Colorado Governor Signs Tractor Right-to-Repair Law Opposed by John Deere (arstechnica.com) 115
mrflash818 writes: Colorado has enacted the nation's first state law guaranteeing farmers a right to repair tractors and other equipment themselves or at independent repair shops. Colorado Gov. Jared Polis, a Democrat, signed the bill yesterday. "I am proud to sign this important bipartisan legislation that saves hardworking farmers and ranchers time and money on repairs, and supports Colorado's thriving agriculture industry... Farmers and ranchers can lose precious weeks and months when equipment repairs are stalled due to long turnaround times by manufacturers and dealers. This bill will change that," Polis said.
The state House voted 46-14 in favor of the bill on April 11, while the Senate voted 21-12 on March 30. "The legislation advanced through long committee hearings, having been propelled forward mostly by Democrats even though a Republican lawmaker co-sponsored the bill," the Associated Press wrote. "The proposal left some GOP lawmakers stuck between their farming constituents pleading for the ability to repair their equipment and the manufacturers who vehemently opposed it." The law's requirements are scheduled to take effect on January 1, 2024. Farm equipment manufacturers will have "to provide parts, embedded software, firmware, tools, or documentation, such as diagnostic, maintenance, or repair manuals, diagrams, or similar information (resources), to independent repair providers and owners of the manufacturer's agricultural equipment," according to the legislature's summary of the Consumer Right To Repair Agricultural Equipment bill.
The state House voted 46-14 in favor of the bill on April 11, while the Senate voted 21-12 on March 30. "The legislation advanced through long committee hearings, having been propelled forward mostly by Democrats even though a Republican lawmaker co-sponsored the bill," the Associated Press wrote. "The proposal left some GOP lawmakers stuck between their farming constituents pleading for the ability to repair their equipment and the manufacturers who vehemently opposed it." The law's requirements are scheduled to take effect on January 1, 2024. Farm equipment manufacturers will have "to provide parts, embedded software, firmware, tools, or documentation, such as diagnostic, maintenance, or repair manuals, diagrams, or similar information (resources), to independent repair providers and owners of the manufacturer's agricultural equipment," according to the legislature's summary of the Consumer Right To Repair Agricultural Equipment bill.
One of the main proponent is really pleased (Score:3, Informative)
Louis Rossmann. Check him out: it's a pleasure to see him this stoked :)
Louis Rossmann - We won [youtube.com]
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
You spelled his name.... RIGHT! Good on you!
Seriously, though, I'm all-for his endeavors in this arena. I wish right-leaning politicians would understand that "conservatism" includes repairing and re-using, not just buying a new one or sitting still while someone like Deere abuses their monopoly and DMCA laws.
Re: (Score:2)
After finding out State of New York screwed him for over 7 years with an tax lien send to New Hampshire where he's never been to (thus denying him the ability to actually get business loan), he now search his name and his businesses including misspelling to make sure there are no more liens. He made sure that his current business is 100% new and not related in anyway to the old business (he knew State of New York will want to collect even after he closed the old one and start anew). The brother is free!
Vote them out! (Score:5, Insightful)
But voters are stupid and are more ideologically driven than logically driven, so the same money taking assholes will get re-elected. And the idiots that elect them will get exactly what they deserve.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: Vote them out! (Score:3)
My first thought was "damn, is it election season already?"
It's that time of year where they count on America's VERY short short term memories to get them reelected, just like it has for many years now.
This bill is great and all but there's still most of a year to get the teeth knocked out of this thing for $1000/tooth. Don't worry, they'll pay. They'll pay, we'll get fucked and the politicians get rich. Everyone important wins.
Maybe in my lifetime I'll see us finally get tired of the masochistic tango we'v
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Exactly! Even if the democrats vote on issue issues that do not align with their constituents!
Sheesh - you act like there is only one issue that people care about.
