35 ms·

Alabama farmer sues John Deere for ‘right to repair’

392 points by SQL2219 5y ago

lostgame 5y ago
While this is great news; I unfortunately have to wonder how effective this is going to be. We need likely a much, much larger subset of farmers joining such a class action lawsuit - ideally from as many states as possible - to get this to change. Out of their greed; John Deere will fight this with all they have. I still think the best solution to this is still a startup that can create tractors that don’t require repairs by a first party. I understand the difficulties behind such an operation, but I’m unfortunately not sure how successful such a lawsuit will be in America without the hell of a lot more ‘ooomph’ behind it.
- spicybright 5y ago
  I've been hearing about farmers trying to organize for at least the past 5 years to tackle this. I'm not going to hold my breath for much progress, sadly. An "open tractor" from a new company is also going to be hard to justify with how thin margins are with farming. Maybe some techies can get together to make repair easier. New electronic control boards, diagrams of how to machine their own replacement parts, etc. for the most popular tractors people own. It's a tough problem to solve, but one worth fighting any way we can.
  - NexRebular 5y ago
    Wonder if they could start buying company stock to get enough voting power to make a difference...
    - bluGill 5y ago
      No entity can legally own more than 10% of John Deere's stock. I forget why that rule is. Something they are in, perhaps finance? If farmers are acting as a group they probably would be in trouble for individual purchases that collectively violate the rules.
- thr0wawayf00 5y ago
  > I still think the best solution to this is still a startup that can create tractors that don’t require repairs by a first party. You're still going up against massively entrenched and influential opposition that could likely undercut a startup's prices and then raise them again once the competition dies. We saw it with the rideshare companies. Their business models are flexible enough to take losses when necessary in order to beat out alternatives and then programmatically raise the prices again once they've captured the market again.
  - Retric 5y ago
    The issue is they are operating in the printer ink model where the initial price is discounted based on expected future revenue. That’s a hard nut to crack because any open competition is fighting from a seeming price disadvantage.
    - MrsPeaches 5y ago
      Just wanted to say thank you for the insightful comment. > That’s a hard nut to crack because any open competition is fighting from a seeming price disadvantage. What other markets are there, where new entrants face the same problem?
- cabalamat 5y ago
  > I still think the best solution to this is still a startup that can create tractors that don’t require repairs by a first party. Do other tractor manufacturers have Deere-style DRM? I imagine some don't.
- Overtonwindow 5y ago
  Is it possible to invest in this lawsuit? Considering how Peter Theil invested in the Hogan lawsuit, perhaps there should be a legal investment concept. Edit: Well, it appears there is something like this already. "Crowd Justice" https://www.crowdjustice.com/ https://www.crowdjustice.com/
  - imglorp 5y ago
    I would like to see a much broader decision, something * applying to all products, not just ag * allowing my choice of parts * allow me or my choice of shop to work on it * no cryptographic DRM'ed parts * access to schematics, shop manuals, and admin/interface software
  - loonster 5y ago
    IIRC, investing in lawsuits can also open you up to liability if you lose.
deleted 5y ago
[deleted]
tempnow987 5y ago
Some ideas: If folks actually value "right to repair" support companies that offer right to repair. If no tractor company exists that offer the type of open setup you want and you think this is critical - start a company up and take out Deere and others. Deere's views on software changes by users in the field is pretty darn clear. My own view - having watched individuals and dealers etc "tune" trucks etc (with all the endless problems involved) - is that for something like a 10,000 part count + heavy piece of equipment - Deere is going to want to keep stuff locked up tight to preserve brand value. Apple has done this with iphones, and the resale value after 5 years on an iphone is incredible compared to players pushing out android phones.
- _dain_ 5y ago
  "don't like it? just build your own X" isn't a solution, it's a sneering dismissal: let them eat cake. we need regulation. force companies to provide a minimum standard of repairability.
  - CamperBob2 5y ago
    Unfortunately 'regulation' is entirely in Deere's favor, thanks to the USPTO and their habit of allowing companies to claim underlying ideas rather than specific implementations. E.g., US8874261 mentioned in this article: https://www.ipwatchdog.com/2015/02/18/john-deere-patents-hybrid-harvesters-and-mobile-robots/id=54801/ https://www.ipwatchdog.com/2015/02/18/john-deere-patents-hyb... https://patents.google.com/patent/US8874261B2/en?oq=8874261 https://patents.google.com/patent/US8874261B2/en?oq=8874261 Claim 1 from that patent: A method for operating a mobile robot, the method comprising: - Collecting range data of one or more objects in an environment around the robot; - Identifying uniquely identifiable ones of the objects as navigation landmarks: - Storing a reference map of the navigation landmarks based on the collected range data; - Establishing a list or