Nebraska is one of eight states in the US – including Minnesota, New York, Massachusetts, Illinois, Wyoming, Tennessee and Kansas – seeking to pass "right to repair" legislation. All eyes will be on the Cornhusker state when the bill has its public hearing on 9 March, because its unique "unicameral legislature" (it's the only state to have a single parliamentary chamber) means laws can be enacted swiftly. If this bill, officially named LB67, gets through, it may lead to a domino effect through the rest of the US, as happened with a similar battle over the right to repair cars. These Nebraska farmers are fighting for all of us.
Big agriculture and big tech – including John Deere, Apple and AT&T – are lobbying hard against the bill, and have sent representatives to the Capitol in Lincoln, Nebraska, to spend hours talking to senators, citing safety, security and intellectual property concerns.
John Deere has gone as far as to claim that farmers don't own the tractors they pay hundreds of thousands of dollars for, but instead receive a "license to operate the vehicle". They lock users into license agreements that forbid them from even looking at the software running the tractor or the signals it generates.
Another article on the topic at Techdirt.
Related Stories
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F8JCh0owT4w
When it comes to repair, farmers have always been self reliant. But the modernization of tractors and other farm equipment over the past few decades has left most farmers in the dust thanks to diagnostic software that large manufacturers hold a monopoly over.
Farmers using Eastern European cracking software for their tractors, and MS, Apple, etc. want to stop them.
Related: Right to Repair
Last year dozens of 'Right to Repair' bills were introduced throughout the US, but defeated. Maybe this time its time has come.
Right to Repair bills, designed to foster competition in the repair industry, require manufacturers to allow repair, and even provide manuals, diagnosic software, and parts. Manufacturers oppose these laws as it can cost them more to address devices repaired by third parties, because repairs are a source of revenue, and because repaired items are less likely to be replaced with new ones.
[O]ne of the most effective anti-repair tactics is to spread FUD about the supposed security risks of independent repairs.
Without a concerted and coordinated effort to counteract this tactic, legislators receive primarily well-heeled opposing views, and vote accordingly.
Hacking Ventilators With DIY Dongles From Poland:
As COVID-19 surges, hospitals and independent biomedical technicians have turned to a global grey-market for hardware and software to circumvent manufacturer repair locks and keep life-saving ventilators running.
The dongle is handmade, little more than a circuit board encased in plastic with two connectors. One side goes to a ventilator’s patient monitor, another goes to the breath delivery unit. A third cable connects to a computer.
This little dongle—shipped to him by a hacker in Poland—has helped William repair at least 70 broken Puritan Bennett 840 ventilators that he’s bought on eBay and from other secondhand websites. He has sold these refurbished ventilators to hospitals and governments throughout the United States, to help them handle an influx of COVID-19 patients. Motherboard agreed to speak to William anonymously because he was not authorized by his company to talk to the media, but Motherboard verified the specifics of his story with photos and other biomedical technicians.
William is essentially Frankensteining together two broken machines to make one functioning machine. Some of the most common repairs he does on the PB840, made by a company called Medtronic, is replacing broken monitors with new ones. The issue is that, like so many other electronics, medical equipment, including ventilators, increasingly has software that prevents “unauthorized” people from repairing or refurbishing broken devices, and Medtronic will not help him fix them.
[...] Delays in getting equipment running put patients at risk. In the meantime, biomedical technicians will continue to try to make-do with what they can. “If someone has a ventilator and the technology to [update the software], more power to them,” Mackeil said. “Some might say you’re violating copyright, but if you own the machine, who’s to say they couldn’t or they shouldn’t?”
I understand that there is an ongoing debate on the "right to repair". However, many manufacturers increasingly find ways to ensure that "unauthorised" people cannot repair their devices. Where do you stand on this issue? During the ongoing pandemic, do medical device manufacturers have the right to prevent repair by third parties?
(Score: 2) by stretch611 on Wednesday March 08 2017, @05:54PM (3 children)
John Deere has gone as far as to claim that farmers don't own the tractors they pay hundreds of thousands of dollars for, but instead receive a "license to operate the vehicle". They lock users into license agreements that forbid them from even looking at the software running the tractor or the signals it generates.
