Senate Introduces Bill To Allow Farmers To Fix Their Own Equipment (nbcnews.com) 145
An anonymous reader quotes a report from NBC News: A bill introduced Tuesday in the Senate could help make it easier for farmers [...] to repair their tractors independently. The legislation would require agriculture equipment manufacturers to make spare parts, instruction manuals and software codes publicly available, allowing farmers to fix devices by themselves or hire third-party mechanics of their own choosing. The bill's sponsor, Sen. Jon Tester, D-Mont., said in an interview that he has heard from many farmers who reported that difficulties repairing equipment hurt their businesses. "We've got to figure out ways to empower farmers to make sure they can stay on the land. This is one of the ways to do it," Tester said. "I think that the more we can empower farmers to be able to control their own destiny, which is what this bill does, the safer food chains are going to be."
Tester said farmers often reported that company-authorized repairs were costly and could be handled only by licensed technicians who may take days, or even weeks, to show up. That type of delay can have serious impacts on the delicate harvest cycle for planting and reaping crops. [...] The rules about farming equipment could help boost the wider "right to repair" movement, which has gained steam across the country in recent years. Consumer rights groups like U.S. PIRG, a federation of nonprofit public interest research groups, or PIRGs, say people have a fundamental right to control devices they already own, especially when they need to be fixed. Over the last few decades, they say, companies have made third-party repairs nearly impossible by locking software, writing prohibitive warranties or restricting spare parts.
The Senate bill is the latest effort to tackle the issue in Congress, following similar legislation sponsored in the House last year by Rep. Joseph Morelle, D-N.Y. But unlike some of the other proposed laws, the Senate bill narrowly targets farmers, who have become one of the most vocal groups advocating for more repair regulations. Tester said: "I think when you get into other areas like cellphones and TVs and all that kind of stuff, it brings in all sorts of other issues that I am personally not as familiar with as agriculture. That's not to say that those other issues aren't really, really important. What it is to say is that I know this issue reasonably well, and I thought this is an issue that we need to deal with, and the sooner the better."
Tester said farmers often reported that company-authorized repairs were costly and could be handled only by licensed technicians who may take days, or even weeks, to show up. That type of delay can have serious impacts on the delicate harvest cycle for planting and reaping crops. [...] The rules about farming equipment could help boost the wider "right to repair" movement, which has gained steam across the country in recent years. Consumer rights groups like U.S. PIRG, a federation of nonprofit public interest research groups, or PIRGs, say people have a fundamental right to control devices they already own, especially when they need to be fixed. Over the last few decades, they say, companies have made third-party repairs nearly impossible by locking software, writing prohibitive warranties or restricting spare parts.
The Senate bill is the latest effort to tackle the issue in Congress, following similar legislation sponsored in the House last year by Rep. Joseph Morelle, D-N.Y. But unlike some of the other proposed laws, the Senate bill narrowly targets farmers, who have become one of the most vocal groups advocating for more repair regulations. Tester said: "I think when you get into other areas like cellphones and TVs and all that kind of stuff, it brings in all sorts of other issues that I am personally not as familiar with as agriculture. That's not to say that those other issues aren't really, really important. What it is to say is that I know this issue reasonably well, and I thought this is an issue that we need to deal with, and the sooner the better."
John Deere does not approve of this message (Score:1, Troll)
because since when have farmers become certified IT specialists?
Re:John Deere does not approve of this message (Score:4, Insightful)
When they can hire the IT specialist of their choice?
Re: John Deere does not approve of this message (Score:1)
Re: John Deere does not approve of this message (Score:5, Interesting)
I could download a file onto a flash drive, plug it into my tractor and update the firmware. I could plug in my laptop and run some diagnostics.
Or I can hire the person of my choice to do it for me. Either way I am fixing it in the way that seems most appropriate to me, and apparently the tractor owner can't do that at present.
Re: (Score:2)
If you think there is a law declaring farm equipment to be 'essential' you need to cite it. Also explain why being able to fix it yourself would result in less availability.
All kinds of mechanical and electrical gear are owner-repairable including your car, little to no negative consequences.
