Comments

You must log in or register to comment.

Rogueish1 t1_j8mpi6c wrote

What's there to consider? People should be able to repair items they've purchased

345

bewjujular t1_j8n85ax wrote

Yeah, why stop at farming equipment?

172

GullibleDetective t1_j8nzbu7 wrote

Fun fact years ago comptia famous for the literal cert that many businesses agree certifies that you can probably repair computer hardware joined a lobby against the right to repair bill.

They later retracted that

https://pirg.org/articles/lobbying-against-right-to-repair-is-risky/#:~:text=Instead%2C%20CompTIA%20was%20one%20of,help%20many%20of%20their%20members.

62

SteilanX t1_j8o4usg wrote

Wow... Sadly I didn't knew this before buying a new certification.

15

andricathere t1_j8p4gn3 wrote

Certification is a money making business. It makes money, that doesn't mean it does anything else of value. It's a middleman industry.

17

who_you_are t1_j8o9hgf wrote

I wonder if this is either because farming companies have less defense to protect themselves or if farms aren't going well (expensive to start, not lot of peoples continuing in that field) so if they could cut off experience.

Maybe farmers are also angry and make it know to high political peoples.

Maybe those political peoples don't see the issue for the general public since you can usually easily buy a new goods right now while on the farming industry... They have a monopole and seems to be slow in anyway.

5

radiocate t1_j8obia2 wrote

It's greed. Some fucking bean counter at the top had the bright idea to change a purchase of equipment into purchasing a license to use that equipment, and when people kept buying anyway thought they'd stumbled on a goldmine.

Has nothing to do with liability or protecting an industry, it was entirely born of greed.

20

who_you_are t1_j8ofauk wrote

I'm watching Louis Rossmann so I know their greed. But even us, we can see it with stuff targeted for us.

I already hate marketing because they lie on everything. Show me the specs, then the specs (if possible) in my common situation (it change, eg. Battery over temperature). Then, if you want put common use, then your bullshit generic marketing.

I also do electronics (not a lot though, and as personal). What they call "datasheet" (read it specifications) is gold by modern standard. You want to know the output at 10, 30, 60 degree? 3.3v, 5v, 50v? Here, take this! Usually the first section describes the product with general usages. Then the features.

All that in a short way. Except the first paragraph that somewhat look like generic marketing blabla, the other part are straight to the point.

All companies want to get all your money. If they could, they would just get it straight from your pay check without providing anything.

The way to go around is with subscription (free money on a regular base) and closed part (so you need to buy exclusive from them so they can get all the money).

Also, and it is a damn big issue, "we can barely do anything". Do you have the money and knowledge to start your own farming equipment manufacturer? To produce cellphones? Cars?... I would like, but I can't. I won't even be able to do 1/90 of that.

If I could, I would almost sell it for the price to build. Make sure management don't eat all the money for no reason (like their wage). trying to block wage increase if the bottom get any, reduce stupid layout to be always on the low hierarchy one (you know, the one actually making money to the company?)

Unfortunately, life suck and all that is impossible.

8

TheRealStorey t1_j8rfk04 wrote

The US government subsidizes farming directly, providing subsidized food and leading to industrial farming and massive lobbying.They now have lobbyists saying you could subsidize us less if we could repair our own equipment which appears as a win-win. The government (in theory) would subsidize them less, keeping them profitable and they've satiated the lobbyists keeping them happy. Appearance and actuality are all that matters with these bills, long as it appears to be helping Joe Everyman (or farmers) and kick backs their donors everyone's happy.I'm not saying it's bad, but this is the only reason farmers are being considered and the very least it can do is open the door to expand this legislation, but it'll come down to corporate vs. private interests and I don't see it going any further.

3

E_Snap t1_j8qyx2r wrote

Because it’s dangerous to the powers that be when rural folks and city folks start to agree about something. They want to manufacture another schism so that there isn’t enough of a base to push for more change.

3

Similar_Value1060 t1_j8np3e7 wrote

They gotta ask the people at john deere lobbying them first.