Oh, wait that's here in the US. Glad we have rights like the First sale doctrine to avoid things like this. /s
Now with 5 covid vaccine shots/boosters altering my DNA :P
(Score: 5, Insightful) by bob_super on Wednesday March 08 2017, @07:29PM (1 child)
It's the US. You're supposed to go into debt to buy The New Shiny.
Repairing the Old Dull (formerly know as last year's New Shiny) is a waste of your time, and robs you of a Golden Opportunity to contract more debt and Buy The New Shiny!
How else do you get perpetual market growth with no immigration, plummeting birth rates, and flat wages?
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday March 08 2017, @08:57PM
Even the yearly update scenario will plateau growth pretty quickly. OH NO! PROFITS ARE STAYING STEADY AND NOT RISING EVERY 3 MONTHS!?!?
(Score: 2) by mhajicek on Wednesday March 08 2017, @08:43PM
If John Deer retains ownership, then they have the responsibility of performing all maintenance and repairs at no additional charge, and replacing units that are beyond repair.
The spacelike surfaces of time foliations can have a cusp at the surface of discontinuity. - P. Hajicek
(Score: 2, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday March 08 2017, @05:55PM (6 children)
Licensing should be abolished for all things except when another business uses someone's product / intellectual property that is still under copyright. We can call it "Right To Own". You pay for something and you can then do whatever you want with it. Currently businesses are trying to all move to the licensing / subscriber business model because it locks people into their service with a recurring revenue stream. This is fine for services that fit that model, but terrible for services that are unneeded.
Case in point: Adobe. They realized that photoshop pretty much peaked and no one would be buying each year's new version for very minor functionality additions. So what do they do? Move everything to the cloud and charge monthly access fees. Jerks.
(Score: 2) by nobu_the_bard on Wednesday March 08 2017, @06:17PM
Adobe actually have "eternal licenses" (similar to the old style of license) that you can get if you're a business and sign up with their VIP plan thing. It's a huge bother to get access to it though since they are fairly ruthless with how they manage their vendors...
Oh and if you're just buying it for yourself it's not an option.
(Score: 2) by Grishnakh on Wednesday March 08 2017, @06:31PM (4 children)
Case in point: Adobe. They realized that photoshop pretty much peaked and no one would be buying each year's new version for very minor functionality additions. So what do they do? Move everything to the cloud and charge monthly access fees. Jerks.
I don't have a problem with this; I just wish they'd jack up their prices a lot more. There's several great free alternatives to Photoshop, but no one wants to use them because they're not "Photoshop". Well, I say let them get screwed over with having to run it in "the cloud" and paying monthly access fees.
If we're going to fix anything legislatively, I think it should be required for manufacturers/sellers to make more clear the terms of ownership of their products. So if John Deere intentionally makes it impossible for end-users to fix their equipment, they should be required to advertise this fact. Then let the buyer decide. If people continue to buy user-hostile products, and get screwed by horrible repair costs, then fuck 'em; they got what they wanted.
(Score: 2) by Zz9zZ on Wednesday March 08 2017, @06:41PM (3 children)
What a cruel and harsh world you must create around yourself. So everyone must be omnipotent at all times or they deserve to be screwed over by shitty business practices.
Yup, seems reasonable /s
May the precedent be set and all future a-holes sued into oblivion!
~Tilting at windmills~
(Score: 2) by Grishnakh on Wednesday March 08 2017, @07:00PM (2 children)
Are you illiterate? I specifically said in my prior post that I support making it plainly obvious to consumers what the policies and repairability etc. of products are, before they buy them. I don't like the idea of people getting screwed over because of some fine print, or because there was no reasonably-obvious way for them to find out that the product carried hidden costs like being impossible for the owner to repair and requiring service by factory-authorized centers that are far away, expensive, and too few in number. However, if consumers know all this up-front, and choose to buy anyway, why should I have sympathy for them? This is just like people who buy iPhones. Sorry, I have no sympathy for people who spend a small fortune on a luxury device and then complain when the only way it can be repaired is to make an appointment weeks out at a "Genius Bar" at an Apple store 2 hours away. There *are* alternatives out there, ones that are much cheaper to buy, and much easier to service, and conveniently available. If consumers *choose* to lock themselves into a user-hostile and shitty manufacturer, that's not my problem.