sequence of way points for the robot to visit, each way point defined with reference to one or more landmarks; - Reading a message on a tag posted at or near one or more way points; and - Managing a task based on the read message. When this claim was granted by the USPTO, John Deere was given exclusive rights to the general concept of robot navigation between waypoiints with the addition of "reading a message on a tag" and acting accordingly. To the layman this language sounds specific enough, but those skilled in the art (or in possession of an HN user name) will recognize it as Turing equivalence. Indeed, the next few claims make it clear that ownership of the idea of conditional execution of tasks at waypoints is exactly the goal of the patent. So, good luck building a competing farm implement that actually does anything useful. The "innovators" at Deere have made sure that you can do no such thing for the next 12 years.
Imaiomus 5y ago
My question is what is wrong with the other brand? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AGCO https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AGCO
- markdown 5y ago
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mahindra_Tractors https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mahindra_Tractors FTFY. Seriously though, the point isn't that there are alternatives, but that one should have the right to repair whatever machine they own.
  - nimbius 5y ago
    disclosure: im a diesel mechanic by trade and Mahindra's are a real treat!! I absolutely endorse Mahindra but if youre outside TN theyre kinda hard to come by. the tractors are less reliable than more modern western designs but faster and easier to repair by far. new head seals rocker arms valve guide seals and an oil change was 6 hours of labor and i actually started to enjoy it. bolts are over-built for what you need in some cases. the gyrovator has some of the beefiest engine mounts ive come across in a long time (looking at you Western Star) im sure every one comes with a free "you dont want that" from the usual scumbags at the dealer but if you have an engine lift you can service your own Jivo very easily from tip to tail. the only reason our shop saw one was because the owner couldnt safely work on the engine (gyrovator series) as he was 71 years old.
    - jacquesm 5y ago
      I had a Kubota and loved it. Easy to work on, parts readily available, affordable and no more electronics than it really needed to have. How do Kubota and Mahindra compare side-by-side?
      - nimbius 5y ago
        kubota parts were faster for us to order since theyre used in construction all over the US and theyre a little more interchangeable, but you make that difference up with mahindra because you can fix more of it in the field to begin with.
Raed667 5y ago
A pretty good video on the subject https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bGH6pxNouCY https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bGH6pxNouCY
deleted 5y ago
[deleted]
jbkiv 5y ago
This has become a general problem. There seems to be more money in "software services" than in building tractors and motors. John Deere is not unique. All common rail engines require a visit from a "certified engineer" who has access to the software. This is terrible in the marine industry where you can't get one in the middle of the ocean and you can't repair yourself either. What do you do? Do you sail to a harbor? You can't unless you have a sailboat. Get a tow to the nearest Volvo/Yanmar dealer? You must be kidding, thousand of miles away? So yes, that lawsuit makes sense. As for a class action lawsuit some of the comments in the thread misunderstand how it works: 1. Secure one or two plaintiffs. Two or three is better. Make sure they represent owners well: no conflicts, not paid to sue, good/clean plaintiffs. 2. Find the right location for the lawsuit. Location is very important in the US. Not only the state but the county. This is VERY important. Good plaintiff lawyers know where to sue. 3. Get your judge to certify the class action. "this lawsuit is on behalf of all users of John Deere tractors, etc". This is ALSO very important. John Deere will fight that. They will claim that those two plaintiffs do not represent the class, blabla. 4. Fight in court. Other plaintiffs have nothing to do. If the class action lawsuit wins on behalf of thousands of owners this represents a lot of money. It costs nothing to plaintiffs. Lawyers typically get 30%, sometimes less. If they are too greedy (they all are) the judge may object and cut down the fees. 5. Users can “opt out” of the payment if John Deere loses in court after appeals. Most plaintiffs do not opt out because they can’t afford to fight big corporations. Unfortunately corporations are not always fair. We have seen many, many cases when poor farmer John just could not pay the exorbitant costs imposed by John Deere. Understand that these people have learned to be self-sufficient. They weld their broken massive tools in the field. They call the mobile repair shop to fix and tune their engines. Now they can't do anything. That massive, expensive John Deer is like a beached whale. Nothing you can do about it. Hence class action lawsuits in the US. Some of them are abusive (i.e.recent att phone bills, 100M customers collect $1, lawyers collect $30M), but sometimes there are no other ways (asbestos, workplace injuries, brain damage near chemical waste from mining). Folks outside the US struggle to understand the system. It is why today you can enjoy Non-Apple store repairs to your phone, non OEM parts for your car or non branded cartridges for your printer. I wish that such a lawsuit will force John Deere to change its practices, like it forced other companies to do so.
