Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Businesses Patents United States Technology

Grandson of Legendary John Deere Inventor Calls Out Company On Right To Repair (securityledger.com) 67

Posted by BeauHD from the lost-focus dept.
chicksdaddy writes: The grandson of Theo Brown, a legendary engineer and inventor for John Deere who patented, among other things, the manure spreader is calling out the company his grandfather served for decades for its opposition to right to repair legislation being considered in Illinois. In an opinion piece published by The Security Ledger entitled "My Grandfather's John Deere would support Our Right to Repair," Willie Cade notes that his grandfather, Theophilus Brown is credited with 158 patents, some 70% of them for Deere & Co., including the manure spreader in 1915. His grandfather used to travel the country to meet with Deere customers and see his creations at work in the field. His hope, Cade said, was to help the company's customers be more efficient and improve their lives with his inventions.

In contrast, Cade said the John Deere of the 21st Century engages in a very different kind of business model: imposing needless costs on their customers. An example of this kind of rent seeking is using software locks and other barriers to repair -- such as refusing to sell replacement parts -- in order to force customers to use authorized John Deere technicians to do repairs at considerably higher cost and hassle. "It undermines what my grandfather was all about," he writes. Cade, who founded the Electronics Reuse Conference, is supporting right to repair legislation that is being considered in Illinois and opposed by John Deere and the industry groups it backs. "Farmers who can't repair farm equipment and a wide spectrum of Americans who can't repair their smartphones are pushing back in states across the country."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Grandson of Legendary John Deere Inventor Calls Out Company On Right To Repair More

Grandson of Legendary John Deere Inventor Calls Out Company On Right To Repair

Comments Filter:

  • Tesla given a pass (Score:1)

    by Anonymous Coward

    It is illegal to repair your own Tesla. But you faggots keep giving them a pass.

    • It is illegal to repair your own Tesla. But you faggots keep giving them a pass.

      A corporate EULA (or some shit like that) stating your warranty is void if you repair your car or whatever other gizmo has broken down on you is not the same thing as law.

      • Re: (Score:3)

        by Matheus ( 586080 )

        This right to repair legislation would apply to the electronics in a Tesla as well but to the jackass OP's point this article had nothing to do with Tesla.. who's giving them a free pass? This article is an editorial from a John Deere founder descendant writing about his dislike of current John Deere company behavior in respects to both their customer interactions and their explicit opposition to proposed right to repair legislation. ...but he hates Tesla so apparently the fact he didn't mention a company

        • Re: (Score:1)

          by Anonymous Coward

          I really don't give a shit about hacking Tesla's (or GM's, or...) software.

          What I want is access to diagnostic information, tools and parts. For $10 a day I can get access to current service information and dealer-level software for my Honda: https://techinfo.honda.com/rjanisis/logon.aspx

          I can get access to parts at ANY Honda dealer, no questions asked.

          Why can't Tesla do this?

          On one hand, you have people which claim EV's are simple to maintain, and on the other hand, these same people say you can't servic

        • Re:Tesla given a pass (Score:5, Insightful)

          by rahvin112 ( 446269 ) on Thursday March 21, 2019 @06:13PM (#58312982)

          The important bit is that right to repair should apply to all machinery and transport like this. It's inexcusable that this isn't an abuse of copyright that IMO should terminate the copyright. It's exploiting copyright to provide an additional legal protection to the seller that they wouldn't otherwise have which is a textbook example of abusing the law.

          There are legitimate rights that need to be respected, but any customer should be able to modify or break software on any product they buy, as long as they aren't doing so to abuse a warranty or to abuse the copyright (using the software on another unaffiliated product or something similar) beyond repairing, servicing or upgrading a product you own.

          The problem here is that Deere and the other companies (like apple) that are opposed to this make massive political donations to make sure these laws die. We need more congress critters that are willing to stand up to these entrenched interests when they are abusing the law to get protections they were never supposed to get.

      • A corporate EULA (or some shit like that) stating your warranty is void if you repair your car or whatever other gizmo has broken down on you is not the same thing as law.

        No but that doesn't mean that the law has to allow or enable it. I get that attempting a repair and making things worse could reasonably void part of a warranty but only the parts that apply to what was "tampered" with. Unrelated systems should still be covered under warranty.

  • Monopolism is a crime. (Score:3, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward on Thursday March 21, 2019 @05:13PM (#58312692)

    As is artificial scarcity.

    For thee same reason: It ruins exactly the freedom of the market that those corporations say they want so much when it works in their favor.
    And it allows infinite price gouging to a poimt where it is literally robbing or stealing, as in: taking money, even by force, without giving something in return, and without leaving a choice. With only a small token legiimate business exchange attached for alibi purposes.

    Whether it's done with tractor parts or software copies (aka "intellectual property"), does not matter.

    • Or printer cartridges where the price of the printer was lowered to a loss leader item, where the manufacturer would actually make money on selling parts to keep the printer printing.. It was so bad at times, the printer was cheaper than you could buy the cartridges in the box with it.

      Apart from the legal "It's for essential emission controls" so we force you to use factory certified parts. It's a shame pretty much ALL companies went with this sell the product cheap and gouge it back from the customer ove

      • It's a shame pretty much ALL companies went with this sell the product cheap and gouge it back from the customer over time model...