(Score: 2) by Zz9zZ on Wednesday March 08 2017, @07:32PM (1 child)
My point is that I fully support a legal precedent which makes such practices illegal. "Plainly obvious" does not always work, and sometimes people don't even realize they should care about some fine print.
This exists for a reason: https://www.ftc.gov/about-ftc/bureaus-offices/bureau-consumer-protection [ftc.gov]
It doesn't have to be your problem, but why you are hostile to users who make misinformed choices is still a mystery.
~Tilting at windmills~
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday March 08 2017, @10:41PM
For now. Don't be so sure it will continue to exist - it's a piece of red tape in the way of "Making Ame..." - er, jobs.
(grin)
(Score: -1, Troll) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday March 08 2017, @05:58PM (10 children)
It won't be robust; it's as transient as the violently imposed monopolists who currently helm that organization which calls itself "government".
The only way to achieve a robust "right to repair" is to have a shift in culture, and thus a concomitant shift in economics, so that industry and society organizes intimately around that very notion.
(Score: 5, Funny) by Azuma Hazuki on Wednesday March 08 2017, @06:40PM (2 children)
Sure, I'll get right on that, as soon as I finish milking my unicorn herds that graze on the rainbow-colored plains of the moons of Neptune.
I am "that girl" your mother warned you about...
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday March 08 2017, @06:53PM (1 child)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DjxH_a5U7wA [youtube.com]
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday March 09 2017, @11:22AM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KlEovr29KBU [youtube.com]
(Score: 5, Insightful) by tangomargarine on Wednesday March 08 2017, @07:09PM (6 children)
"Perfect is the enemy of the good."
Expecting a corporate sphere to voluntarily organize itself to better society is hilariously and egregiously naive. The only way you get companies to play nicely is punish them when they won't.
Unless your post is just a more subtle way of saying "communist revolution." In which case...okay then. Guess we could always try that again.
"Is that really true?" "I just spent the last hour telling you to think for yourself! Didn't you hear anything I said?"
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday March 08 2017, @08:42PM (5 children)
Communism involves the sort of violent imposition that we're seeing proposed by this legislation; capitalism, in contrast, requires voluntary association.
(Score: 2) by tangomargarine on Wednesday March 08 2017, @09:10PM (2 children)
>the sort of violent imposition that we're seeing proposed by this legislation
>violent imposition
>violent
I don't think that word means what you think it means. Letting a customer tinker with their own property now is considered "violence?" Or is this like another of those "all property is theft" sort of koans?
"Is that really true?" "I just spent the last hour telling you to think for yourself! Didn't you hear anything I said?"
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday March 08 2017, @10:18PM (1 child)
If it's the farmer's property, then there's already nothing preventing him from tinkering with it; there's no need for any violently imposed mandate.
It sounds like these things are not the farmer's property, and that such farmers are trying to use the violent imposition of the state to commandeer these things from the rightful owners; that's wrong. Instead, the farmers who object should join together and come up with a plan for re-negotiating their [future] agreements, or work with some other supplier, etc.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by tangomargarine on Wednesday March 08 2017, @10:36PM
If it's the farmer's property, then there's already nothing preventing him from tinkering with it
Other than John Deere or whoever siccing their team of ninja lawyers on him and suing him for everything he's worth, sure.
It sounds like these things are not the farmer's property
Yes, that's the core of the argument. The companies market these things as "you own them," then argue that technically that's not what the fine print said and you're only leasing them in perpetuity (or whatever lawyerese they use).
"Is that really true?" "I just spent the last hour telling you to think for yourself! Didn't you hear anything I said?"
(Score: 2) by sjames on Thursday March 09 2017, @02:11PM
The manufacturers are already using state violence to enforce their "license" against the legitimate owners of the hardware. This bill says that the state will no longer participate in that.
(Score: 2) by sjames on Thursday March 09 2017, @03:47PM
Capitalism requires state violence to enforce things like the DMCA and consumer hostile contract terms. Without the threat of state violence, the manuals and diagnostic equipment would have already been duplicated and spread widely.