- 5y ago
pessimizer 5y ago
Hopefully people are directly lobbying Biden on this right now. Anti-monopoly action has been his only significant priority (and only deviation from the status quo.) IMO that's why he's being continually slammed in the media on easily predictable legislative failures on "progressive" legislation in this particular Congress. I'd suspect if polled on each component of his anti-monopoly orders, the public would give them 90%+ support, but those the papers ignore (allowing them to be quietly rolled back under the next POTUS, unnoticed.)
shagie 5y ago
For industrial equipment (such as a tractor), who is liable for injuries if the equipment is repaired or modified by a 3rd party and it goes to court later? https://www.biren.com/blog/2020/september/defective-machinery-products-liability-litigatio/ https://www.biren.com/blog/2020/september/defective-machiner... In particular https://www.justia.com/trials-litigation/docs/caci/1200/1245/ https://www.justia.com/trials-litigation/docs/caci/1200/1245... > The [misuse/ [or] modification] was so highly extraordinary that it was not reasonably foreseeable to [name of defendant], and therefore should be considered as the sole cause of [name of plaintiff]’s harm. So, if it was foreseeable that a 3rd party may modify some equipment in some way, the manufacturer must specifically warn the purchaser about "don't do that." With software, this becomes a much more difficult challenge. Additionally, https://www.justia.com/trials-litigation/docs/caci/1200/1244/ https://www.justia.com/trials-litigation/docs/caci/1200/1244... > [Name of defendant] claims that [he/she/nonbinary pronoun/it] is notresponsible for any harm to [name of plaintiff] based on a failure to warn because [name of plaintiff] is a sophisticated user of the [product]. To succeed on this defense, [name of defendant] must prove that, at the time of the injury, [name of plaintiff], because of [his/her/nonbinary pronoun]particular position, training, experience, knowledge, or skill, knew or should have known of the [product]’s risk, harm, or danger. So with software, either the user is a sophisticated user and aware of the implications of installing their own patches on the system and what that could do (over fertilize a field because of an incorrect setting on the gps calibration)... or they aren't. If they aren't a sophisticated user of the system, then it should be locked down sufficiently to prevent those changes. > “The sophisticated user defense concerns warnings. Sophisticated users ‘arecharged with knowing the particular product’s dangers.’ ‘The rationale supporting the defense is that “the failure to provide warnings about risks already known to a sophisticated purchaser usually is not a proximate cause of harm resulting from those risks suffered by the buyer’s employees or downstream purchasers.” So are we expecting farmers to be software engineers too?
- mistrial9 5y ago
  ok - "you are too stupid to own this equipment" and "we know what is best for you" basically?
- heavyset_go 5y ago
cletus 5y ago
The example is of course egregious ($600 for a software update for a wire that got wet, basically). I fully support being able to repair your own stuff but I have no idea how you regulate this so companies don't gouge "owners" for aftermarket services. Earlier today there was a thread about e-bike battery prices (tl'dr they're ridiculous expensive). I really wish rechargeable batteries had interchangeable form factors like normal batteries. I can't help but feel that if AA batteries were invented today there's no way there'd be a standard form factor. But this issue is complicated. As much as first-party parts and accessories cost too much, there can be deadly consequences with shoddy third party products [1]: > In July, a Chinese woman died after being electrocuted from a charging iPhone 5. Later that week, another man in China suffered a similar injury from a charging iPhone 4, leaving him comatose. In both cases, the victims were using an unofficial third-party adapter to charge their device. So how do you guarantee something third-party will do what it claims to? If you use bad RAM chips in a Macbook, the consumer is going to blame Apple not whoever supplied cheap, shoddy parts (for the record, I hate soldered in RAM). As an aside, I was unsurprised to see in this article this is a small farm. The harsh truth is that family farms and small farms in general are a dying way of life and just aren't competitive with industrial-scale agriculture. You can't fight the incoming tide forever. [1]: https://appleinsider.com/articles/13/11/28/thai-man-dies-after-alleged-electrocution-from-charging-iphone-4s- https://appleinsider.com/articles/13/11/28/thai-man-dies-aft...
- imgabe 5y ago
  Apple can make the customer whole and then go sue the 3rd party manufacturer. Apple has far more resources and clout to hold manufacturers accountable than any one customer. “Don’t make crappy parts or Apple will send a team of lawyers to bankrupt you” would be a credible threat.
  - shagie 5y ago
    I don't see it working out well for Apple to become the USB charger and cord enforcer for the world. If this is a counterfeit Apple charger, then yes. If this is a charger that was purchased from Apple as the distributor, then yes. However, if this was a 3rd party charger purchased from a street vendor or online merchant (that has difficulties with counterfeit products) that could be used for anything from the cat water fountain pump to an Apple iPhone - then no.
