ref> Additionally, outsourcing of e-waste recycling represents an environmental health disaster to less developed countries, leading to China banning the import of many categories of waste.<ref>https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_National_Sword</ref> Right to ~~Repair~~ stands to greatly reduce the generation of e-waste and make ~~it's~~ recycling much more cost effective, at the expense of reducing the number of new devices purchased as replacements. Reduce, then ~~Reuse~~ (repair or salvage parts) and then ~~Recycle~~.		In regards to Bill LD1977 SP679 ("An Act To Ensure a Consumer's Right To Repair Certain Electronic Products"),<ref>{{Cite web \|title=SP0679, LD 1977, item 1, An Act To Ensure a Consumer's Right To Repair Certain Electronic Products \|url=https://www.mainelegislature.org/legis/bills/bills_129th/billtexts/SP067901.asp \|website=Maine.gov \|date=17 Mar 2020 \|access-date=10 Jul 2025 \|url-status=live \|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200805014337/https://www.mainelegislature.org/legis/bills/bills_129th/billtexts/SP067901.asp \|archive-date=5 Aug 2020}}</ref> the CTA's VP of Environmental Affairs and Industry Sustainability{{Clarify\|who}} testified that "[the] issue that's been raised about e-waste and concern about how not passing legislation like this might increase e-waste, I would remind the committee that Maine has a robust e-waste law and program in place<ref>{{Cite web \|title=Electronics Recycling, Waste Management, Maine Department of Environmental Protection \|url=https://www.maine.gov/dep/waste/ewaste/index.html \|website=Maine.gov \|date=20 Oct 2022 \|access-date=10 Jul 2025 \|url-status=live \|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20221020000802/https://www.maine.gov/dep/waste/ewaste/index.html \|archive-date=20 Oct 2022}}</ref>... ...we are not looking at a situation where e-waste in Maine [is] going into landfills."{{Citation needed}}

			While these laws are on the books in Maine, e-waste recycling faces serious issues perpetuated by many of the same industry practices which make repair difficult, and is less complete of a solution than the legislation would suggest. "Smartphones are becoming lighter and slimmer, and ''their batteries are no longer removable'', making recycling much more difficult and labour-intensive. Manual sorting requires workers to be constantly exposed to toxic substances, albeit at a low level, over a long period, while these ''difficult-to-recycle electronic devices require facilities to constantly upgrade their machines to keep up with the changing technology'', lowering the incentive for businesses to recycle e-waste that is already difficult to disassemble" (emphasis added).<ref>{{Cite web \|author=Tin Lok Wu \|title=What Is E-Waste Recycling and How Is it Done? \|url=https://earth.org/what-is-e-waste-recycling/ \|website=Earth.org \|date=26 May 2022 \|access-date=10 Jul 2025 \|url-status=live \|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20220526003215/https://earth.org/what-is-e-waste-recycling/ \|archive-date=26 May 2022}}</ref> Additionally, outsourcing of e-waste recycling represents an environmental health disaster to less developed countries, leading to China banning the import of many categories of waste.<ref>{{Cite web
			\|title=Operation National Sword \|url=https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_National_Sword \|website=Wikipedia \|date= \|access-date=10 Jul 2025 \|url-status=live}}</ref> Right-to-repair stands to greatly reduce the generation of e-waste and make its recycling much more cost effective, at the expense of reducing the number of new devices purchased as replacements. Reduce, then reuse (repair or salvage parts) and then recycle.