32

Rogueish1 t1_j8npiaj wrote

Lobbying should also be illegal. Nothing more than bribery, which is illegal as is

25

Similar_Value1060 t1_j8nq9ec wrote

Lobbying is the reason why places like AZ have water leases with middle eastern countries. They get “donations” then they allow foreign countries to grow water intensive crops that screw over the people who actually live there. This is just one example that has nothing to do with the article, but im sure everyone agrees that lobbying is destroying the country. Encourages our leaders to offer up our resources, automotive companies to monopolize maintaining your vehicles, and the military industrial complex to mobilize. Yucky! Follow the money!

19

tuscanspeed t1_j8oji10 wrote

>but im sure everyone agrees that lobbying is destroying the country.

Nope. Both positive and negative outcomes occur due to the lobbying.

You have a scapegoat here. Nothing more.

−12

Similar_Value1060 t1_j8pcak6 wrote

Money in politics is why your vote no longer matters dipshit. Even a wrong clock is right twice a day.

6

tuscanspeed t1_j8rz4ia wrote

/spends millions lobbying to protect national forests
/votes to protect national forests
/protection passes

I don't see it.

1

barbarianbob t1_j8p9tfc wrote

My wife used to work for a non-profit organization that helped adults with developmental disabilities navigate life. The nonprofit was always underfunded.

They had a lobbyist (who represented a bunch of other similar nonprofits) who would go to the capitol and lobby on their behalf.

Not all lobbyists are bad.

It's more the "use PACs to circumvent political donation cap" that really fucked everything up.

2

AnacharsisIV t1_j8pfsae wrote

There is nothing wrong with lobbying. Writing to your congresscritter to say "tell the cops to stop shooting unarmed black teenagers", congratulations, makes you a lobbyist. There's literally no way to stop lobbying without also trampling on the first amendment.

−2

SnooTomatoes1445 t1_j8sl14f wrote

In Iowa, a lobbyist can’t buy a beer for the person they’re trying to lobby. In Washington they can send them around the world at the company’s expense. That’s what’s broken.

1

Frosty-Raspberry9920 t1_j8on8h3 wrote

Uhm, no. Lobbying is literally just telling an elected official what you want them to do. Not sure how a democracy could function without it.

−5

Rogueish1 t1_j8rh2bf wrote

Actually, lobbyists pay government officials to advocate what they want. Think you need to go back to 9th grade global studies there guy

1

garlicroastedpotato t1_j8o6t57 wrote

Okay, so here's the broad issue.

John Deere is kind of a monopolsitic farming equipment manufacturer. They're in cahoots with the US government on this. Every time there's "farming aid" that the US shifts around the world it's always John Deere equipment. This is because John Deere is the world's only clear American farming equipment company that manufacturers just about everything in the US. It's a huge boon to the US economy. Their two biggest rivals are AGCO (who work under a number of brands including Massey, Caterpillar, and Fendt), Kubota, and CNH Industrial (Case and New Holland). The US government wants to protect John Deere because the US government has decided it doesn't want to collaborate with Europe on things... they don't want to be dependent on Europe for anything (see: US spending trillions of dollars on chips manufacturing when they could just buy from Europe instead)

Farmers have a choice when it comes to farm equipment. I've actually done farming equipment acquisitions. When you talk to farming equipment sales people they're more than happy to give you a table with the projected income earnings you would get from their equipment based on what type of crop you have in mind. For most farmers it makes these decisions a lot easier. A harvester that is just 1CM wider might result in a 5% gross profit for that harvest.

So basically, in terms of your life time investment in that piece of equipment (including maintenance, purchase price, loans, etc.) John Deere is just always a clear winner on these tables. Because of this farmers have chosen John Deere wherever they can. It's the world's most popular brand.

John Deere used this position to add even more value to their equipment packages to make them even more valuable.... and it's a part of the purchase now. By signing on to a maintenance contract with John Deere you get an even cheaper piece of equipment but now you have to pay exclusively JD for maintenance.

And I can't say this enough... farmers know what they're getting into when they get into these agreements. They have competitors they can go to that don't have these contracts. They're choosing John Deere because it's the one that'll earn them the most money. Most companies have a warranty that operates like this for two years and farmers are very happy with that (until they void their warranty by trying to fix it themselves). JD is offering a lifetime warranty on their equipment... as long as you don't try to fix it themselves.

John Deere settled the issue. They made it so that farmers could fix their own equipment and be provided their own manuals as long as they re-signed their contract. The new contract would require that they cannot sue John Deere for any liability issues, they have to use OEM parts and they can't tamper with the DEF system (federal law requires all new farming equipment to have it).