(Score: -1, Troll) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday March 08 2017, @06:05PM (2 children)
It won't be robust; it will be as transient as the viol-ently impos-ed mono-polists who currently helm that organization which calls itself "government".
The only way to achieve a robust "right to repair" is to have a shift in culture, and thus a concomitant shift in economics, so that industry and society organizes intimately around that very notion.
(Score: 2) by lx on Wednesday March 08 2017, @09:55PM (1 child)
Your cut and paste text has made me see the light. Tell me oh great sage, how do I become free of imposed structure? Is there a movement I can join? Will there be smart uniforms with shiny buttons for all?
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday March 08 2017, @10:37PM
Structure and order is not what's in dispute.
What's in dispute is action without such structure and order—specifically, action without any clear foundation in prior agreement to some set of rules of interaction (e.g., a contract, or a long-lived understanding, etc.).
In this case, it seems like a bunch of farmers have agreed to certain rules of interaction with the suppliers of equipment, and now realize that they don't like those rules. Well, here's the capitalist game: You've got to figure out how to achieve what you want within the confines of such rules; in this case, agitated farmers should put a unified front to re-negotiate the agreement, or they should work with a separate supplier, etc. In contrast, capitalism does not allow these farmers to violently force the suppliers into new rules of interaction, which is what these farmers are trying to do via the State.
(Score: 2) by tangomargarine on Wednesday March 08 2017, @06:32PM (2 children)
Big agriculture and big tech – including John Deere, Apple and AT&T – are lobbying hard against the bill
Was glad to hear when Apple kicked up a fuss about the FBI iPhone backdoor thing, but this just goes to show that companies are, first and foremost, about protecting their ability to make money.
From further down in TFA:
The combination of the agricultural repair with electronic goods repair makes Kenney nervous: he thinks it’s going to be a harder fight with the attention and lobbying clout of technology giants. “Apple is going to throw too much money at it,” he said.
State senator Lydia Brasch, who sponsored the bill, described a meeting with the Apple lobbyist Steve Kester. “Apple said we would be the only state that would pass this, and that we would become the mecca for bad actors,” she said. The Cupertino-headquartered company also argued there was a safety risk associated having untrained people installing unofficial components, particularly lithium ion batteries – as demonstrated by Samsung’s Note 7 debacle. Apple also told Brasch that there were plenty of authorized repair shops to choose from.
The state of Nebraska, which covers 77,000 sq miles (roughly the size of England and Scotland combined), has just one Apple Store. It’s an 80-mile journey for Brasch to get there, and it can take weeks to get a Genius Bar appointment. “It’s disruptive and inconvenient,” she said. It’s the same for authorized repair shops of agricultural equipment. Long waits for engineers can lead to costly downtime at critical weather-sensitive parts in the farming cycle, such as planting or harvesting.
"Is that really true?" "I just spent the last hour telling you to think for yourself! Didn't you hear anything I said?"
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday March 08 2017, @09:01PM (1 child)
It would be criminal to not pass this legislation. Allowing companies to screw over and restrict the freedoms of its users? I guess those of us without a fortune 500 just can't understand.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday March 08 2017, @10:59PM
The same argument that says GPL is not free, basically. It doesn't allow you do it everything*!
* Everything is not defined as ripping off and fucking you in the ass in the process despite all the similarities.
(Score: -1, Redundant) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday March 08 2017, @06:35PM (1 child)
It won't be robust; it will be as ephemeral as the self-imposing clowns who currently helm that organization which calls itself "The State".
The only way to achieve a robust "right to repair" is to have a shift in culture, and thus a similar shift in economics, so that society organizes itself intimately around that very notion.
It is not the case that people respect certain rights only when they persist in legislation; rather, those rights persist in legislation only when people respect them.
(Score: 5, Informative) by Bogsnoticus on Wednesday March 08 2017, @07:04PM
No matter how many times you rephrase and repost, you're still dribbling shit.
Genius by birth. Evil by choice.
