3 ms·

You're misrepresenting your case here. The law stops you from tinkering with the software of the tractor. You can tweak, repair, replace, or light on fire any p

by kinsho 11y ago

You're misrepresenting your case here. The law stops you from tinkering with the software of the tractor. You can tweak, repair, replace, or light on fire any part of the tractor you want, so long as you do not reverse-engineer the software inside the tractor. So technically, the law does not stop you from repairing any of the mechanical parts of your tractor. I'm not saying I agree with John Deere's attempt to prevent people from playing around with its tractor software, but I am saying that you're exaggerating here.

rahimnathwani 11y ago
The software is an essential part of the tractor. The tractor isn't just the mechanical parts.
- kinsho 11y ago
  Yes, but it's NOT the -only- part of the tractor. The commenter who brought up this tractor example made it seem like the government outlawed people from tinkering or repairing ANY part of the tractor. I also wouldn't be surprised if (much like cars), tractors generally only need mechanical repairs over the duration of their lifespans.
  - rahimnathwani 11y ago
    "The commenter who brought up this tractor example made it seem like the government outlawed people from tinkering or repairing ANY part of the tractor." No, they said "...the law can stop you from repairing...", which is true. "I also wouldn't be surprised if (much like cars), tractors generally only need mechanical repairs over the duration of their lifespans." I know little about tractors, but your statement is not true for modern cars. Often repairs cannot be completed by mechanical means alone, and require interfacing with or modifying the software in the car. Even if you replace a broken airbag, the light will stay on until you take the car to the dealer to have it reset. Even if your statement were true, who gets to decide what repairs are required over the life of the car/tractor? If not the owner, then why not?
    - kinsho 11y ago
      Good points.
  - tremon 11y ago
    I also wouldn't be surprised if [cars] only need mechanical repairs over the duration of their lifespans. But you'd be wrong. Take a look at the top comment here[1]: A recent BMW, in which all I did was replace a dead battery, required a trip to the dealer to "accept" this new battery. So yes, the ECU software can really do prevent you from repairing any mechanical part of the machine, as long as the ECU has a monitoring sensor for that part. [1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11423833 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11423833
slantyyz 11y ago
I wasn't attempting to misrepresent the case, I was just bringing up an example of a headline I remembered using the first link I found on Google. I don't disagree that my link may not be the best story to illustrate the point. Having said that, here's some additional context to the same story: http://www.wired.com/2015/04/dmca-ownership-john-deere/ http://www.wired.com/2015/04/dmca-ownership-john-deere/ >> a neighbor, Kerry Adams, hasn’t been able to fix an expensive transplanter because he doesn’t have access to the diagnostic software he needs. He’s not alone: many farmers are opting for older, computer-free equipment. http://boingboing.net/2015/05/13/john-deere-of-course-you-ow.html http://boingboing.net/2015/05/13/john-deere-of-course-you-ow... Has a scan of John Deere's response to the Wired story above. Paraphrase: John Deere is opposed to a revision to the DRM law that "would allow owners of equipment, including Deere competitors or software developers, to access or hack Deere's protected software to repair, diagnose or modify vehicle software". I get that most simple repairs to tractors might be just mechanical parts, but when you're dealing with add-ons (transplanters?) or fine tuning issues like emissions systems (ahem, Volkswagen), I am guessing you usually need access to the diagnostics systems or computer to see and/or understand what's going on before being able to fix it.
- kinsho 11y ago
  Ah the Wired article presents your case in a much better light. If the software in the tractor prevent you from replacing a broken mechanical part, then that can lead to the law blocking you from literally repairing any part of your tractor.

by kinsho 11y ago

rahimnathwani 11y ago

The software is an essential part of the tractor. The tractor isn't just the mechanical parts.

kinsho 11y ago
Yes, but it's NOT the -only- part of the tractor. The commenter who brought up this tractor example made it seem like the government outlawed people from tinkering or repairing ANY part of the tractor. I also wouldn't be surprised if (much like cars), tractors generally only need mechanical repairs over the duration of their lifespans.
- rahimnathwani 11y ago
  "The commenter who brought up this tractor example made it seem like the government outlawed people from tinkering or repairing ANY part of the tractor." No, they said "...the law can stop you from repairing...", which is true. "I also wouldn't be surprised if (much like cars), tractors generally only need mechanical repairs over the duration of their lifespans." I know little about tractors, but your statement is not true for modern cars. Often repairs cannot be completed by mechanical means alone, and require interfacing with or modifying the software in the car. Even if you replace a broken airbag, the light will stay on until you take the car to the dealer to have it reset. Even if your statement were true, who gets to decide what repairs are required over the life of the car/tractor? If not the owner, then why not?
  - kinsho 11y ago
    Good points.
- tremon 11y ago
  I also wouldn't be surprised if [cars] only need mechanical repairs over the duration of their lifespans. But you'd be wrong. Take a look at the top comment here[1]: A recent BMW, in which all I did was replace a dead battery, required a trip to the dealer to "accept" this new battery. So yes, the ECU software can really do prevent you from repairing any mechanical part of the machine, as long as the ECU has a monitoring sensor for that part. [1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11423833 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11423833

slantyyz 11y ago

I wasn't attempting to misrepresent the case, I was just bringing up an example of a headline I remembered using the first link I found on Google. I don't disagree that my link may not be the best story to illustrate the point. Having said that, here's some additional context to the same story: http://www.wired.com/2015/04/dmca-ownership-john-deere/ http://www.wired.com/2015/04/dmca-ownership-john-deere/ >> a neighbor, Kerry Adams, hasn’t been able to fix an expensive transplanter because he doesn’t have access to the diagnostic software he needs. He’s not alone: many farmers are opting for older, computer-free equipment. http://boingboing.net/2015/05/13/john-deere-of-course-you-ow.html http://boingboing.net/2015/05/13/john-deere-of-course-you-ow... Has a scan of John Deere's response to the Wired story above. Paraphrase: John Deere is opposed to a revision to the DRM law that "would allow owners of equipment, including Deere competitors or software developers, to access or hack Deere's protected software to repair, diagnose or modify vehicle software". I get that most simple repairs to tractors might be just mechanical parts, but when you're dealing with add-ons (transplanters?) or fine tuning issues like emissions systems (ahem, Volkswagen), I am guessing you usually need access to the diagnostics systems or computer to see and/or understand what's going on before being able to fix it.

kinsho 11y ago
Ah the Wired article presents your case in a much better light. If the software in the tractor prevent you from replacing a broken mechanical part, then that can lead to the law blocking you from literally repairing any part of your tractor.