But some feel like this just isn't good enough. They feel like John Deere should just not be allowed to provide these types of contracts at all. The US drags their feet on this because they're in bed with John Deere... but they also don't know what happens next. Like if you say that these contracts are void... are you fucking over a lot of people?

Because if these contracts are void for farmers wanting to fix their equipment... they're certainly void for John Deere. All these farmers paid MORE for these tractors on the basis that they were getting a lifetime maintenance contract. If that arrangement is void does it also mean JD is no longer liable for providing repairs to the people who want it for free? It's a huge cost savings for JD if the solution becomes to just make these kinds of contracts illegal.

By also going against an iconic exclusively American brand you're also opening the doors of foreign competition... which means US job lay offs... which will make some politicians politically vulnerable. Farmers can choose a lot of brands... they choose JD... almost entirely because of price but also because of US and state level endorsements. It's similar to a lot of the "Buy American" proposals from the US government.... proposals that have always been illegal by the standards of USMCA... but that the US illegally continues to push. It'd have a similar impact to say, the US government deciding to buy a series of fighter jets from France.

12

Rogueish1 t1_j8olail wrote

Here's the issue with this.. monopolies, as with bribery, are illegal in the great USA

10

garlicroastedpotato t1_j8oozmj wrote

It's not a pure monopoly. It's more like how Google has a monopoly on web searches... but then there's still Bing.

2

dungone t1_j8putv6 wrote

The Chicago School of conservative richonomics really perverted everyone’s concept of what a monopoly is. Monopolies used to be understood as any anti-competitive trusts or practices against any of the stakeholders who were in a position of not having another choice. Whether the workers, customers, shareholders, etc. Right-wing propaganda changed this around to require a company to have 100% market share.

6

fredlllll t1_j8olvn3 wrote

you forgot to mention how you need software to unlock the machine again after a switch failed and you replaced it. software that costs a lot of money or isnt even available to farmers. so you replace the switch and the machine tells you "go to dealer to unlock huehue" but you cant move the machine, and calling the dealer out costs you days in time

7

garlicroastedpotato t1_j8opw50 wrote

Actually, every piece of farming equipment has this as a standard feature. According to the article those sorts of things wouldn't be changing with this law because they would mean removing safeguards.

The law proposed would make something like the MOU JD signed into law in some states. It's not certain what consequences this would have with the contracts. Which is why they're only considering this and not doing this. They have to study the particular impacts of this decision. They don't want to sign it into law and find out that they made a law that creates a recall issue that cripples agricultural for a year.

2

Ranew OP t1_j8oxd6r wrote

The MOU with Farm Bureua was a promised continuation of the status quo and probably the simplest PR both could do.

2

Ranew OP t1_j8owfde wrote

I can get into software for $1800. That's cheaper than the radiator I put a fan through last harvest. For the price of the radiator, I can have OEM cable and software or third-party that comes with a laptop.

2

AnacharsisIV t1_j8pguby wrote

> they don't want to be dependent on Europe for anything (see: US spending trillions of dollars on chips manufacturing when they could just buy from Europe instead)

Things like food and microchips are vital to the persistence of the American state. Every country should strive for self-sufficiency in those areas and some other significant industrial capacities. God forbid more wars break out in Europe and we were dependent on them for our chip manufacture; well we just have wait until that war is over (or end it ourselves) if we want chips... or we can see that problem coming and build our own chip factories. The same thing goes with food and that would logically extend to the farming equipment used to create the high yields to feed a country that takes up most of a continent.

It's not unreasonable to want all of this done domestically.

4

talonfender t1_j8onek3 wrote

Right? I couldn’t think about anything besides how much this sounds like a dystopia when I read the title. How was it not the default option that people can repair their possessions?

2

scarabic t1_j8qko3r wrote

“Gubamint reglumations? On my damn tractor, now? Get a rope!”

“No, no, grandpa these are good regulations!”

“Humph. You ain’t one of them wokes now, is ya?”

1

dungone t1_j8psc0f wrote

I am against this. Because it shouldn’t be limited to farming equipment. Once the Republican farmers get what they wanted, they’ll be against it for anyone else.