But not to worry, 46 democrats and 19 republicans
It'd be nice (Score:4, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
"And the idiots that elect them will get exactly what they deserve."
And the rest of us will get the same, whether we deserve it or not.
Re: (Score:2)
Party Priorities (Score:5, Insightful)
Well, that should tell you all you need to know about whose side each party is actually on...
Re:Party Priorities (Score:5, Insightful)
Like the farmers complaining about socialism and welfare queens while cashing those subsidy checks
Re:Party Priorities (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
If you don't like paying subsidies, you can always buy your food from another country ... what could possibly go wrong? Like it or not, domestic farming is essential to national security.
No one said that. The point was about hypocrisy.
Re:Party Priorities (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Neither side is particularly great on right to repair. There was a bill in New York that was essentially gutted by the Governor. Will you also generalize her behavior to the entirety of her political party?
Once side is mediocre, the other side is awful.
Re:Party Priorities (Score:5, Informative)
Democrat: 40 yes, 2 no, 4 abstain
Republican: 6 yes, 12 no, 1 abstain
So 2/3 republicans didn't want this.
Re: (Score:3)
That high horse can apply to everyone.
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
They aren't any more dangerous than any other vehicle repair that these farmers perform on their other equipment.
Indeed. Not only that, most of this farm equipment never leaves the farm (some will be driven at low speed on public roads between fields), so it is not like these repairs are a threat to the public at large in any case.
Re: (Score:1)
Campaign to the farmers (and working class) but take campaign donations from big business. That's the new Republican party. But this strategy only works by bamboozling the voters. Which politics has known how to do for centuries.
Re:I’m fine with this but (Score:5, Informative)
As if steam power farm machinery was safer.
This isn't about interlocks. It's about a $20 sensor rendering your quarter million dollar investment a doorstop. Sure you can replace the part yourself but it won't function until the proprietary John Deere programmer tells it to. Don't worry a tech will be out in a few weeks.
Re: (Score:1)
Don't forget about the $250 an hour, including travel, for the repair tech to plug in his laptop and authorize the replacement.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
The average American Farmer is definitely smarter than you're giving them credit for.
Tractors and Farmers are not Moths and Lightbulbs.
Re: (Score:2)
And the average American farmer is totally against the DRM nataure of modern farming machinery.
and why does the sensor need to be paired? (Score:2)
and why does the sensor need to be paired?
why can't it get download config the main cpu on it's own?
Why can the owner tell the main CPU the new part id number with out needing an dealer tech out there?
Why can't the non dealer repair place get the tools / parts on there own?
Re: (Score:2)
This is no different from "why can't I use different printer ink for my printer?" or "why do I have to use the expensive coffee pods in my coffee maker?" A lot of reason this makes some news is that the opposition here isn't from the typical home consumer but from a major business segment.
Re:I’m fine with this but (Score:5, Informative)
We've had heavy farm (and other) machinery for decades upon decades to date.
We've only had these locked down versions for the past few years....
Were we having significant numbers of "bob chunk" accidents before John Deere decided to locked down their tractors where people couldn't self service....which again, was NOT that long ago and extremely prevalent?
Re: (Score:2)
https://extension.missouri.edu... [missouri.edu]–%20Each%20year%2C%20more%20people%20die,the%20national%20average%20for%20workers.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Tractor rollovers are the leading cause of fatalities in the agriculture industry, accounting for more than half of all farm-related deaths. According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, 44 Missouri farmers died in tractor rollover accidents from 2011 to 2018.
Has locking out farmers repairing this meant a reduction in these? it mentions ROP (I assume rollover protection) helps
The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention estimates the probability of death is 40% for a rollover in a tractor without an ROP device, compared to less than 2% for a ROP-protected tractor, says Funkenbusch.
not right to repair.
Re: (Score:2)
Yes farming is a dangerous job and always has been, but those deaths are not from farmers doing stupid things like sticking their hands into machinery. A lot of them are due to the very nature of farming - working outside on potentially rough/unstable/slippery terrain, working with large animals etc.