djoldman 5y ago
Instead of a special right to repair law, it may be more prudent to expand anti-competition law to include the practice of precluding competition via impeding repair.
rafale 5y ago
John Deere will just claim they never sold him a tractor, but rather signed a custom contract with him that gives him access and custody of one in return of some constraints he agreed upon. If the government intervenes, it would undermine the free market. But you could argue it's already undermined, both by the government itself and the fact that somehow John Deere managed to achieve a monopoly in a sector critical to national security.
- deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]
- OnlineGladiator 5y ago
  > If the government intervenes, it would undermine the free market. Good. Sometimes we need regulation, otherwise bankers would crash the economy while getting bailouts with taxpayer money, workers would be paid below minimum wage, child labor would be rampant, and so on. The government is supposed to represent the people, although clearly money is the real voting power today. I'd like to see John Deere get sued into bankruptcy and laws set in place to avoid predatory techniques like this moving forward. I'm not hopeful though, and the stock market has certainly voted in favor of John Deere.
  - dvt 5y ago
    > Sometimes we need regulation, otherwise bankers would crash the economy while getting bailouts with taxpayer money... I honestly can't tell if this is meant to be satire.
    - dabber21 5y ago
      it's all about the money, no matter the cost, that's why they mostly operate in grey zones/areas, always trying to circumvent the law somehow. "What do you mean we can't dump all the waste into the river? we actually have to dispose it properly and pay for it?" and I get it they want to increase their profit. Even if a company wanted to dispose it properly he won't be able to offer competitive prices if nobody else does it
Gustomaximus 5y ago
I dont understand why people keep buying JD tractors. They have a reputation for reliability, so do many other brands. Kubota, Deutz, Fent, Massy, Case, New Holland... a bunch more. It's amazing the brand loyalty hold JD have on farmers.
- 8bitsrule 5y ago
  I read somewhere recently that the market for old, used JD's has grown dramatically in the recent past.
- dghlsakjg 5y ago
  Is it a case of lock-in with accessories?
- i_am_proteus 5y ago
  Dealer proximity and local parts availability play a pretty big role.
  - fnordfnordfnord 5y ago
    Both of those things are worth zero when Deere can't supply enough technicians in the planting and harvest seasons to keep those tractors running.
  - cplusplusfellow 5y ago
    Also an established line of credit basically with the farm makes buying them easier than competitive offerings by other manufacturers. There’s still enormous cultural inertia with Deere.
- gerdesj 5y ago
  "I dont understand why people keep buying JD tractors." Let's get closer to home: why do people buy Windows and Apples, despite a fair few free (really free) alternatives?
  - stickfigure 5y ago
thelittleone 5y ago
Am I being overly cynical in concluding that a growing % of companies will screw over their customers for their own gain. Doesn't this myopic "screw the customer" mentality damage brand reputation? Sure does for me. The growing discontent amongst a companies customer base is creating a new market opportunity for a competitor. When I feel screwed by a company like this, I find a good alternative, then jump ship and NEVER go back (even if they course correct some years later). From that point on I'm a vocal detractor of the brand. If no quality alternative exists it's even worse because you know the company is screwing you knowing you have no good alternatives.
- pessimizer 5y ago
  The monopolist can just buy the competition that you jumped ship to. Now your choice is between A) the services that are too terrible to be bought out, or B) services that are not taking the buyout because they are irrational. Incompetence or insanity.
  - vorpalhex 5y ago
    There is always C - services that won't be bought out because Buyer is incompatible with values.
    - Dylan16807 5y ago
      I'm pretty sure B was written to include those.
- asdff 5y ago
  This isn't anything new to be fair. Marketing books from the early 1900s talk about the strategy of attracting your flock of customers with a product but then cutting costs by offering a substandard product after you've created a reputation with the initial quality product.
  - thelittleone 5y ago
    It's like the Lord of the Rings.... the power of the ring (greed in the system) is too powerful for most (companies) to bare. The world needs more Frodos.
creed98 5y ago
jfnetsec 5y ago
owning a john deere was once a symbol of a liberated man
GnarfGnarf 5y ago
Would "right to repair" also apply to software companies that lock up their customers' data in password-protected databases, which is only known to the company?
- hiptobecubic 5y ago
  How would it? What have you purchased and what are you repairing?
  - GnarfGnarf 5y ago
    I have software that creates a database in a special format, from the data I have entered. I cannot access the data from third-party tools to do custom reporting.
Proven 5y ago
[dead]
pcdoodle 5y ago
Good on him!
SQL2219 5y ago
rent-seeking must really be about lusting after power, after all, how much money do you actually need to live a really good life in the West?