0

[deleted] t1_j8qfe96 wrote

[deleted]

0

Rogueish1 t1_j8rho9c wrote

Share holders make more than enough from their investment. If I buy something, damn right if it breaks, I'LL be the one to fix it. Always have, always will

1

ICK_Metal t1_j8ns8eq wrote

You can… the wording of this was poorly chosen.

Edit: not saying the OP needs to reword it.

−1

Bierbart12 t1_j8mr1kv wrote

I had no idea that farming equipment had this issue as well.

Also explains why so many people swear by their ancient tractors

107

CaryWhit t1_j8ms4yy wrote

Poweresports, atv’s, utv, and watercraft are just as bad but since they are not as large a market or expensive and considered toys, they don’t get the coverage.

37

vtriple t1_j8oihta wrote

Meh most people don’t want the old shit tho. Suspension and engines change too much to not want the latest stuff.

3

DrHiccup t1_j8sw2by wrote

Are u advocating against the right to repair because people want the latest stuff?

1

vtriple t1_j8syk9h wrote

Nope just saying that for most people that use those things anything past 10 years is basically only used if you can't afford new shit.

1

DrHiccup t1_j8sz4vv wrote

I don't get ur comment tho. If what I have isn't old but just breaks, I should suck it up and buy the latest and greatest instead of fixing it?

1

vtriple t1_j8szrdc wrote

It really depends on what it is and what you're doing with it. If you race a dirt bike in motocross for any number of years anything past 5 years of racing on it will be far past the point of being worth it to repair.

Naturally, if you're a trail rider and don't abuse it than these things can't last 30-40 years with light repairs.

Also generally speaking have you rode a 20 year old ATV or watercraft compared to the recent ones? It's a totally different experience on the body alone lol

1

RevolutionaryMove357 t1_j8mwgwg wrote

Just like older vehicles too. I want something I can work on and that I’m familiar with. I don’t want bad sensors or faulty wiring harnesses getting in the way of me troubleshooting and fixing the problem. I don’t need power windows; heated and cooled seats; 97 position seats with memory for all the family; a radio with satellite, internet, and Bluetooth; or power mirrors and running boards. I just need a dependable piece of equipment that does it’s job, which is work. I don’t need pre-programmed features that will farm for me, the way some programmer thinks it should (FYI, I appreciate the hell out of what programmers do and respect the position).

24

stupidusername t1_j8nfi9b wrote

It may be complicated, but there's almost no repair you need to make on a BMW for instance that requires only BMW perform the work. There are many BMW certified mechanics able to purchase BMW parts use BMW specialty tools and ultimately fix your BMW.

Contrast this with John Deere, who require even the smallest of repairs be done only at a John Deere facility, which are often hundreds of miles away for these farmers and that exacerbates the problem

13

BOSS-3000 t1_j8nya3i wrote

It's the reason John Deere tractors made before company kill switches were made are appreciating in value rather than depreciating.

13

Infinite-Night8374 t1_j8ogqkt wrote

I’m sitting on a 1988 850 with only 1000 hours. Maybe I’ll actually get to retire.

10

CaryWhit t1_j8mpxh8 wrote

I fully support this. Deere and others could easily allow access to most data and lock down other parts so it couldn’t be reflashed or modified. We are Deere people and simple keep our older tractors well maintained and will not be getting new. It leads to another phenomenon that is not specific to the tractor industry, that customers only take a vehicle in for warranty work due to the labor rate, and use independent mechanics for after warranty work. There is often a 100 dollar an hour difference in labor rate.

25

HermitKane t1_j8n0g6r wrote

Nothing like going out and trying to do soil conditioning before season starts. To only discover your tractor won’t start because the JDLink won’t connect after sitting all winter.

John Deere is okay with soil depletion and less nutrient rich food because my tractor needs to be “serviced”.

25

CaryWhit t1_j8mrlah wrote

Deere is not dumb. They simply claim that people are reflashing the software to add more power and bypass DEF and emissions controls and most in the government nod their heads in agreement.

16

PlaguesAngel t1_j8nlzmu wrote

God forbid people fix their machines, but if a foreign power who has gathered all historic data of the American heartlands fields/crops wanted to launch a ransom attack

I haven’t followed up to hear if the vulnerabilities were corrected but they sure seemed to not give a shit when it was presented to them over the past 2 years.