Re: (Score:2)
An academic article about hazards of farming..more dangerous than being a cop:
https://extension.missouri.edu... [missouri.edu]–%20Each%20year%2C%20more%20people%20die,the%20national%20average%20for%20workers.
Some of the most dangerous parts of farming have nothing to do with working on machinery. The easiest ways to die involve suffocation hazards. Climbing up to open silo doors frequently kills farmers because fermented silage creates gas that can quickly render someone unconscious. Manure lagoons create methane, which can catch people unaware and knock them unconscious at which point they fall in and literally drown to death in shit. Also a frequent killer is drowning in silos full of corn or beans, where fa
Re: I’m fine with this but (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
Farming is actually one of the most dangerous jobs in the country, and working with heavy machinery is a big reason why. Farmers have a number of other things that make their jobs more dangerous. Almost by definition, they tend to work in rural areas, and they often work by themselves, so if they have an accident they're less likely to get prompt medical attention. They also have a tendency to work very long hours; tiredness and heavy equipment are a very dangerous mix.
Re: (Score:2)
Without any doubts at all, adding DRM to farm machinery was not done for safety reasons.
Re: (Score:2)
So how did farmers treat all the locking? They seem to have kept buying John Deere.
And I am guessing that once one leading manufacturer does something all the other sheep follow.
But there must be some reasonable non-locked Chinese machines that suddenly look much nicer. They break but they are cheap, buy 2.
Re: (Score:2)
Farming is a dangerous job, but farmers are not as stupid as you seem to think they are.
Re: (Score:1)
I work in a physical science/engineering field that occasionally deals with high voltages, radiation, and poisonous chemicals. Occasionally, once once or twice a decade, some highly-educated idiot decides that they’re good enough to unwisely try and fix a piece of dangerous equipment. They defeat one or two layers of interlocks, stick their arm in, and promptly poison/irradiate/sh
Re: (Score:2)
Having a PHD doesn't prevent someone being careless, reckless or lacking in common sense. All it shows is that they were able to complete studies in a particular field. Someone fresh out of studying may also lack real world experience, so while they have been taught the theory behind safety practices they could easily make mistakes, or fail to apply them correctly to the situation.
There also tends to be a level of arrogance involved with risk taking. People may decide that the safety procedures are an incon
Re:I’m fine with this but (Score:5, Interesting)
Most farmers these days - the independent, family owned ones - are college educated, often with dual majors in finance and agriculture.
Bluntly, they're better educated, smarter and harder working than you'll ever be.
(Because all the stupid ones died long ago, stupidly, because farming has always been among the most dangerous jobs in the US [ishn.com].
Re: (Score:2)
I'm not sure that I buy that farmer (owning, managing, supervising) is a 30% more dangerous category than farm worker.
Re: (Score:2)
Also, even if the law allows for a farmer to fix things on his own, I am pretty sure the main scope of it is to allow for independent repair shops to set up and directly compete with the manufacturer's.
Essentially, even if the owner didn't know how to get things running, you can have a guy that knows how to fix things properly whether it's a John Deere or a JCB or a Lamborghini or whatever, and that will probably be way cheaper and more readily available than the manufacturer, forcing the manufacturer to lo
Re: (Score:2)
While I find some of his content a bit annoying, Colethecornstar on youtube is a good example. He is a young farmer, degree in finance, and talks in detail of all the prep work, planning, and extensive knowledge needed to run even a small farm efficiently. It is very interesting to see the challenges of modern day farming, and the solutions they have to come up with - as well as how EXPENSIVE it is. You dont just chuck some seeds in the ground and go pick them when its time to harvest. even the grai
Re:I’m fine with this but (Score:5, Insightful)
Think of it this way. You are forced to submit your code and pay a fee to fix compile errors, even when you perfectly capable of fixing these yourself. It is like that, but with tractors.