        It's a shame people keep falling for it.

    • Monopolism is a crime. As is artificial scarcity.

      Unless it is based upon a government issued patent. Then it is perfectly legal.

  • "My grandfather would have wanted them to have the right to repair, as long as they used only John Deere authentic parts purchased from a dealer. He filed those patents to also prevent others from making use of the technology he created but ignore that part as it's a bit counter to my argument."

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by DRJlaw ( 946416 )

      "My grandfather would have wanted them to have the right to repair, as long as they used only John Deere authentic parts purchased from a dealer. He filed those patents to also prevent others from making use of the technology he created but ignore that part as it's a bit counter to my argument.

      Hardly counter to his argument. He's arguing for a right to repair the technology, not a right to manufacture copies of the technology.

      "Right to repair" is not a synonym for "open source hardware." Try to make it so

  • I think right to repair is important - especially with what Deere has been doing, which I read about off and on.

    The one caution I would make is, I like making it so that third parties can get official means and parts to do repairs. I'm not as on-board with any kind of law that would limit how objects should be manufactured...

    My long term worry is that products would become more crappy if it's mandated they cannot be sealed a certain way. Both Android and iPhone owners enjoy greta waterproofing abilities of

    • Re:I'm with right to repair if doesn't harm (Score:5, Interesting)

      by zippo01 ( 688802 ) on Thursday March 21, 2019 @05:42PM (#58312838)
      I disagree with your statement in whole. Apple does not sell parts, and is difficult to service. Samsung http://www.samsungparts.com/Mo... [samsungparts.com] I can buy any part I want, and for a long time lead the way in water proof phones. it is a design choice to say, I need to make this serviceable and weather proof. The part can even be considered disposable, as long as I can replace it myself. Versus, I refuse to support people repairing their phones and putting mechanisms in place to make it almost impossible.

      • I don't think you disagree with me as much as you think you do...

        I probably did not make it clear enough but I do support third parties being able to get official repair equipment and parts from Apple as well. I am totally fine with that.

        Where I differ is I think it should remain OK for products to possibly be difficult to service, because you are shutting out a lot of design priorities by making it easier.. in fact there is a risk you are making it MORE likely products will break down more often by having

        • You can buy any part you want but don't install it yourself [ifixit.com] if you want to keep the phone waterproof... that's the problem with letting the average consumer buy parts, they will on average break more than they fix (at least for something as compact and delicate as a phone).

          Right to repair laws aren't mostly about people wanting to do the repairs themselves. It's about wanting to take it to your local repair shop instead of the factory authorized shop that charges 3 times as much. Just like in your own link where the top rated answer is from a local repair shop that can do the work.

  • Comment removed based on user account deletion
  • All due respect to the grandson and the grandfather, but Theo Brown was a businessman of the time. If he had lived today, he would totally be working to lock his customers into exclusive maintenance channels. Business has changed, and that's how you make money nowadays. I like the idea of right-to-repair, but let's face it: it just isn't good business anymore. You're fighting capitalism. It's gonna be a *very* uphill battle.
  • Is far worse! As much as I am for less governmental oversight, I think it's going to take legislation.

  • I've solved the entire problem right here. (Score:4, Interesting)

    by WolfgangVL ( 3494585 ) on Thursday March 21, 2019 @08:49PM (#58313532)

    Once I've purchased your item or service, I'm more than happy to license certain "unlimited"* rights back to you, for a "reasonable fee"** Just head on over to my website, create and account***, and apply for your new access to my decision making processes!

    *using the new meaning of the word, popularized by American ISPs and data service providers.

    **using the new meaning of the term, popularized by american shareholders, and banking institutions.

    ***All data presented in account creation process belongs to ME, and may be shared or sold to other interested parties at my sole discretion, in an effort to better patronize your company and/or services.

    You certify that all information provided during the application process is true, and you understand I may revoke your access to my decision making process at any time, without notice, and I may change the terms of this agreement at any time without notice. By entering into a sales contract for goods or services with ME, you have explicitly agreed to these terms. This agreement supersedes all other agreements you may, or may not have made with ME in the past. You also agree that any disagreements arising from acceptance of this agreement are to be resolved via arbitration, by an arbiter of my choosing, at a time of my choosing, at your expense.

  • Sorry, but only the great grandson of a legendary inventor has the final word on whether or not the company is now corrupt.

  • Farmers (Score:3, Interesting)

    by Anonymous Coward on Friday March 22, 2019 @03:58AM (#58314296)

    I grew up on a farm. Farmers *need* to repair their own machinery. You cannot be a farmer without also being a mechanic. When you're working in the fields all day and into the night, for example, to get the crops harvested before winter comes, you can't just stop and wait for someone else to repair your broken combine. You need to be able to diagnose the problem, go buy the part you need from the local farm supply store, and then do the repairs yourself.

    So for John Deere company to deny farmers the right to repair their own equipment which they own is stupid.

  • I thought Facebook had that patent?

Slashdot Top Deals

You are in a maze of little twisting passages, all different.

Close