			More than a year after this testimony and the allegation that investments and lobbying for e-waste recycling more than makes up for anti-repair practices{{Citation needed}} (and the death of the bill in committee<ref>{{Cite web \|title=Summary \|url=https://legislature.maine.gov/LawMakerWeb/summary.asp?LD=1977&SessionID=13 \|website=Maine.gov \|date=16 Nov 2020 \|access-date=10 Jul 2025 \|url-status=live \|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20250711042403/https://legislature.maine.gov/LawMakerWeb/summary.asp?LD=1977&SessionID=13\|archive-date=11 Jul 2025}}</ref>), the ''Maine Monitor'' reported in that "Mainers are generating more electronic waste than ever. And no one knows what percentage of that waste is sent for recycling."<ref>{{Cite web
			\|first=Kate \|last=Cough \|title=There are more devices in Mainers' lives than ever. No one knows where they end up. \|url=https://themainemonitor.org/there-are-more-devices-in-mainers-lives-than-ever-no-one-knows-where-they-end-up/ \|website=Maine Monitor \|date=5 Dec 2021 \|access-date=10 Jul 2025 \|url-status=live \|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20211205153124/https://themainemonitor.org/there-are-more-devices-in-mainers-lives-than-ever-no-one-knows-where-they-end-up/ \|archive-date=5 Dec 2021}}</ref> He{{Clarify\|who}} also includes statistics for sold phones, trade-ins, and phones given to friends or relatives to give a false view that only 2% of phones are thrown into the trash when looking at phones at end of life.{{Citation needed}}

	More than a year after this testimony and the allegation that investments and lobbying for e-waste recycling more than makes up for anti-repair practices (and the death of the bill in committee), the Maine Monitor published [https://themainemonitor.org/there-are-more-devices-in-mainers-lives-than-ever-no-one-knows-where-they-end-up/ this report].<ref>https://themainemonitor.org/there-are-more-devices-in-mainers-lives-than-ever-no-one-knows-where-they-end-up/</ref> To quote the article, "Mainers are generating more electronic waste than ever. And no one knows what percentage of that waste is sent for recycling." He also includes statistics for sold phones, trade-ins, and phones given to friends or relatives to give a false view that only 2% of phones are thrown into the trash when looking at phones at end of life.		==References==
			{{Reflist}}

	~~== References ==~~		[[Category:Consumer Technology Association]]
	~~<references />~~

HeavenPiercerYama: Formatting

2025-01-30T13:35:34Z

Formatting

← Older revision		Revision as of 13:35, 30 January 2025
Line 41:		Line 41:

	More than a year after this testimony and the allegation that investments and lobbying for e-waste recycling more than makes up for anti-repair practices (and the death of the bill in committee), the Maine Monitor published [https://themainemonitor.org/there-are-more-devices-in-mainers-lives-than-ever-no-one-knows-where-they-end-up/ this report].<ref>https://themainemonitor.org/there-are-more-devices-in-mainers-lives-than-ever-no-one-knows-where-they-end-up/</ref> To quote the article, "Mainers are generating more electronic waste than ever. And no one knows what percentage of that waste is sent for recycling." He also includes statistics for sold phones, trade-ins, and phones given to friends or relatives to give a false view that only 2% of phones are thrown into the trash when looking at phones at end of life.		More than a year after this testimony and the allegation that investments and lobbying for e-waste recycling more than makes up for anti-repair practices (and the death of the bill in committee), the Maine Monitor published [https://themainemonitor.org/there-are-more-devices-in-mainers-lives-than-ever-no-one-knows-where-they-end-up/ this report].<ref>https://themainemonitor.org/there-are-more-devices-in-mainers-lives-than-ever-no-one-knows-where-they-end-up/</ref> To quote the article, "Mainers are generating more electronic waste than ever. And no one knows what percentage of that waste is sent for recycling." He also includes statistics for sold phones, trade-ins, and phones given to friends or relatives to give a false view that only 2% of phones are thrown into the trash when looking at phones at end of life.
	=References=
			== References ==
	<references />		<references />

HeavenPiercerYama: Added references section

2025-01-30T12:36:27Z

Added references section

← Older revision		Revision as of 12:36, 30 January 2025
Line 41:		Line 41:

	More than a year after this testimony and the allegation that investments and lobbying for e-waste recycling more than makes up for anti-repair practices (and the death of the bill in committee), the Maine Monitor published [https://themainemonitor.org/there-are-more-devices-in-mainers-lives-than-ever-no-one-knows-where-they-end-up/ this report].<ref>https://themainemonitor.org/there-are-more-devices-in-mainers-lives-than-ever-no-one-knows-where-they-end-up/</ref> To quote the article, "Mainers are generating more electronic waste than ever. And no one knows what percentage of that waste is sent for recycling." He also includes statistics for sold phones, trade-ins, and phones given to friends or relatives to give a false view that only 2% of phones are thrown into the trash when looking at phones at end of life.		More than a year after this testimony and the allegation that investments and lobbying for e-waste recycling more than makes up for anti-repair practices (and the death of the bill in committee), the Maine Monitor published [https://themainemonitor.org/there-are-more-devices-in-mainers-lives-than-ever-no-one-knows-where-they-end-up/ this report].<ref>https://themainemonitor.org/there-are-more-devices-in-mainers-lives-than-ever-no-one-knows-where-they-end-up/</ref> To quote the article, "Mainers are generating more electronic waste than ever. And no one knows what percentage of that waste is sent for recycling." He also includes statistics for sold phones, trade-ins, and phones given to friends or relatives to give a false view that only 2% of phones are thrown into the trash when looking at phones at end of life.
			=References=
	<references />		<references />

Shingo: Changed a heading to try and be less inflammatory, and fixed a period to comply with the style guide. https://wiki.rossmanngroup.com/wiki/CAT:Documentation/Style_Guide

2025-01-27T20:08:20Z

Changed a heading to try and be less inflammatory, and fixed a period to comply with the style guide. https://wiki.rossmanngroup.com/wiki/CAT:Documentation/Style_Guide

← Older revision		Revision as of 20:08, 27 January 2025
Line 33:		Line 33:
	==Lobbying==		==Lobbying==

	==History of ~~Lies~~ ==		==History of Deception==

	==Testimonies==		==Testimonies==
Line 40:		Line 40:
	The CTA's VP of Environmental Affairs and Industry Sustainability testified that "[the] issue that's been raised about e-waste and concern about how not passing legislation like this might increase e-waste, I would remind the committee that Maine has a robust e-waste law and program in place<ref>https://www.maine.gov/dep/waste/ewaste/index.html</ref>... ...we are not looking at a situation where e-waste in Maine [is] going into landfills." While these laws are on the books in Maine, e-waste recycling faces serious issues perpetuated by many of the same industry practices which make repair difficult, and is less complete of a solution than the legislation would suggest. "Smartphones are becoming lighter and slimmer, and ''their batteries are no longer removable'', making recycling much more difficult and labour-intensive. Manual sorting requires workers to be constantly exposed to toxic substances, albeit at a low level, over a long period, while these ''difficult-to-recycle electronic devices require facilities to constantly upgrade their machines to keep up with the changing technology'', lowering the incentive for businesses to recycle e-waste that is already difficult to disassemble."<ref>https://earth.org/what-is-e-waste-recycling/</ref> Additionally, outsourcing of e-waste recycling represents an environmental health disaster to less developed countries, leading to China banning the import of many categories of waste.<ref>https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_National_Sword</ref> Right to Repair stands to greatly reduce the generation of e-waste and make it's recycling much more cost effective, at the expense of reducing the number of new devices purchased as replacements. Reduce, then Reuse (repair or salvage parts) and then Recycle.		The CTA's VP of Environmental Affairs and Industry Sustainability testified that "[the] issue that's been raised about e-waste and concern about how not passing legislation like this might increase e-waste, I would remind the committee that Maine has a robust e-waste law and program in place<ref>https://www.maine.gov/dep/waste/ewaste/index.html</ref>... ...we are not looking at a situation where e-waste in Maine [is] going into landfills." While these laws are on the books in Maine, e-waste recycling faces serious issues perpetuated by many of the same industry practices which make repair difficult, and is less complete of a solution than the legislation would suggest. "Smartphones are becoming lighter and slimmer, and ''their batteries are no longer removable'', making recycling much more difficult and labour-intensive. Manual sorting requires workers to be constantly exposed to toxic substances, albeit at a low level, over a long period, while these ''difficult-to-recycle electronic devices require facilities to constantly upgrade their machines to keep up with the changing technology'', lowering the incentive for businesses to recycle e-waste that is already difficult to disassemble."<ref>https://earth.org/what-is-e-waste-recycling/</ref> Additionally, outsourcing of e-waste recycling represents an environmental health disaster to less developed countries, leading to China banning the import of many categories of waste.<ref>https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_National_Sword</ref> Right to Repair stands to greatly reduce the generation of e-waste and make it's recycling much more cost effective, at the expense of reducing the number of new devices purchased as replacements. Reduce, then Reuse (repair or salvage parts) and then Recycle.