This will stop farmers having the freedom (Score:2)
To buy tractors that they cannot repair.
It is part of the price. Cheaper now, pay more later.
There are plenty of Chinese tractors that do not have restrictive practices, and they mostly work.
This argument would make perfect sense if markets were truly competitive and purchasers rational.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
A PC user is not necessarily an IT professional. I've known many people who utterly depended upon their computers to do their jobs who had not the first clue about computer maintenance. They literally knew/know nothing about it. Just because someone uses technology doesn't mean they understand it. In fact, most people don't.
Re:John Deere does not approve of this message (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:John Deere does not approve of this message (Score:4, Informative)
Yeah. The company I'm writing software for is in that business , and its surprisingly high tech. We're getting data streams from multiple vendors gears (as well as the telemetry gear we manufacture) and its all given to data analysts (I refuse to use the term "data scientist") who crunch it all down and come up with schedules, recomendations, liase with govt bodies for policy reasons, as well as tracking the usual data businesses are in.
Further its kind of vertically integrated. Everything from planting seeds to harvest, to processing to distribution and retail all ends up pushing data back into the stack to get that birds eye view that the money people and policy makers need to coordinate agricultural activity and make sure famers , retailers and consumers are all getting the best bang for their buck.
Its a whole different world now.
Re: (Score:2)
The grandparent's experience with farming is from watching Smallville and other Hollywood depictions of farmers.
Re: John Deere does not approve of this message (Score:2)
Farmers today aren't illiterate sharecroppers (Score:5, Interesting)
Modern farmers often design and fab their own advanced equipment including some of the largest tractors.
Serious farmers aren't stereotypical yokels any more because those guys got sidelined or lost their land to competitive agribusinessmen.
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
Those yokels can, in the typical case, handle all electrical wiring (including the burying of cable) for an industrial scale operation. The same yokel will be able to handle all the plumbing and infrastructure planning. Yes, they perform most of the mainte
Re: (Score:2)
Serious farmers aren't stereotypical yokels any more because those guys got sidelined or lost their land to competitive agribusinessmen.
They never were. The message that they were was perpetuated because if everyone knew they could have a rural home+family+happiness on a plot of land they can survive on on their own there wouldn't be wageslaves in cubicles to drive the megacorps.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re:John Deere does not approve of this message (Score:4, Informative)
The first five minutes of this should answer that question.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?... [youtube.com]
It wasn't like this when I was a farm kid back in the '70s.
Re: (Score:2)
Since when is a tractor an "Information" device that needs an IT specialist?
It's the 21st century, almost everything is a information device.
Re: (Score:2)
In the 21st century every DIYer also has enough knowledge and skill to work on information devices.
I agree. John Deere's approach is sure to limit innovation of their products. The "open" approach has taken many technology platforms to unexpected places.
If they don't want to open their product then they should stick to leasing them instead of challenging the concept of ownership.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Ha! I'm a EE you insensitive clod - that means I can find the on/off switch to *anything*.
This is not a new right (Score:5, Insightful)
For the entire history of engineering, manufacturing and craftsmanship, designs have been open source and repairable. The tech to make secret, unrepairable devices is new. We don't want any new rights, we just want the rights that have existed for hundreds of years
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
i think what's he's alluding to is the time honored redneck tradition of fixing things themselves. And they are very, very, good at it. Smarmy coastal types don't understand this facet of blue collar folks.
Sure they sometimes have funny accents and say politically incorrect things and don't care about your github repo; but don't let that fool you into thinking they aren't intelligent. You know that scene in apollo 13 where they reverse engineer the carbon scrubber from the LEM? Yeah that was hollywood fa
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Can rural blue collar types fix things? Some things, sometimes, yes. But dont put them on a pedestal. Very, very few of them could fix a modern Deere tractor.
Re: (Score:2)
You manufacturing has been historically open source?
Many farm machines come with repair manuals or have repair manuals available online.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
I have a tube radio from 1929 that I've restored. Receives better than your average transistor radio.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
* Often you will be able to find some of the more common tubes in stock at a surplus shop or online somewhere. I used Soviet surplus tubes to build a Tesla coil that performs well, they're at least 40yrs old.