Re: (Score:2)
Or, you can't replace your graphics card when it breaks - only a qualified Dell technician is allowed to do this, please wait 3 to 6 weeks for one to show up.
Now there is a lot of new and great technology in modern tractors, even at John Deere. They can sell the products on their own merits without being sleezy and adding this repair lockout crap.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: I’m fine with this but (Score:1)
If there's an uptick in injuries and deaths from equipment, then
you'll start seeing ads to repeal the law. "(cue sad music) Bob is a 5th generation farmer. It's in his DNA. After Bob lost his arm when his tractor unexplicably started moving on it's own, he could no longer support his family and they lost the family farm. Vote YES to repeal this dangerous law that's killing and hurting farmers! Say YES for farmers safety and security!"...paid for by Friends of Farmers PAC not affiliated with any political party or candidate.
Re: (Score:3)
This comment reeks of contempt - who the heck are you to be looking down on anyone? You wouldn't make it half the morning on a farm.
They own it, they do what they want with it, they judge the risks for themselves, and it is absolutely none of your business.
Re: I’m fine with this but (Score:1)
Your "poor grand pappy" has probably never been near a tractor and you're full of shit. You can only be sucked in if the engine is running and it cant run if the fuel pump is being replaced.
Re: (Score:2)
Do you hear that whooshing sound? It's not a vacuum pump.
Re: (Score:2)
Yeah, I missed the sarcasm. I shouldn't post late at night.
Re: (Score:2)
Just another illustration of the value of sarcasm tags.
Not enough (Score:5, Insightful)
You know what is bullshit about this? It is bullshit because it is limited to only agricultural equipment. Fixing anything yourself or from third party shops should be inherent in EVERYTHING. Artificial lockouts by the companies that try to force you stay in their small tightly controlled and expensive ecosystem should be illegal.
Re: (Score:2)
So, because they didn't start with whatever toy you want to be able to break pretending you're fixing it, they shouldn't even try?
Re: (Score:3)
No while its good it happened for farmers, they could have just done it for everything if they where not corrupt and catering to companies like apple.
It should be a simple concept, my possession my choice if I want to break it, or even endanger my life by fixing it well that's my problem. And a company should not intentionally make it harder for me.
But we should wait for another 20 year, possibly have legislation that reverses these decisions, all the while paying senators to take the smallest possible step
Re:Not enough (Score:5, Interesting)
Time to get creative then. The definition of agricultural equipment in the law:
"AGRICULTURAL EQUIPMENT" INCLUDES:
(I) A TRACTOR, TRAILER, COMBINE, SPRAYER, TILLAGE IMPLEMENT,
BALER, AND OTHER EQUIPMENT USED TO PLANT, CULTIVATE, OR HARVEST
AGRICULTURAL PRODUCTS OR TO RANCH;
Let's see. Farmers used a smartphone (read: "other equipment") to check the weather and see if tomorrow is suitable for planting. It's now agricultural equipment per the definition in the law.
A rancher over here just ordered some animal feed online using their laptop. So if they're using this "other equipment" "to ranch" then they are using agricultural equipment to do so.
It's not my fault the law didn't specify that it had to be the primary or sole use of the item or that it only applies when used for agriculture (except aircraft - which is named as excluded if not used for agriculture in this law).
Re: (Score:2)
Time to get creative then. The definition of agricultural equipment in the law:
"AGRICULTURAL EQUIPMENT" INCLUDES: (I) A TRACTOR, TRAILER, COMBINE, SPRAYER, TILLAGE IMPLEMENT, BALER, AND OTHER EQUIPMENT USED TO PLANT, CULTIVATE, OR HARVEST AGRICULTURAL PRODUCTS OR TO RANCH;
Let's see. Farmers used a smartphone (read: "other equipment") to check the weather and see if tomorrow is suitable for planting. It's now agricultural equipment per the definition in the law.