9

Mr_ToDo t1_j8nvmdh wrote

And people can use dyed fuel in normal engines. Doesn't mean we don't sell dyed fuel, you put harsh punishments on the infringements. And yes harsh ones, because catching them is uncommon so the ones you do catch have to be hurt enough to make the low odds not worth the risk.

4

m_nels t1_j8n4rxr wrote

Work in the heavy equipment industry. Don’t know how hard and expensive JD’s software is to get for the end-user but we have multiple companies that have our software for their field-techs.

I’d assume most large operations have shops that have JD’s software. Having said that, yeah it’s total horseshit their software is proprietary. Especially for small operations. Tier IV has made it hard enough to work on your own equipment let alone not being able to access the data from the ECM.

Edit: Typo

16

Ranew OP t1_j8n65gb wrote

Can think of at least one third-party software option that claims dealer level interface. Tier IV is the cause of a lot of the problems, DEF is one of my least favorite liquids when it's -20 out.

JD service advisor is like $1500 for the cable then $250/mo or something on the software. Makes a guy wish he'd paid when it was a one time.

5

m_nels t1_j8nastm wrote

Yeah I can’t remember how much our software is but it’s a 1-time fee. Tier IV killed the diesel engine.

Fortunately, the OEM I work for has probably the best telematics system I’ve ever seen. Can view GPS, stats, current & stored codes etc. Can also view parts diagrams & download service manuals.

4

Stampede_the_Hippos t1_j8pki4l wrote

Having proprietary software seems fine to me. It's the fact that you can't do whatever you want to the hardware, that's the problem.

1

m_nels t1_j8pmcac wrote

Gets real tricky with Tier IV emissions controls. If a customer was to delete their machine we cannot perform warranty work, deleting a machine can also get you fined by the EPA.

It’s proprietary, protected and expensive. I don’t know what the ultimate solution is going to be. There are so many sensors and electronic controls on machines nowadays that are all tied back to the ECU so it’s not as easy as reflashing the software.

Edit: Thought more about a solution. Guess OEMs would have to provide end users with the program that could be downloaded to a laptop.

1

gamefreac t1_j8na7tx wrote

i hate that we keep having to revisit this idea... if you buy something, it is your property. if you have the tools and knowhow to fix it, you should damn well be allowed to. it is quite literally a monopoly for companies to essentially hold parts for ransom just because of some BS excuse that the consumers don't know enough to do it themselves. even if the excuse is about modding their things in such a way as to get around built in limits, again it is their property...

the problem here is that the people making decisions on matters like these are totally uneducated in the matters. politicians are too ald and out of touch so when a big corporation tells them they know better (or realistically just pays them off) they buy it no questions asked.

11

TheCaptainDamnIt t1_j8njr1g wrote

Good step but ... why just '"farmers", we all need this?

I've been saying since this started the right to repair will finally be addressed... for farmers only because of 'identity politics'. They're the 'real Americans' and only 'they deserve it', rest of us are gonna get the shaft once farmers can repair their equipment. Farmers have the political push, and press sympathy (and they deserve it) but they won't give two shits about anyone else and neither will their politicians or associations once they get theirs. I got the feeling the press coverage and political will for right to repair will die as soon as famers can repair their equipment while they laugh at those 'city people' not being able to fix our computers or electric cars.

7

Halabane t1_j8omap1 wrote

Its on fire for farmers because of how equipment that depends on this is used. They use implements and machines for only certain times. They have windows of time and weather to do something. To plant, cultivate or harvest. The rest of the time the machine sits. If they miss the opportunity waiting for a repair or a license issue to be fixed (cause it happened during one of these windows) they can lose their entire income for the year. I don't think any one would argue we all should be able to but the consequence for farmers is very high.

Quick example, have the DEF sensor goes bonkers (the additive for diesel) and the tractor will shut down. Right in the field or road. Can't move it (well you can move it a little for awhile). Have to have someone remote into the machine to get things to work. In the middle of no where. You can't do it. Imagine your car shutting down in the middle of your commute, because of not a mechanical failure as much as the temp sensor in the cabin was wrong. Agree everyone should be able to repair, be thankful farmers are making a lot of noise. It will help all of us.