* Some very popular tubes are still manufactured today (quality not always as good as the old ones).
* Absolute worst-case, you can often use a similar class of tube to perform the same function (depending on what stage of the receiver it's in). Kinda like transistors+mosfets in a way.
Re: (Score:3)
Times have changed. People are not engineers (Score:1)
Unfortunately, times have changed, and right to repair is dead at the starting gate due to four major issues, and we can talk about it, but in reality it is dead:
1: DMCA. The US signed the WIPO treaty. Firmware is considered trade secrets, be it how an engine is timed, how a CPU regulates equipment is done. This is all DMCA protected items, and really isn't repairable. Yes, firmware is as important, if not more, than protecting video or audio assets.
2: Liability. Someone tries to repair something, ge
Re: (Score:1)
Re liability, then maybe the manufacturer should assume full liability, including 100% of the costs for repairs and downtime? And regarding ownership: as far as I'm concerned, anything I can't fix myself is just a lease by another name. The only thing that changes is how hard you get screwed.
Re: (Score:2)
Re liability, then maybe the manufacturer should assume full liability, including 100% of the costs for repairs and downtime? And regarding ownership: as far as I'm concerned, anything I can't fix myself is just a lease by another name. The only thing that changes is how hard you get screwed.
And downtime is the biggest factor in this for many farmers, if you have $10,000-20,000 worth of hay cut, dried and ready to bale on Saturday morning with rain predicted by Sunday at lunchtime, having to wait until Monday to get a dealer mechanic out to tell the computer that its ok to use the new sensor is not acceptable.
Aaron Z
Times have not changed. (Score:5, Insightful)
Unfortunately, times have changed, and right to repair is dead at the starting gate due to four major issues, and we can talk about it, but in reality it is dead:
1: DMCA. The US signed the WIPO treaty. Firmware is considered trade secrets, be it how an engine is timed, how a CPU regulates equipment is done. This is all DMCA protected items, and really isn't repairable. Yes, firmware is as important, if not more, than protecting video or audio assets.
2: Liability. Someone tries to repair something, gets injured, and now you have multi-billion dollar class action lawsuits. Especially farm equipment. Seen Tiktok? There are warning labels for people not to drink radiator fluid for a reason. They decide to try to disassemble something without de-energizing it, the combine shreds them, and now companies now have to pay their next of kin huge amounts of cash.
3: Tech knowledge. The days of being able to just pull an engine and do something in a garage is long gone. People are not engineers, and do not have the knowledge or capabilities to second guess the people who built it. For example, there is a reason why BMWs are taken to the dealer to register the battery, when that is changed, because the computer system is too delicate to rely on what an unauthorized/unregistered power source would do. There are safety procedures, and stuff to follow, that only shops have.
4: People won't pay for this and go elsewhere. People are not going to want to pay for repairable devices. Things like adding space for user replacable batteries or service diagrams cost money, and companies will lose their competitive edge to others who don't provide this. Look at Apple, where everything is closed, but yet they are the industry leaders in investments and properties. Repairability is at best a niche thing.
Overall, RTR is dead, until these issues are addressed. No company wants their IP stolen, or sued to oblivion.
1: DMCA. The US signed the WIPO treaty. Firmware is considered trade secrets, be it how an engine is timed, how a CPU regulates equipment is done. This is all DMCA protected items, and really isn't repairable. Yes, firmware is as important, if not more, than protecting video or audio assets.
The solution is to make the module containing the firmware small and easily replaceable, and mandate that other aspects of the machine can be repaired without accessing the firmware. As an example, replacing a battery or headlight should not involve the firmware, as it now does on certain vehicles.
The ECU on my truck is the size of a cereal box under the passenger seat. There's the firmware, unplug and replace if needed.
2: Liability. Someone tries to repair something, gets injured, and now you have multi-billion dollar class action lawsuits. Especially farm equipment. Seen Tiktok? There are warning labels for people not to drink radiator fluid for a reason. They decide to try to disassemble something without de-energizing it, the combine shreds them, and now companies now have to pay their next of kin huge amounts of cash.