	More than a year after this testimony and the allegation that investments and lobbying for e-waste recycling more than makes up for anti-repair practices (and the death of the bill in committee), the Maine Monitor published [https://themainemonitor.org/there-are-more-devices-in-mainers-lives-than-ever-no-one-knows-where-they-end-up/ this report]<ref>https://themainemonitor.org/there-are-more-devices-in-mainers-lives-than-ever-no-one-knows-where-they-end-up/</ref>. To quote the article, "Mainers are generating more electronic waste than ever. And no one knows what percentage of that waste is sent for recycling." He also includes statistics for sold phones, trade-ins, and phones given to friends or relatives to give a false view that only 2% of phones are thrown into the trash when looking at phones at end of life.		More than a year after this testimony and the allegation that investments and lobbying for e-waste recycling more than makes up for anti-repair practices (and the death of the bill in committee), the Maine Monitor published [https://themainemonitor.org/there-are-more-devices-in-mainers-lives-than-ever-no-one-knows-where-they-end-up/ this report].<ref>https://themainemonitor.org/there-are-more-devices-in-mainers-lives-than-ever-no-one-knows-where-they-end-up/</ref> To quote the article, "Mainers are generating more electronic waste than ever. And no one knows what percentage of that waste is sent for recycling." He also includes statistics for sold phones, trade-ins, and phones given to friends or relatives to give a false view that only 2% of phones are thrown into the trash when looking at phones at end of life.
			<references />

Jason: /* Right to Repair in Maine (LD1977 SP679 "An Act To Ensure a Consumer's Right To Repair Certain Electronic Products") */

2025-01-27T19:35:05Z

Right to Repair in Maine (LD1977 SP679 "An Act To Ensure a Consumer's Right To Repair Certain Electronic Products")

← Older revision		Revision as of 19:35, 27 January 2025
Line 8:		Line 8:
	\| Official Website = https://www.cta.tech/		\| Official Website = https://www.cta.tech/
	\| Logo = Ctalogo.svg		\| Logo = Ctalogo.svg
	}}The '''~~[[wikipedia:Consumer_Technology_Association\|~~Consumer Technology Association]]''' ('''CTA''') is a standard and [[wikipedia:Trade_organization\|trade organization]]. Their [https://www.cta.tech/ ~~mission statement]~~ is "to help innovators of all sizes grow their business." They are active lobbyists for a wide [https://www.cta.tech/Advocacy ~~variety of issues]~~ but often do this by representing large tech companies in legal battles against the right to repair. While the American consumer may have various feelings about their trade policy, immigration, or patent reform stances, all of us are harmed by their consistent defense of restrictive licensing and built-in blocks for independent repair.<!--To save you guys the trouble, here's every relevant video regarding CTA.		}}The '''Consumer Technology Association'''<ref>https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Consumer_Technology_Association</ref> ('''CTA''') is a standard and [[wikipedia:Trade_organization\|trade organization]]. Their mission statement<ref>https://www.cta.tech/</ref> is "to help innovators of all sizes grow their business." They are active lobbyists for a wide variety of issues<ref>https://www.cta.tech/Advocacy</ref> but often do this by representing large tech companies in legal battles against the right to repair. While the American consumer may have various feelings about their trade policy, immigration, or patent reform stances, all of us are harmed by their consistent defense of restrictive licensing and built-in blocks for independent repair.<!--To save you guys the trouble, here's every relevant video regarding CTA.