392 points by SQL2219 5y ago

While this is great news; I unfortunately have to wonder how effective this is going to be. We need likely a much, much larger subset of farmers joining such a class action lawsuit - ideally from as many states as possible - to get this to change. Out of their greed; John Deere will fight this with all they have. I still think the best solution to this is still a startup that can create tractors that don’t require repairs by a first party. I understand the difficulties behind such an operation, but I’m unfortunately not sure how successful such a lawsuit will be in America without the hell of a lot more ‘ooomph’ behind it.

spicybright 5y ago
I've been hearing about farmers trying to organize for at least the past 5 years to tackle this. I'm not going to hold my breath for much progress, sadly. An "open tractor" from a new company is also going to be hard to justify with how thin margins are with farming. Maybe some techies can get together to make repair easier. New electronic control boards, diagrams of how to machine their own replacement parts, etc. for the most popular tractors people own. It's a tough problem to solve, but one worth fighting any way we can.
- NexRebular 5y ago
  Wonder if they could start buying company stock to get enough voting power to make a difference...
  - bluGill 5y ago
    No entity can legally own more than 10% of John Deere's stock. I forget why that rule is. Something they are in, perhaps finance? If farmers are acting as a group they probably would be in trouble for individual purchases that collectively violate the rules.
thr0wawayf00 5y ago
> I still think the best solution to this is still a startup that can create tractors that don’t require repairs by a first party. You're still going up against massively entrenched and influential opposition that could likely undercut a startup's prices and then raise them again once the competition dies. We saw it with the rideshare companies. Their business models are flexible enough to take losses when necessary in order to beat out alternatives and then programmatically raise the prices again once they've captured the market again.
- Retric 5y ago
  The issue is they are operating in the printer ink model where the initial price is discounted based on expected future revenue. That’s a hard nut to crack because any open competition is fighting from a seeming price disadvantage.
  - MrsPeaches 5y ago
    Just wanted to say thank you for the insightful comment. > That’s a hard nut to crack because any open competition is fighting from a seeming price disadvantage. What other markets are there, where new entrants face the same problem?
cabalamat 5y ago
> I still think the best solution to this is still a startup that can create tractors that don’t require repairs by a first party. Do other tractor manufacturers have Deere-style DRM? I imagine some don't.
Overtonwindow 5y ago
Is it possible to invest in this lawsuit? Considering how Peter Theil invested in the Hogan lawsuit, perhaps there should be a legal investment concept. Edit: Well, it appears there is something like this already. "Crowd Justice" https://www.crowdjustice.com/ https://www.crowdjustice.com/
- imglorp 5y ago
  I would like to see a much broader decision, something * applying to all products, not just ag * allowing my choice of parts * allow me or my choice of shop to work on it * no cryptographic DRM'ed parts * access to schematics, shop manuals, and admin/interface software
- loonster 5y ago
  IIRC, investing in lawsuits can also open you up to liability if you lose.

deleted 5y ago

[deleted]

tempnow987 5y ago

Some ideas: If folks actually value "right to repair" support companies that offer right to repair. If no tractor company exists that offer the type of open setup you want and you think this is critical - start a company up and take out Deere and others. Deere's views on software changes by users in the field is pretty darn clear. My own view - having watched individuals and dealers etc "tune" trucks etc (with all the endless problems involved) - is that for something like a 10,000 part count + heavy piece of equipment - Deere is going to want to keep stuff locked up tight to preserve brand value. Apple has done this with iphones, and the resale value after 5 years on an iphone is incredible compared to players pushing out android phones.

_dain_ 5y ago
"don't like it? just build your own X" isn't a solution, it's a sneering dismissal: let them eat cake. we need regulation. force companies to provide a minimum standard of repairability.
- CamperBob2 5y ago
  Unfortunately 'regulation' is entirely in Deere's favor, thanks to the USPTO and their habit of allowing companies to claim underlying ideas rather than specific implementations. E.g., US8874261 mentioned in this article: https://www.ipwatchdog.com/2015/02/18/john-deere-patents-hybrid-harvesters-and-mobile-robots/id=54801/ https://www.ipwatchdog.com/2015/02/18/john-deere-patents-hyb... https://patents.google.com/patent/US8874261B2/en?oq=8874261 https://patents.google.com/patent/US8874261B2/en?oq=8874261 Claim 1 from that patent: A method for operating a mobile robot, the method comprising: - Collecting range data of one or more objects in an environment around the robot; - Identifying uniquely identifiable ones of the objects as navigation landmarks: - Storing a reference map of the navigation landmarks based on the collected range data; - Establishing a list or sequence of way points for the robot to visit, each way point defined with reference to one or more landmarks; - Reading a message on a tag posted at or near one or more way points; and - Managing a task based on the read message. When this claim was granted by the USPTO, John Deere was given exclusive rights to the general concept of robot navigation between waypoiints with the addition of "reading a message on a tag" and acting accordingly. To the layman this language sounds specific enough, but those skilled in the art (or in possession of an HN user name) will recognize it as Turing equivalence. Indeed, the next few claims make it clear that ownership of the idea of conditional execution of tasks at waypoints is exactly the goal of the patent. So, good luck building a competing farm implement that actually does anything useful. The "innovators" at Deere have made sure that you can do no such thing for the next 12 years.