The other thing...we all need to read EULA better. We sign to much of our rights away.

4

TheCaptainDamnIt t1_j8oybgk wrote

Yea I understand the issue farmers are having with this, I'm just saying only farmers are going to get the right to repair and the rest of us are gonna be told to pound sand.

2

Halabane t1_j8pnzji wrote

That was part of my point. I think because of them there is a better chance of this being for everyone. You need a group to fight this, not an unorganized bunch of individuals. Don't forget, they just don't need to repair farm equipment, they are in the same boat as you with other stuff too.

2

TheCaptainDamnIt t1_j8rx9gx wrote

> I think because of them there is a better chance of this being for everyone.

No, as I said in my original post > right to repair will finally be addressed... for farmers only because of 'identity politics'. They're the 'real Americans' and only 'they deserve it', rest of us are gonna get the shaft once farmers can repair their equipment.

1

NonSupportiveCup t1_j8ni0zp wrote

Stop considering it. Just fucking do it already.

4

Firepower01 t1_j8nlhwb wrote

This should be a no brainier but our political leaders are so obviously corrupt. It's honestly disgusting.

3

Inappropriate_mind t1_j8nn1b0 wrote

Consider? Right to repair gets "considered"?

I'd bet these states put more thought into restricting abortions and women's reproductive rights than they will on "Right to Repair".

The fact they're "considering" it is a slap in the face to every farmer in their state. These farmers deserve a lawmaker that WILL make Right to Repair a reality in their state. Not more limp-wristed "consideration" while those same lawmakers lining their pockets from Big Tech and Corporate Ag manufacturers.

3

instrumentality1 t1_j8nx9vy wrote

This would all be a simple and straightforward if as a country we didn’t let corporations run rampant, lobby, and profiteer

3

tmdblya t1_j8ojtrz wrote

This should be framed as a purchasers rights of ownership. Nip these bullshit feature subscriptions car manufacturers are testing in the bud.

3

Samwoodstone t1_j8nn43f wrote

Look for politicians who take money from big ag.

2

Hairasser t1_j8oy5e8 wrote

Should be every state and it should be all equipment, not just farming equipment.

2

MasterFubar t1_j8pay89 wrote

Before they try new regulations, they should consider de-regulating.

All these problems started when someone came up with laws trying to make "piracy" more difficult. All those laws should be rescinded, starting with the Digital Millennium Copyright Act. The people who came up with that abomination should be sent to a Gulag somewhere in North Korea. Rescind the DMCA and companies will create ways to repair any electronic equipment.

2

Playful-Educator4921 t1_j8q47t8 wrote

Great news.

Next states need to stop punitive attacks from seed companies like Monsanto who sue farmers both big and small for use of seeds they may or may not have even developed and do so without proof. They also attack farmers for replanting seeds from their own harvested crops. Then there’s the environmental crimes related to the illegal use of a pesticides by Monsanto the states need to take up. If you want to know why food costs are so high that’s the best place to start.

2

rabidboxer t1_j8nq45b wrote

All we can hope is that this is only the start and 'Right to repair' extends well beyond farming equipment.

1

grahamulax t1_j8o7k31 wrote

Did they buy it? Then they can repair it! Mod it! Turn it into something else! Why would we have laws like this!?! Tech, farming equipment, what’s next!?

1

Redrump1221 t1_j8ogq0w wrote

They do this to phones (especially Iphones), printer cartridges, cars and just about any other product they can get away with. Digital rights management software is preventing people from using devices they bought under the premise of copyright and safety. The farmers feel it the hardest but everyone should be aware that everyday you have less rights to use the things you bought just so some CEO can give himself a 20 million dollar bonus instead of 10 million y seedling you a subscription to something you bought.

1

cody4king t1_j8p8gep wrote

Please ‘consider’ this for electronics as well dammit

1

PhilosopherAntique71 t1_j8pcpny wrote

Imagine how many tractors they could sell if they actually designed them to be easily repaired by their owners and supported this.

1

dumby22 t1_j8phh1a wrote

It really pains me that this is even a thing.

1

blatsnorf t1_j8pks4g wrote

Drop the 'for farming equipment'. It should simply be 'right to repair'.

1

Fun-Bedroom-1559 t1_j8pnnyz wrote

Yes farmers or everyone that buy a product should be able to repair his own purchase. What about Tesla??