	Not directly related according to video directory, but likely important for context:		Not directly related according to video directory, but likely important for context:
Line 38:		Line 38:

	====Right to Repair in Maine (LD1977 SP679 "An Act To Ensure a Consumer's Right To Repair Certain Electronic Products")====		====Right to Repair in Maine (LD1977 SP679 "An Act To Ensure a Consumer's Right To Repair Certain Electronic Products")====
	The CTA's VP of Environmental Affairs and Industry Sustainability testified that "[the] issue that's been raised about e-waste and concern about how not passing legislation like this might increase e-waste, I would remind the committee that Maine has a robust ref>[https://www.maine.gov/dep/waste/ewaste/index.html ~~e-waste law and program in place]~~... ...we are not looking at a situation where e-waste in Maine [is] going into landfills." While ~~this may be strictly true of~~ Maine ~~landfills~~, e-waste recycling faces serious issues perpetuated by many of the same industry practices which make repair difficult. "Smartphones are becoming lighter and slimmer, and ~~<u>~~their batteries are no longer removable~~</u>~~, making recycling much more difficult and labour-intensive. Manual sorting requires workers to be constantly exposed to toxic substances, albeit at a low level, over a long period, while these ~~<u>~~difficult-to-recycle electronic devices require facilities to constantly upgrade their machines to keep up with the changing technology~~</u>~~, lowering the incentive for businesses to recycle e-waste that is already difficult to disassemble.[https://earth.org/what-is-e-waste-recycling/ "] Additionally, outsourcing of e-waste recycling represents an environmental health disaster to less developed countries, leading to China banning the import of many categories of waste[[wikipedia:Operation_National_Sword~~\|.]]~~ Right to Repair stands to greatly reduce the generation of e-waste and make it's recycling much more cost effective, at the expense of reducing the number of new devices purchased as replacements. Reduce, then Reuse (repair or salvage parts) and then Recycle.		The CTA's VP of Environmental Affairs and Industry Sustainability testified that "[the] issue that's been raised about e-waste and concern about how not passing legislation like this might increase e-waste, I would remind the committee that Maine has a robust e-waste law and program in place<ref>https://www.maine.gov/dep/waste/ewaste/index.html</ref>... ...we are not looking at a situation where e-waste in Maine [is] going into landfills." While these laws are on the books in Maine, e-waste recycling faces serious issues perpetuated by many of the same industry practices which make repair difficult, and is less complete of a solution than the legislation would suggest. "Smartphones are becoming lighter and slimmer, and ''their batteries are no longer removable'', making recycling much more difficult and labour-intensive. Manual sorting requires workers to be constantly exposed to toxic substances, albeit at a low level, over a long period, while these ''difficult-to-recycle electronic devices require facilities to constantly upgrade their machines to keep up with the changing technology'', lowering the incentive for businesses to recycle e-waste that is already difficult to disassemble."<ref>https://earth.org/what-is-e-waste-recycling/</ref> Additionally, outsourcing of e-waste recycling represents an environmental health disaster to less developed countries, leading to China banning the import of many categories of waste.<ref>https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_National_Sword</ref> Right to Repair stands to greatly reduce the generation of e-waste and make it's recycling much more cost effective, at the expense of reducing the number of new devices purchased as replacements. Reduce, then Reuse (repair or salvage parts) and then Recycle.