Imaiomus 5y ago

My question is what is wrong with the other brand? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AGCO https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AGCO

markdown 5y ago
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mahindra_Tractors https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mahindra_Tractors FTFY. Seriously though, the point isn't that there are alternatives, but that one should have the right to repair whatever machine they own.
- nimbius 5y ago
  disclosure: im a diesel mechanic by trade and Mahindra's are a real treat!! I absolutely endorse Mahindra but if youre outside TN theyre kinda hard to come by. the tractors are less reliable than more modern western designs but faster and easier to repair by far. new head seals rocker arms valve guide seals and an oil change was 6 hours of labor and i actually started to enjoy it. bolts are over-built for what you need in some cases. the gyrovator has some of the beefiest engine mounts ive come across in a long time (looking at you Western Star) im sure every one comes with a free "you dont want that" from the usual scumbags at the dealer but if you have an engine lift you can service your own Jivo very easily from tip to tail. the only reason our shop saw one was because the owner couldnt safely work on the engine (gyrovator series) as he was 71 years old.
  - jacquesm 5y ago
    I had a Kubota and loved it. Easy to work on, parts readily available, affordable and no more electronics than it really needed to have. How do Kubota and Mahindra compare side-by-side?
    - nimbius 5y ago
      kubota parts were faster for us to order since theyre used in construction all over the US and theyre a little more interchangeable, but you make that difference up with mahindra because you can fix more of it in the field to begin with.

Raed667 5y ago

A pretty good video on the subject https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bGH6pxNouCY https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bGH6pxNouCY

deleted 5y ago

[deleted]

jbkiv 5y ago

This has become a general problem. There seems to be more money in "software services" than in building tractors and motors. John Deere is not unique. All common rail engines require a visit from a "certified engineer" who has access to the software. This is terrible in the marine industry where you can't get one in the middle of the ocean and you can't repair yourself either. What do you do? Do you sail to a harbor? You can't unless you have a sailboat. Get a tow to the nearest Volvo/Yanmar dealer? You must be kidding, thousand of miles away? So yes, that lawsuit makes sense. As for a class action lawsuit some of the comments in the thread misunderstand how it works: 1. Secure one or two plaintiffs. Two or three is better. Make sure they represent owners well: no conflicts, not paid to sue, good/clean plaintiffs. 2. Find the right location for the lawsuit. Location is very important in the US. Not only the state but the county. This is VERY important. Good plaintiff lawyers know where to sue. 3. Get your judge to certify the class action. "this lawsuit is on behalf of all users of John Deere tractors, etc". This is ALSO very important. John Deere will fight that. They will claim that those two plaintiffs do not represent the class, blabla. 4. Fight in court. Other plaintiffs have nothing to do. If the class action lawsuit wins on behalf of thousands of owners this represents a lot of money. It costs nothing to plaintiffs. Lawyers typically get 30%, sometimes less. If they are too greedy (they all are) the judge may object and cut down the fees. 5. Users can “opt out” of the payment if John Deere loses in court after appeals. Most plaintiffs do not opt out because they can’t afford to fight big corporations. Unfortunately corporations are not always fair. We have seen many, many cases when poor farmer John just could not pay the exorbitant costs imposed by John Deere. Understand that these people have learned to be self-sufficient. They weld their broken massive tools in the field. They call the mobile repair shop to fix and tune their engines. Now they can't do anything. That massive, expensive John Deer is like a beached whale. Nothing you can do about it. Hence class action lawsuits in the US. Some of them are abusive (i.e.recent att phone bills, 100M customers collect $1, lawyers collect $30M), but sometimes there are no other ways (asbestos, workplace injuries, brain damage near chemical waste from mining). Folks outside the US struggle to understand the system. It is why today you can enjoy Non-Apple store repairs to your phone, non OEM parts for your car or non branded cartridges for your printer. I wish that such a lawsuit will force John Deere to change its practices, like it forced other companies to do so.