A rancher over here just ordered some animal feed online using their laptop. So if they're using this "other equipment" "to ranch" then they are using agricultural equipment to do so.
It's not my fault the law didn't specify that it had to be the primary or sole use of the item or that it only applies when used for agriculture (except aircraft - which is named as excluded if not used for agriculture in this law).
Nice try, but none of those are used to "PLANT, CULTIVATE, OR HARVEST." They may be used to obtain materials or information used in that process but they are not used in teh actual "PLANT, CULTIVATE, OR HARVEST" steps. I suspect a court would not include them in the R2R list of covered equipment.
Re: (Score:2)
they are not used in teh actual "PLANT, CULTIVATE, OR HARVEST" steps
Neither is a tractor. Whatever they're pulling behind them might be, but they don't do any of it. So it's very clear that in order for it to apply to tractors it has to be less pedantic than actually putting the seed in the hole to count as planting.
Re: (Score:2)
they are not used in teh actual "PLANT, CULTIVATE, OR HARVEST" steps
Neither is a tractor. Whatever they're pulling behind them might be, but they don't do any of it. So it's very clear that in order for it to apply to tractors it has to be less pedantic than actually putting the seed in the hole to count as planting.
Well, they specifically call out tractors as covered, and I suspect a court, looking at that sentence and its intent, probably would not include a laptop or smartphone as part of "other equipment." It will be interesting to see how much impact this has on the issues raised.
Re: (Score:2)
Courts and lawyers can only do a very small amount regarding intent. A lot of it really is literally semantics. Tractors are specifically called out. And because of the Oxford comma are included even if they're not used for planting, cultivating, or harvesting.
If planting only includes the exact step of the seed going into the hole, then there is a lot of legitimate farming equipment excluded. If they determine it to mean the whole process, then my argument applies. Cultivate is a much less specific te
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
It's a chink in the armor. Getting agricultural right to repair can be expanded to other things in due time.
We must keep pushing.
Re: (Score:2)
Ha, an online game hasa quest called "A Chink In The Armor" and the game censors out the word by default :-)
Landfill (Score:1)
Another problem with limiting outside repairs is land-fill. If it's easier to repair things, then we don't have to dump away our gizmos every 4 years.
Re: (Score:2)
That may be one reason the companies do this. Ie, I think my grandfather kept his tractor for 40 years.
Re: (Score:1)
My wife already wants to turn me in for a new model.
Re: (Score:3)
She can probably keep you for another decade as long as she keeps you lubed.
Re: (Score:2)
Or???? (Score:3)
What's that ", or documentation" doing in there? So, they can provide any single thing in the list but not the rest? Should be ", and documentation"
Re: (Score:1)
The list of things the manufacturer is supposed to provide is from the legislation, but the legislation says they must provide "any" of those things the repairer needs. If you read the actual legislation rather than the summary, it's clear the company has to provide whatever the person performing the repair needs. For example:
Re: (Score:1)
The legislation does actually define "fair and reasonable terms and costs", though the definition is necessarily vague. One key thing is that it says the cost can't be one that would discourage or disincentivize owner or third-party repair. My guess is the wording is taken from existing laws in other areas.
That is a key point. People act as if right to repair laws are something new, but they're far from it. The car companies tried to force people to go to dealerships for repairs, but car owners fought
Re: (Score:2)
If You Can't Fix It, Do You Really Own It? (Score:5, Interesting)
I'm so happy for the many people who have dedicated so much of their time to get this legislation passed. This has been years in the making, and despite several promising attempts, the corrupt lobbyists have managed to get the politicians to take their side every step of the way up until now. The good news is that now that right-to-repair is required for farm equipment in Colorado, other states, and even other countries, will likely follow suit. The hardest one to win was the first one because the equipment companies kept pushing the false narrative that allowing right-to-repair would force them to irreparably harm their bottom line. Once that proves to be false in Colorado, they'll have a tougher time pushing that lie in other jurisdictions.