1

ECUDUDE20 t1_j8pq9xu wrote

Apple should be next!

1

metaltimmy t1_j8px6yr wrote

Politicians are probably waiting to see how much the farm equipment companies are willing to “donate” before they decide which side they’re on.

1

SoCloseButNot t1_j8pzf0s wrote

Am I right to believe 'consider' means meeting with lobbyists?

1

unknownchild t1_j8pzhj3 wrote

i wonder what the law says if i buy an ipad and use it as a display and planting setup with the farm credit card if that counts as ag equipment

1

Rumpleicious1 t1_j8qij3j wrote

This is a precedent that cannot be contained to just one industry. I can't wait for this to be the slippery slope that leads to all right to repair

1

innocentius-1 t1_j8qrh37 wrote

On the other hand... 39 states still aren't considering "right to repair" for farming equipment, and 50 states + the federal government still haven't passed laws that should be passed 10 years ago!

1

tsarborisciv t1_j8s6r3m wrote

Thats a good start.

However, if I purchase something I own it. I can repair it, maintain it, not maintain it, paint it with puke, etc. It is mine and it better work as intended.

1

RecessiveGenius69 t1_j8s9zth wrote

11 states ‘consider’ right to repair for farming equipment. Fixed it

1

JustSamJ t1_j8stz06 wrote

If you purchased a product, you should have a right to repair it. Doesn't matter what it is.

1

Firm_Judge1599 t1_j8q33eo wrote

replacement parts at cost and schematics with purchase.

fuck you.

they roll over for the chinese communists and give our farmers the finger.

0

ICK_Metal t1_j8ns4tz wrote

The wording of this drives me nuts. It implies you can’t turn a wrench on your own equipment, that’s simply not true. And believe it or not, JD for instance gives you access to fully detailed part schematics. Reword this shit.

Edit: not telling OP to reword it, he his just posting the wording that they use to describe this.

−2

Ranew OP t1_j8nvvlc wrote

Preach. It's a combo of Tier IV and shitty dealers that have it where it is, and farmers being a nice emotional image for the movement.

1

ICK_Metal t1_j8nwrr6 wrote

Not telling you to “reword this shit” by the way. You’re just a messenger.

0

Lopsided_Web5432 t1_j8n9uy7 wrote

You can have the right to repair, but almost nobody can except people that specifically know how

−6

teletubby_wrangler t1_j8pfa99 wrote

Haha, arn’t you great at word play, if you boil down what this actual means, it has the same endgoal of anti-trust / monopoly regulation.

But we so lucky to have you to give your critique of the buzzword for the argument.

Btw buzzword is referring to the whole phrase not just a word, it’s so confusing I know!

1

Lopsided_Web5432 t1_j8phwa8 wrote

So you’re clueless. Thought so. I never said farmers are stupid, but if you think Joe blow farmer is going to fix his own modern engine you’re dreaming. That’s why John Deere has j men mechanics that go to additional schooling from the company to learn specific engine systems. Your comments are very stupid, stick to skateboarding chum

1

teletubby_wrangler t1_j8qa4nt wrote

I never said that you said that farmers were stupid, you just showed you don’t know how to read,

I also don’t think that farmers are going to fix their own tractors, you wouldn’t think that unless your clueless.

Right to repair would allow for 3rd parties to repair the tractors and be competitive about it, you need multiple people repair shops for a free market.

You need to chill out, or grow a brain, either is fine.

1

Lopsided_Web5432 t1_j8ro4m4 wrote

Right dummy, so what in your mind means right to repair? Change a belt, chain, tire? Go to fucking trade school, become a journeyman mechanic, and after 10,000 hours and actually working on things, feel free to discuss this topic. You obviously don’t have a clue. As for calling farmers stupid they’re anything but stupid. Read this entire conversation from the start, and show me where I called anyone stupid other than your comments. Do you think you’re qualified to do a John Deere mechanic’s job because someone said you can? Big difference between stupid and just not having knowledge about things. Now go off to school, bug bye.

1

teletubby_wrangler t1_j8rsbf8 wrote

Dude gain some comprehension skills, or stop trolling, i very clearly stated right to repair means something else, and told you I never implied farmers were stupid, only that you are, which is an understatement.

1