5y ago

pessimizer 5y ago

Hopefully people are directly lobbying Biden on this right now. Anti-monopoly action has been his only significant priority (and only deviation from the status quo.) IMO that's why he's being continually slammed in the media on easily predictable legislative failures on "progressive" legislation in this particular Congress. I'd suspect if polled on each component of his anti-monopoly orders, the public would give them 90%+ support, but those the papers ignore (allowing them to be quietly rolled back under the next POTUS, unnoticed.)

shagie 5y ago

For industrial equipment (such as a tractor), who is liable for injuries if the equipment is repaired or modified by a 3rd party and it goes to court later? https://www.biren.com/blog/2020/september/defective-machinery-products-liability-litigatio/ https://www.biren.com/blog/2020/september/defective-machiner... In particular https://www.justia.com/trials-litigation/docs/caci/1200/1245/ https://www.justia.com/trials-litigation/docs/caci/1200/1245... > The [misuse/ [or] modification] was so highly extraordinary that it was not reasonably foreseeable to [name of defendant], and therefore should be considered as the sole cause of [name of plaintiff]’s harm. So, if it was foreseeable that a 3rd party may modify some equipment in some way, the manufacturer must specifically warn the purchaser about "don't do that." With software, this becomes a much more difficult challenge. Additionally, https://www.justia.com/trials-litigation/docs/caci/1200/1244/ https://www.justia.com/trials-litigation/docs/caci/1200/1244... > [Name of defendant] claims that [he/she/nonbinary pronoun/it] is notresponsible for any harm to [name of plaintiff] based on a failure to warn because [name of plaintiff] is a sophisticated user of the [product]. To succeed on this defense, [name of defendant] must prove that, at the time of the injury, [name of plaintiff], because of [his/her/nonbinary pronoun]particular position, training, experience, knowledge, or skill, knew or should have known of the [product]’s risk, harm, or danger. So with software, either the user is a sophisticated user and aware of the implications of installing their own patches on the system and what that could do (over fertilize a field because of an incorrect setting on the gps calibration)... or they aren't. If they aren't a sophisticated user of the system, then it should be locked down sufficiently to prevent those changes. > “The sophisticated user defense concerns warnings. Sophisticated users ‘arecharged with knowing the particular product’s dangers.’ ‘The rationale supporting the defense is that “the failure to provide warnings about risks already known to a sophisticated purchaser usually is not a proximate cause of harm resulting from those risks suffered by the buyer’s employees or downstream purchasers.” So are we expecting farmers to be software engineers too?

mistrial9 5y ago
ok - "you are too stupid to own this equipment" and "we know what is best for you" basically?
heavyset_go 5y ago

cletus 5y ago

The example is of course egregious ($600 for a software update for a wire that got wet, basically). I fully support being able to repair your own stuff but I have no idea how you regulate this so companies don't gouge "owners" for aftermarket services. Earlier today there was a thread about e-bike battery prices (tl'dr they're ridiculous expensive). I really wish rechargeable batteries had interchangeable form factors like normal batteries. I can't help but feel that if AA batteries were invented today there's no way there'd be a standard form factor. But this issue is complicated. As much as first-party parts and accessories cost too much, there can be deadly consequences with shoddy third party products [1]: > In July, a Chinese woman died after being electrocuted from a charging iPhone 5. Later that week, another man in China suffered a similar injury from a charging iPhone 4, leaving him comatose. In both cases, the victims were using an unofficial third-party adapter to charge their device. So how do you guarantee something third-party will do what it claims to? If you use bad RAM chips in a Macbook, the consumer is going to blame Apple not whoever supplied cheap, shoddy parts (for the record, I hate soldered in RAM). As an aside, I was unsurprised to see in this article this is a small farm. The harsh truth is that family farms and small farms in general are a dying way of life and just aren't competitive with industrial-scale agriculture. You can't fight the incoming tide forever. [1]: https://appleinsider.com/articles/13/11/28/thai-man-dies-after-alleged-electrocution-from-charging-iphone-4s- https://appleinsider.com/articles/13/11/28/thai-man-dies-aft...

imgabe 5y ago
Apple can make the customer whole and then go sue the 3rd party manufacturer. Apple has far more resources and clout to hold manufacturers accountable than any one customer. “Don’t make crappy parts or Apple will send a team of lawyers to bankrupt you” would be a credible threat.
- shagie 5y ago
  I don't see it working out well for Apple to become the USB charger and cord enforcer for the world. If this is a counterfeit Apple charger, then yes. If this is a charger that was purchased from Apple as the distributor, then yes. However, if this was a 3rd party charger purchased from a street vendor or online merchant (that has difficulties with counterfeit products) that could be used for anything from the cat water fountain pump to an Apple iPhone - then no.