	More than a year after this testimony and the allegation that investments and lobbying for e-waste recycling more than makes up for anti-repair practices (and the death of the bill in committee), the Maine Monitor published [https://themainemonitor.org/there-are-more-devices-in-mainers-lives-than-ever-no-one-knows-where-they-end-up/ this report]. To quote the article, "Mainers are generating more electronic waste than ever. And no one knows what percentage of that waste is sent for recycling." He also includes statistics for sold phones, trade-ins, and phones given to friends or relatives to give a false view that only 2% of phones are thrown into the trash when looking at phones at end of life.		More than a year after this testimony and the allegation that investments and lobbying for e-waste recycling more than makes up for anti-repair practices (and the death of the bill in committee), the Maine Monitor published [https://themainemonitor.org/there-are-more-devices-in-mainers-lives-than-ever-no-one-knows-where-they-end-up/ this report]<ref>https://themainemonitor.org/there-are-more-devices-in-mainers-lives-than-ever-no-one-knows-where-they-end-up/</ref>. To quote the article, "Mainers are generating more electronic waste than ever. And no one knows what percentage of that waste is sent for recycling." He also includes statistics for sold phones, trade-ins, and phones given to friends or relatives to give a false view that only 2% of phones are thrown into the trash when looking at phones at end of life.

Shingo: Fixed an infobox.

2025-01-27T19:29:52Z

Fixed an infobox.

← Older revision		Revision as of 19:29, 27 January 2025
Line 4:		Line 4:
	\| Name = Consumer Protection Association		\| Name = Consumer Protection Association
	\| Type = Trade Organization		\| Type = Trade Organization
	\| Founded = ~~April 16,~~ 1924~~; 100 years ago (as Radio Manufacturers Association)~~		\| Founded = 1924
	~~1999 (as Consumer Electronics Association)~~
	~~2015 (as Consumer Technology Association)~~
	~~United States~~
	\| Industry = Electronics		\| Industry = Electronics
	\| Official Website = https://www.cta.tech/		\| Official Website = https://www.cta.tech/
Line 36:		Line 33:
	==Lobbying==		==Lobbying==

	==History of Lies==		==History of Lies ==

	==Testimonies==		==Testimonies==

← Older revision		Revision as of 06:21, 16 February 2026
Line 44:		Line 44:

	While these laws are on the books in Maine, e-waste recycling faces serious issues perpetuated by many of the same industry practices which make repair difficult, and is less complete of a solution than the legislation would suggest. "Smartphones are becoming lighter and slimmer, and ''their batteries are no longer removable'', making recycling much more difficult and labour-intensive. Manual sorting requires workers to be constantly exposed to toxic substances, albeit at a low level, over a long period, while these ''difficult-to-recycle electronic devices require facilities to constantly upgrade their machines to keep up with the changing technology'', lowering the incentive for businesses to recycle e-waste that is already difficult to disassemble" (emphasis added).<ref>{{Cite web \|author=Tin Lok Wu \|title=What Is E-Waste Recycling and How Is it Done? \|url=https://earth.org/what-is-e-waste-recycling/ \|website=Earth.org \|date=26 May 2022 \|access-date=10 Jul 2025 \|url-status=live \|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20220526003215/https://earth.org/what-is-e-waste-recycling/ \|archive-date=26 May 2022}}</ref> Additionally, outsourcing of e-waste recycling represents an environmental health disaster to less developed countries, leading to China banning the import of many categories of waste.<ref>{{Cite web		While these laws are on the books in Maine, e-waste recycling faces serious issues perpetuated by many of the same industry practices which make repair difficult, and is less complete of a solution than the legislation would suggest. "Smartphones are becoming lighter and slimmer, and ''their batteries are no longer removable'', making recycling much more difficult and labour-intensive. Manual sorting requires workers to be constantly exposed to toxic substances, albeit at a low level, over a long period, while these ''difficult-to-recycle electronic devices require facilities to constantly upgrade their machines to keep up with the changing technology'', lowering the incentive for businesses to recycle e-waste that is already difficult to disassemble" (emphasis added).<ref>{{Cite web \|author=Tin Lok Wu \|title=What Is E-Waste Recycling and How Is it Done? \|url=https://earth.org/what-is-e-waste-recycling/ \|website=Earth.org \|date=26 May 2022 \|access-date=10 Jul 2025 \|url-status=live \|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20220526003215/https://earth.org/what-is-e-waste-recycling/ \|archive-date=26 May 2022}}</ref> Additionally, outsourcing of e-waste recycling represents an environmental health disaster to less developed countries, leading to China banning the import of many categories of waste.<ref>{{Cite web
	\|title=Operation National Sword \|url=https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_National_Sword \|website=Wikipedia \|date= \|access-date=10 Jul 2025 ~~\|url-status=live~~ \|url-status=live \|archive-url=http://web.archive.org/web/20260207191211/https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_National_Sword \|archive-date=7 Feb 2026}}</ref> Right-to-repair stands to greatly reduce the generation of e-waste and make its recycling much more cost effective, at the expense of reducing the number of new devices purchased as replacements. Reduce, then reuse (repair or salvage parts) and then recycle.		\|title=Operation National Sword \|url=https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_National_Sword \|website=Wikipedia \|date= \|access-date=10 Jul 2025 \|url-status=live \|archive-url=http://web.archive.org/web/20260207191211/https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_National_Sword \|archive-date=7 Feb 2026}}</ref> Right-to-repair stands to greatly reduce the generation of e-waste and make its recycling much more cost effective, at the expense of reducing the number of new devices purchased as replacements. Reduce, then reuse (repair or salvage parts) and then recycle.