We rarely get to celebrate victories over corporate greed! Everyone take a moment to enjoy this win!
Re: (Score:1)
I think this is partly the reason why so many industries are pushing for a subscription and/ or leasing model. Even in their attempts to lock down their hardware and content in the name of intellectual property protection, there's still a chance of push back, with legislation such as this one. If you're only subscribing or leasing, and you don't even own it, then they can bypass even this question.
This is also why I'm not a big fan of the widespread Cloud adoption and evangelism in the IT industry.
Get A Cow Or Get A Degree (Score:1)
In engineering. Sheez. Now I understand manufacturers making some things seemingly more difficult to repair/replace, but until you understand manufacturing engineering then you need to just shut the fuck up and learn how to fix what is in front of you. Or else get a cow and do it the old fashioned way before we had machinery.
Will this bill actually do anything? (Score:2)
Will this bill genuinely force John Deere to provide EVERYTHING needed to repair their equipment? Are there any loopholes that would let John Deere not provide everything?
Could John Deere point to federal laws (the DMCA, federal emissions/safety/etc standards that apply to farm equipment or other federal laws) and claim that federal law trumps state law and refuse to provide stuff? Will we see John Deere challenge this law in court?
we can't give the dealer only AD domain login need (Score:2)
we can't give the dealer only AD domain login needed to auth in the repair tools.
But we can give out the installer files for them.
Re: (Score:2)
This is one of the reasons John Deere is getting replaced by Tata tractors for example. Similar features, cheaper cost, and no DRM so the farmers can repair themselves.
Let's hope (Score:2)
Ah so government intervention (Score:2)
What if manufacturers refuse to do this? (Score:2)
All I can see in the bill is "manufacturers shall ...". But what if they don't?
Will they get banned from manufacturing inside Colorado?
Will they get banned from selling equipment inside Colorado?
Will they get banned from providing any services inside Colorado associated with equipment they manufactured?
Will it become illegal to import their equipment to Colorado?
Will it become illegal to operate their equipment in Colorado?
My guess is that they will just no longer be allowed to sell inside Colorado and deal
Re: (Score:2)
Colorado courts will have the right to try cases filed by the customers residing within their jurisdiction. Expect those courts to be very sympathetic to the plaintiffs. And generous.
Re: (Score:2)
"Your honor, this tractor was never supposed to be used inside Colorado. According to our documents it was manufactured for a buyer in Kansas."
The basic problem here (Score:2)
"The proposal left some GOP lawmakers stuck between their farming constituents pleading for the ability to repair their equipment and the manufacturers who vehemently opposed it."
The constituents are, well, constituents. The manufacturers, being companies, are very definitely NOT constituents, because a company doesn't get to vote come election time. There should be no "stuck between" here on the part of lawmakers, either in fact or in perception. That this state of supposed conflict is taken for granted, instead of being treated as a crime, is a fundamental problem and we need to fix it.
Re: (Score:2)
> That this state of supposed conflict is taken for granted, instead of being treated as a crime, is a fundamental problem and we need to fix it.
True, and these old-school Republicans are a special kind of retarded if they think a Fortune 500 company working for its ESG score is actually on their side.
this law should go nation wide (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:1)
Re:The first thing every farmer will do... (Score:5, Informative)
For the smaller farms they were taking risk that they would need to hire contractors or friends to risk their machines in their crops at the last possible moment. Farmers were loading their 10 ton tractors on flatbeds to get new parts authorized.
There is an entire open farm movement
https://civileats.com/2022/04/... [civileats.com]
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Most US farm equipment has no meaningful emissions controls. Only in California, of course, and even here there are more counties with exemptions than requirements.
Re: (Score:2)
I think you’re confusing farmers with brodozer truck drivers. Those people who literally burn money to pwn the libz.
Re: (Score:2)