djoldman 5y ago

Instead of a special right to repair law, it may be more prudent to expand anti-competition law to include the practice of precluding competition via impeding repair.

rafale 5y ago

John Deere will just claim they never sold him a tractor, but rather signed a custom contract with him that gives him access and custody of one in return of some constraints he agreed upon. If the government intervenes, it would undermine the free market. But you could argue it's already undermined, both by the government itself and the fact that somehow John Deere managed to achieve a monopoly in a sector critical to national security.

deleted 5y ago
[deleted]
OnlineGladiator 5y ago
> If the government intervenes, it would undermine the free market. Good. Sometimes we need regulation, otherwise bankers would crash the economy while getting bailouts with taxpayer money, workers would be paid below minimum wage, child labor would be rampant, and so on. The government is supposed to represent the people, although clearly money is the real voting power today. I'd like to see John Deere get sued into bankruptcy and laws set in place to avoid predatory techniques like this moving forward. I'm not hopeful though, and the stock market has certainly voted in favor of John Deere.
- dvt 5y ago
  > Sometimes we need regulation, otherwise bankers would crash the economy while getting bailouts with taxpayer money... I honestly can't tell if this is meant to be satire.
  - dabber21 5y ago
    it's all about the money, no matter the cost, that's why they mostly operate in grey zones/areas, always trying to circumvent the law somehow. "What do you mean we can't dump all the waste into the river? we actually have to dispose it properly and pay for it?" and I get it they want to increase their profit. Even if a company wanted to dispose it properly he won't be able to offer competitive prices if nobody else does it

Gustomaximus 5y ago

I dont understand why people keep buying JD tractors. They have a reputation for reliability, so do many other brands. Kubota, Deutz, Fent, Massy, Case, New Holland... a bunch more. It's amazing the brand loyalty hold JD have on farmers.

8bitsrule 5y ago
I read somewhere recently that the market for old, used JD's has grown dramatically in the recent past.
dghlsakjg 5y ago
Is it a case of lock-in with accessories?
i_am_proteus 5y ago
Dealer proximity and local parts availability play a pretty big role.
- fnordfnordfnord 5y ago
  Both of those things are worth zero when Deere can't supply enough technicians in the planting and harvest seasons to keep those tractors running.
- cplusplusfellow 5y ago
  Also an established line of credit basically with the farm makes buying them easier than competitive offerings by other manufacturers. There’s still enormous cultural inertia with Deere.
gerdesj 5y ago
"I dont understand why people keep buying JD tractors." Let's get closer to home: why do people buy Windows and Apples, despite a fair few free (really free) alternatives?
- stickfigure 5y ago

thelittleone 5y ago

Am I being overly cynical in concluding that a growing % of companies will screw over their customers for their own gain. Doesn't this myopic "screw the customer" mentality damage brand reputation? Sure does for me. The growing discontent amongst a companies customer base is creating a new market opportunity for a competitor. When I feel screwed by a company like this, I find a good alternative, then jump ship and NEVER go back (even if they course correct some years later). From that point on I'm a vocal detractor of the brand. If no quality alternative exists it's even worse because you know the company is screwing you knowing you have no good alternatives.

pessimizer 5y ago
The monopolist can just buy the competition that you jumped ship to. Now your choice is between A) the services that are too terrible to be bought out, or B) services that are not taking the buyout because they are irrational. Incompetence or insanity.
- vorpalhex 5y ago
  There is always C - services that won't be bought out because Buyer is incompatible with values.
  - Dylan16807 5y ago
    I'm pretty sure B was written to include those.
asdff 5y ago
This isn't anything new to be fair. Marketing books from the early 1900s talk about the strategy of attracting your flock of customers with a product but then cutting costs by offering a substandard product after you've created a reputation with the initial quality product.
- thelittleone 5y ago
  It's like the Lord of the Rings.... the power of the ring (greed in the system) is too powerful for most (companies) to bare. The world needs more Frodos.

creed98 5y ago

jfnetsec 5y ago

owning a john deere was once a symbol of a liberated man

GnarfGnarf 5y ago

Would "right to repair" also apply to software companies that lock up their customers' data in password-protected databases, which is only known to the company?

hiptobecubic 5y ago
How would it? What have you purchased and what are you repairing?
- GnarfGnarf 5y ago
  I have software that creates a database in a special format, from the data I have entered. I cannot access the data from third-party tools to do custom reporting.

Proven 5y ago

[dead]

pcdoodle 5y ago

Good on him!

SQL2219 5y ago

rent-seeking must really be about lusting after power, after all, how much money do you actually need to live a really good life in the West?