Modding your device voids the warranty, why can't modding your device void the manufacturer's liability? Seems simple enough...
3: Tech knowledge. The days of being able to just pull an engine and do something in a garage is long gone. People are not engineers, and do not have the knowledge or capabilities to second guess the people who built it. For example, there is a reason why BMWs are taken to the dealer to register the battery, when that is changed, because the computer system is too delicate to rely on what an unauthorized/unregistered power source would do. There are safety procedures, and stuff to follow, that only shops have.
See point 1 above: the firmware shouldn't care when the battery is changed, or headlamps, or anything else.
But in particular for farming equipment, the vast *vast* major
Re: (Score:2)
As an example, replacing a battery or headlight should not involve the firmware, as it now does on certain vehicles.
I'm actually all for non-user-serviceable headlights. The reason they need to be paired with the control module is for safety. Modern headlights are extremely bright and can blind on-coming drivers. The law only allows them to be so bright because they are able to dip or in the case of matrix lights block out the part that would illuminate other vehicles. That requires proper installation and calibration to work.
I often see cars with dumb headlights that have been illegally upgraded by the owners with ultra
Re: (Score:2)
Yeah this is a major problem for the modern farmer working a field. Oh wait, no, this isn't relevant at all. But for a car or truck I'd say you have something of a point but the answer isn't to prevent user servicing of the headlights. We don't solve problems by taking away rights we aren't personally taking advantage of from everyone just to block a handful of bad apples.
"The police don't seem interested in enforcing the law."
This is y
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Make sure they don't blind other drivers, or she might be in an accident with them next time.
Re: (Score:2)
Modding your device voids the warranty, why can't modding your device void the manufacturer's liability? Seems simple enough...
Once again, the farm lobby is getting special treatment, and I don't think that this goes far enough. What about other equipment and devices that aren't farm products? This shouldn't just be farmers, and it shouldn't just be tractors.
Re: (Score:2)
DMCA. The US signed the WIPO treaty. Firmware is considered trade secrets, be it how an engine is timed, how a CPU regulates equipment is done. This is all DMCA protected items, and really isn't repairable.
However, the right to reverse engineer it for the purposes of backwards compatibility is explicitly protected by the DMCA. However, if you make a workalike product it still won't work on a Deere because of the DRM. DRM is not mandated by DMCA or WIPO and the purpose of this bill is to make it illegal to use DRM to prevent repairs.
Modding your device voids the warranty, why can't modding your device void the manufacturer's liability?
Because of the Magnussen-Moss warranty act which states that your warranty cannot be voided in this country if you use a compatible repair part.
Re:Times have changed. People are not engineers (Score:4, Interesting)
1. ugh, if in a socket, you take the firmware out, throw it in the trash and put in your own firmware purchased on the open market. Or de-solder, or whatever. I'm pretty sure I've witnessed this before...
2. Maybe the new breed of farmer, but maybe not. My grandfather partially shredded a leg in a combine. His fault, he knew it, owned up to it and never thought once about suing anyone. Old breed was just that way. Is it possible you've never seen farm equipment up close? There are several warning stickers and such, and a shit-ton in old service manuals. You choose to disregard those, that's on you.
3. Please, it's not a BMW ( example bmw tractor [motor1.com]) nor does it have to be. Lamborghini [lamborghini-tractors.com] maybe.
4. I will, and know others who will. New equipment is outrageously expensive. But seems to break more. I'll buy old iron, even if it's slightly higher than it should be due to demand. I can repair it, plus it is just built more solidly.
Things like adding space for user replacable batteries or service diagrams cost money
- Don't tell the battery companies this, or the folks who make flashlights, or hearing aids, or smoke alarms, etc.
Good point on Apple. I have an iPhone. In a few years, when the battery dies or is too degraded, I'll trade it in on a newer one or more likely, chuck the fucker in the ditch cause it's not worth jackshit anymore. If I can't afford OEM repairs on my combine that cost half a mil, it's not going to be worth much on the trade in market, but I'm not going to drive it off in the ditch either. I will find a way to fix it. Myself.