	More than a year after this testimony and the allegation that investments and lobbying for e-waste recycling more than makes up for anti-repair practices{{Citation needed}} (and the death of the bill in committee<ref>{{Cite web \|title=Summary \|url=https://legislature.maine.gov/LawMakerWeb/summary.asp?LD=1977&SessionID=13 \|website=Maine.gov \|date=16 Nov 2020 \|access-date=10 Jul 2025 \|url-status=live \|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20250711042403/https://legislature.maine.gov/LawMakerWeb/summary.asp?LD=1977&SessionID=13\|archive-date=11 Jul 2025}}</ref>), the ''Maine Monitor'' reported in that "Mainers are generating more electronic waste than ever. And no one knows what percentage of that waste is sent for recycling."<ref>{{Cite web		More than a year after this testimony and the allegation that investments and lobbying for e-waste recycling more than makes up for anti-repair practices{{Citation needed}} (and the death of the bill in committee<ref>{{Cite web \|title=Summary \|url=https://legislature.maine.gov/LawMakerWeb/summary.asp?LD=1977&SessionID=13 \|website=Maine.gov \|date=16 Nov 2020 \|access-date=10 Jul 2025 \|url-status=live \|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20250711042403/https://legislature.maine.gov/LawMakerWeb/summary.asp?LD=1977&SessionID=13\|archive-date=11 Jul 2025}}</ref>), the ''Maine Monitor'' reported in that "Mainers are generating more electronic waste than ever. And no one knows what percentage of that waste is sent for recycling."<ref>{{Cite web

← Older revision		Revision as of 02:34, 16 February 2026
Line 44:		Line 44:

	While these laws are on the books in Maine, e-waste recycling faces serious issues perpetuated by many of the same industry practices which make repair difficult, and is less complete of a solution than the legislation would suggest. "Smartphones are becoming lighter and slimmer, and ''their batteries are no longer removable'', making recycling much more difficult and labour-intensive. Manual sorting requires workers to be constantly exposed to toxic substances, albeit at a low level, over a long period, while these ''difficult-to-recycle electronic devices require facilities to constantly upgrade their machines to keep up with the changing technology'', lowering the incentive for businesses to recycle e-waste that is already difficult to disassemble" (emphasis added).<ref>{{Cite web \|author=Tin Lok Wu \|title=What Is E-Waste Recycling and How Is it Done? \|url=https://earth.org/what-is-e-waste-recycling/ \|website=Earth.org \|date=26 May 2022 \|access-date=10 Jul 2025 \|url-status=live \|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20220526003215/https://earth.org/what-is-e-waste-recycling/ \|archive-date=26 May 2022}}</ref> Additionally, outsourcing of e-waste recycling represents an environmental health disaster to less developed countries, leading to China banning the import of many categories of waste.<ref>{{Cite web		While these laws are on the books in Maine, e-waste recycling faces serious issues perpetuated by many of the same industry practices which make repair difficult, and is less complete of a solution than the legislation would suggest. "Smartphones are becoming lighter and slimmer, and ''their batteries are no longer removable'', making recycling much more difficult and labour-intensive. Manual sorting requires workers to be constantly exposed to toxic substances, albeit at a low level, over a long period, while these ''difficult-to-recycle electronic devices require facilities to constantly upgrade their machines to keep up with the changing technology'', lowering the incentive for businesses to recycle e-waste that is already difficult to disassemble" (emphasis added).<ref>{{Cite web \|author=Tin Lok Wu \|title=What Is E-Waste Recycling and How Is it Done? \|url=https://earth.org/what-is-e-waste-recycling/ \|website=Earth.org \|date=26 May 2022 \|access-date=10 Jul 2025 \|url-status=live \|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20220526003215/https://earth.org/what-is-e-waste-recycling/ \|archive-date=26 May 2022}}</ref> Additionally, outsourcing of e-waste recycling represents an environmental health disaster to less developed countries, leading to China banning the import of many categories of waste.<ref>{{Cite web
	\|title=Operation National Sword \|url=https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_National_Sword \|website=Wikipedia \|date= \|access-date=10 Jul 2025 \|url-status=live}}</ref> Right-to-repair stands to greatly reduce the generation of e-waste and make its recycling much more cost effective, at the expense of reducing the number of new devices purchased as replacements. Reduce, then reuse (repair or salvage parts) and then recycle.		\|title=Operation National Sword \|url=https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_National_Sword \|website=Wikipedia \|date= \|access-date=10 Jul 2025 \|url-status=live \|url-status=live \|archive-url=http://web.archive.org/web/20260207191211/https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_National_Sword \|archive-date=7 Feb 2026}}</ref> Right-to-repair stands to greatly reduce the generation of e-waste and make its recycling much more cost effective, at the expense of reducing the number of new devices purchased as replacements. Reduce, then reuse (repair or salvage parts) and then recycle.

	More than a year after this testimony and the allegation that investments and lobbying for e-waste recycling more than makes up for anti-repair practices{{Citation needed}} (and the death of the bill in committee<ref>{{Cite web \|title=Summary \|url=https://legislature.maine.gov/LawMakerWeb/summary.asp?LD=1977&SessionID=13 \|website=Maine.gov \|date=16 Nov 2020 \|access-date=10 Jul 2025 \|url-status=live \|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20250711042403/https://legislature.maine.gov/LawMakerWeb/summary.asp?LD=1977&SessionID=13\|archive-date=11 Jul 2025}}</ref>), the ''Maine Monitor'' reported in that "Mainers are generating more electronic waste than ever. And no one knows what percentage of that waste is sent for recycling."<ref>{{Cite web		More than a year after this testimony and the allegation that investments and lobbying for e-waste recycling more than makes up for anti-repair practices{{Citation needed}} (and the death of the bill in committee<ref>{{Cite web \|title=Summary \|url=https://legislature.maine.gov/LawMakerWeb/summary.asp?LD=1977&SessionID=13 \|website=Maine.gov \|date=16 Nov 2020 \|access-date=10 Jul 2025 \|url-status=live \|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20250711042403/https://legislature.maine.gov/LawMakerWeb/summary.asp?LD=1977&SessionID=13\|archive-date=11 Jul 2025}}</ref>), the ''Maine Monitor'' reported in that "Mainers are generating more electronic waste than ever. And no one knows what percentage of that waste is sent for recycling."<ref>{{Cite web