Here are several arguments against right to repair:
1. Safety issues
Today's technologies are more complicated and are easier to harm the users without sufficient knowledge. For example, Lithium ion batteries can catch fire if punctured or overheated, and the capacitors in a power supplies can carry dangerously high voltages after being switched off for a while. Another aspect of this argument is software security, as some third-party hardwares could have security vulnerabilities. Such accidents can deeply impact a company's image, so some people might consider it reasonable to restrict the self-repairing of some products.

2. Quality
For some products, an increase in repairability needs to sacrifice the quality. The most notable example of this is smartphones. To pack more hardwares into the limited space and get better water resistance, we got glued screens, back panels and batteries. Thin laptops also have their RAMs and even SSDs soldered to the motherboard. Some people are willing to trade repairability for better quality and the right to repair might discourage manufactures from such products.

3. Reliability of second hand products
One of Apple's notorious schemes to make repairs harder is to encrypt their hardwares such as the screen. However, for some people this guarantees that the second hand products are less likely to have some parts replaced by inferior third-party parts. Therefore purchasing one is safer and it is also easier to sell old products at a higher price.

4. Requirements gone too far
Some requirements about right to repair are so far as that manufactures should have to provide full technical diagrams for easier repairing, which can leak designs to competitors. In other words, some arguments are not against the whole idea that it should be legally protected to repair one's own product, but some requirements that might have gone too far.
spam fails_task lang_mismatch pii not_appropriate hate_speech sexual_content quality toxicity humor helpfulness creativity violence