Re: (Score:2)
For example, there is a reason why BMWs are taken to the dealer to register the battery, when that is changed,
This is true.
because the computer system is too delicate to rely on what an unauthorized/unregistered power source would do.
This is bullshit. Same battery chemistry, same number of cells in the replacement. 12v lead-acid batteries are a worldwide standard. If the same size or even a bit smaller and it fits, it'll work fine. BMW just wants more cash.
There are safety procedures, and stuff to follow, that only shops have.
For a battery swap? Don't lick the terminals, they're made of lead.
Re: (Score:2)
Every listed reason here is garbage.
1. People want access to the same firmware that the techs have. Very few are asking for the source code, just access to run it themselves.
2. Liability has been solved years ago. Fairy tale lawsuits with astronomical fear mongering payouts that have never happened isn't helping your argument. Show me a single applicable lawsuit where this is true.
3. Oh no, we should definitely protect the poor farmers from hurting themselves. They certainly haven't been repairing their
Re: (Score:3)
There used to be something like a "book" that held things like "wiring diagrams" and "torque specifications". They were called "service manuals".
Re: (Score:2)
General agreement that information should be open so people can hack the world used to be the norm around here. Maybe it is time to see where the real nerds/geeks have
Re: This is not a new right (Score:2)
For the entire history of engineering, manufacturing and craftsmanship, designs have been open source and repairable
That's a load of horseshit. The entire idea of patent law was invented specifically because the entire history of engineering, manufacturing, and craftsmanship was rife with secrets and inside knowledge.
Re: This is not a new right (Score:2)
Patents aren't secret. They are (in theory) a form of open source. Where the inventor trades publishing the design for an exclusive right to manufacture for a time.
Re: (Score:2)
As long as Deere can void your warranty (Score:2, Interesting)
Companies should NOT be held accountable for user stupidity. As long as that principle is upheld, I’m fine with right-to-repair.
Re:As long as Deere can void your warranty (Score:5, Informative)
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
You can be coddled by a warranty, or you can go full blown libertarian “I own it and do what I want with it
Re:As long as Deere can void your warranty (Score:4, Informative)
Re: (Score:1)
You could try actually reading it.
Under M-M, you can't void a warranty because the user did repairs properly (or hired somebody else to do them properly). You also can't void the warranty with respect to something totally unrelated to whatever the user did. You can still refuse to cover damage that the user did by doing it wrong. And that's settled law that's been around for decades, not something new. ... and warranties are not "coddling". An implied warranty of merchantability and fitness for purpose is s
Re: (Score:2)
He was using a DMM-173 bench multimeter in a lab that had a car-sized cockroft-walton generator. One day it discharged and the leads to the keithley were connected with a large loop area open... half the parts in the DMM were exploded into confetti.
But it was still under warranty, so he sent it in, and true to their warranty, Keithley sent a new unit.
Enclosed was a letter stating that they were
Re:As long as Deere can void your warranty (Score:4, Informative)
Wow. Didn’t know that. Thanks. I’m pretty much fully against right to repair, then. Its one thing for a company to replace a 50 dollar consumer item when the user spits tobacco juice into it and then asks the company to honor the warranty. It’s very different when Jim Bob wrecks a million dollar farm machine because he’s an impatient moron and wants it replaced. You can be coddled by a warranty, or you can go full blown libertarian “I own it and do what I want with it”. Not both.
Gotta read the whole article, there are reasonable limitations in the Act:
Right-to-repair has never been about having carte blanche to destroy things and then assert that the manufacturer is responsible for repairs under warranty. Not that that would prevent opponents from claiming it is so.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Wow. Didn’t know that. Thanks. I’m pretty much fully against right to repair, then. Its one thing for a company to replace a 50 dollar consumer item when the user spits tobacco juice into it and then asks the company to honor the warranty. It’s very different when Jim Bob wrecks a million dollar farm machine because he’s an impatient moron and wants it replaced.
You can be coddled by a warranty, or you can go full blown libertarian “I own it and do what I want with it”. Not both.
Magnuson moss doesn't mean the company can't void the warranty if you work on your own stuff. It simply means the burden of proof is on the manufacturer to prove the damage was caused by you.
If you replace your hard drive with an SSD, the manufacturer can't void your warranty in your laptop because you replaced the drive.
If you replace your heatsink/fan with a dildo, the manufacturer can void your warranty in your laptop, by pointing to the dildo that is in place of the heatsink/fan and saying "you caused i
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
This statute applies only to written warranties and only when the products warranted are purchased for personal, family or household use. Sellers are not required to furnish written warranties.
Re: (Score:2)
I thought that would only apply if the company was also holding exclusive ownership of the tools or services that could potentially repair the device. If the repair can be done with common materials, for instance, then the manufacturer is welcome to void the warranty if the person attempts their own repairs.
Televisions used to come with seals on the back all the time back in the CRT days that said "warranty void if removed". And yes, it really would void the warranty. But you could also take your TV
Re: (Score:2)
I don't see anything in that link that says a warranty can't be voided if someone does their own repairs.
Re: (Score:2)
That's reasonable.
Re: (Score:2)
It should apply to everything (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:It should apply to everything (Score:4, Insightful)
Absolutely this. If you aren't concerned that this legislation doesn't extend to everything you own, you don't understand what's at stake.
Re: (Score:2)
*Louis Rossmann has entered the chat*
On a more serious note, I knew someone was going to mention Louis. The moment I saw this, he was the first person that I thought of. Finally making progress. Little by little, change is coming. :-) :-)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
It would also lead to lawsuits.
Because what if you want to sell equipment with a service model? You get expensive equipment at a huge discount, maybe even below cost, but you basically have to pay for it through a service plan.
I mean, people buy cellphones like that - you get a discounted cellphone, but you're forced to pay it back over the course of a couple of years.
Well, what if I sell you a $1M farm vehicle for say, $500K but you'll have to only let me service it for the next 20 years?
And if you think t
Re: (Score:2)
A modern tractor is just a large form factor cell phone
Brings back memories (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
It's a Connecticut thing [uconn.edu].
Linux tractors when? (Score:2)
Come on, I knew that farmers were well-versed in putting up with massive amounts of bullshit but this is getting ridiculous. If we can pull together open-source cellphones then certainly there must be collective will available to make a self-driving tractor without the explicit permission of John Deere. This is the food supply we're talking about! John Deere's business plan is a blatant attack on national security and they should be jailed.
Re:Linux tractors when? (Score:4, Informative)
Deere is claiming DMCA on all protocols of operation and diagnostics. No one but them is allowed to work on it.
I never really cared that much (Score:2, Interesting)
we already subsidize farmers to the point we are paying for their entire operation just to overproduce to the point we have to give it away or let it rot, why don't we just pay them the same to not produce and a broken tractor is no issue
Re: (Score:1)
Re:I never really cared that much (Score:4, Informative)
Re:I never really cared that much (Score:5, Informative)
Yeah, I used to oppose farm subsidies based on economic principals: that it distorts markets, creates inefficiencies, etc.
Eventually I grew up and realized that some things are more important than market efficiencies, and food is one of them.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Because before those policies were enacted in 1933, we had nationwide famines every other year, right?
That reminds me of a joke: why do elephants paint their toenails red? So they can hide in cherry trees. Ever seen an elephant in a cherry tree? That's how you know it works!
Or maybe the reason why we haven't had a famine since the Civil War is because we have very fertile land, and lots of it, spread over too wide an area for a single natural
Because farming is unpredictable (Score:3)
If you have a problem with food waste do more foreign aid and make school lunches 100% free. Oh course you'll have to do something about the grocery store lobby...
As long as the filibuster exists (Score:4)
It's the same old song and dance they started in the 90s with newt Gingrich. If you go to his Wikipedia article you can read up a little on it. The goal is to do as much damage as they can while the other guy is in charge because they know voters will blame that guy and his people and his party.
I just wish we as a nation would stop falling for it. But it's been being done for about 30 years now and we don't show any sign of stopping. I mean, fool me once shame on you, for me for 30 years and running....?
Re:As long as the filibuster exists (Score:5, Interesting)
I'd bet on the snowball in hell over this passing. Even if they were Republicans who would support it they won't break ranks because McConnell knows how to crack the whip. And right now, right before midterm election, anything that might look like a wind to the Democrats has to be blocked. Heck McConnell has literally said he wants a policy free midterm election
Typically yes, but I'd expect this to be an exception.
A lot of US politics is driven by the fact that a disproportionate amount of power, especially in the Senate, is held by small states that heavily identify with farmers. And a "Right to repair" bill for farmers is both easy to explain and it directly impacts that core constituency.
Politics is national... unless it's clearly a local issue, then making it national makes you one of the outsiders.
For a Senator of a rural state it's more important to make sure that you're seen as voting with farmers than it is trying to stick it to Biden.
I'm a bit more cynical (Score:2)
I just don't think we can have a functional government as long as we have the filibuster. It needs to go or our democracy needs to go. The two can't survive together at this point. Not in a post newt Gingrich "contract with America"
Right to repair anything you own. (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Now make Tesla, Apple, and every other company give out repair schematics, parts, basic tools, software/firmware, and repair manuals so people can actually fix their items themselves or at third parties which will bring down the cost and cut down on the massive piles of waste greedy companies cause.
It would be a start if they don't insist on Pentalobe screws or those Torx with a pin in the middle.
Every replacement screen for a phone now comes with a silly amount of extra tools. Too cheaply made to be really useable, so I throw away the bag every time and use my own.
Re: (Score:2)
The other issue with Tesla and Apple is that they disable features if you do DIY repairs. When they detect unauthorized parts or tampering they turn off features like fast charging on Teslas and face unlock on iPhones.
Re: (Score:2)
I would be fine if the law just said they have to be available for purchase at reasonable cost. I don't care if the parts are more or less integrated vs separated, but I should be able to buy the same parts and manuals that their own repair techs can access. If a dealership can access the firmware, then I should have access as well.
Re: (Score:2)
Fixing the symptom not the disease (Score:3)
IMHO, this bill really only fixes a symptom of a more serious disease in the economy. That disease is the subscription business model. Look around and at your own finances (if you pay attention to them) and you'll see more and more business are subscription fee based. You're no long buying a durable product that's 100% yours when you get it. No, you have to spend money on it every month whether you use the product or not. Companies that historically have made durable goods are getting screwed. After all, if you make something that the customer owns outright, then they stop being your customer until the thing they bought wears out. Cynically speaking, John Deere is simply trying to stay in business in the current economy by trying to get into a subscription system. A tractor is going to last many years... with proper maintenance. They don't make money after the initial sale with the exception of parts of which there are third-party alternatives. So to smooth out the peaks and valleys of durable product sales, they're trying the subscription model with the added twist of ensuring that the customer has to use their service.
If anyone is to blame, it's the MBAs who thought up the subscription model and probably the entertainment industry's concept of residual royalties because it's killing off the part of the economy that makes product.
Re: (Score:2)
A lot of people hate subscription based models, but from the software company's perspective it's insane not to head that direction. You transform customers from less reliable yearly revenue to monthly. You can easily see where profits are headed because you don't have to yolo hope those same customers are upgrading later. You can drop the upfront costs of your product, run shortened sales, etc. It more than makes up in the 20% loss in customers leaving for non-sub based competitors.
That said, consumers
Re: (Score:2)
Granted. That's why Adobe went down that road. It has its benefits assuming that the consumer is actually getting something of value in return. Adobe tends to add interesting features frequently. By contrast other software companies who shall remain nameless rarely add anything of value and don't address glaring weaknesses in the product. In addition, some companies expect you to ante up for every fee period if you unsubscribe and then resubscribe two years later. The business model takes advantage of
They'll just move to leasing. (Score:2)
A lot of high value capital equipment has gone this way over the last few decades. This'll just be another such market.
I'm told that the main part of the electric vehicle market is