(Score: 5, Informative) by Fnord666 on Wednesday March 08 2017, @06:36PM (4 children)
(Score: 1, Funny) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday March 08 2017, @06:50PM (1 child)
What if the prediction comes true and "Cornhackers" becomes a new hit show on ABC? Set in Omaha, hackers and criminal gangs settle in the Cornhusker State. The Omaha FBI field office triples its manpower. The protag gets a hot rural hacker girlfriend from University of Nebraska Omaha. Apple Inc. sends a death squad to kill the protag.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday March 08 2017, @11:22PM
In one episode, the main character foils an insidious plot by a major corporation trying to spy on residents using a multi-gigabit fiber network. Two seasons later, the same corporation returns with gigabit wireless.
(Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday March 09 2017, @04:05AM
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday March 09 2017, @04:25AM
As someone from nebraska. Let me start with HAHAHAHAA and end with HAHAHAHAHAHA.
We didnt give a flying fuck in the first place. We did it anyway. Just like everyone else.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by Grishnakh on Wednesday March 08 2017, @06:39PM (21 children)
So why are Nebraska farmers buying their farm equipment from John Deere, instead of other companies like Kubota? I don't see them ever listed in these articles as trying to kill right-to-repair legislation. Most likely, their stuff is easier to fix too. A quick Google search found that there's a bunch of other ag equipment makers out there: Claas (Germany), New Holland (int'l, HQed in Italy), Case, Lite-Trac (UK). Maybe farmers should start looking more closely at other (particularly foreign) companies.
(Score: 5, Insightful) by Zz9zZ on Wednesday March 08 2017, @06:45PM (17 children)
Lack of local dealers maybe? I'm sure farmers don't want additional shipping cost, it can't be cheap for monster machines like those. Also, that does not factor in farmers who are already invested in John Deere.
As for solving problems with the "free market" we've seen that doesn't really work out so well. Consumer knowledge plus cornering the market makes "voting with your wallet" a rare option. I would prefer we get legislation to prevent shady business practices instead.
~Tilting at windmills~
(Score: 2) by Grishnakh on Wednesday March 08 2017, @06:55PM (16 children)
Also, that does not factor in farmers who are already invested in John Deere.
Sunk cost fallacy.
Consumer knowledge plus cornering the market makes "voting with your wallet" a rare option.
I'm all for increasing consumer knowledge. These anti-repair policies should be required to be advertised by manufacturers. But consumers should make the ultimate choice. All too often, people are stupid and short-sighted. Why do we need Big Brother to save us from ourselves if we're too dumb to make intelligent choices in the first place? As I've pointed out, there's plenty of alternatives out there. They might cost more up-front, but that's part of the cost-benefit equation. Obviously, these farmers don't think the right to repair is that important, or else they would support manufacturers who are friendlier that way.
(Score: 2) by Bogsnoticus on Wednesday March 08 2017, @07:10PM (6 children)
> "These anti-repair policies should be required to be advertised by manufacturers. But consumers should make the ultimate choice. All too often, people are stupid and short-sighted. Why do we need Big Brother to save us from ourselves if we're too dumb to make intelligent choices in the first place?"
Let's see if I'm reading this right. you want Big Brother to enact legislation due to your stupid decision of not doing research prior to purchase, to save you from making the stupid decision of not doing your research prior to making your purchase which then required the "right to repair" laws?
Genius by birth. Evil by choice.
(Score: 5, Interesting) by Grishnakh on Wednesday March 08 2017, @07:29PM (5 children)
The world isn't black and white. That's why many of our laws and our courtroom procedures reference "reasonability". There's only so much research that consumers can reasonably expected to do before purchase. An auto dealer isn't going to let you take a car off the lot, take it home, and take it apart before buying it so that you can fully evaluate its build quality and engineering, for instance. And there's a disparity in power between sellers (usually large companies) and buyers (usually not), so there is a need for keeping the "playing field" level. But I think it should stop short of coddling consumers. I don't support consumers getting screwed over by things they couldn't have reasonably known about, but I do support them getting screwed over because they ignored plainly-obvious warnings (e.g., "this product can only be repaired by the manufacturer, whenever they feel like it, wherever they decide to do it (even if there's only one location in your entire state), and at whatever price they decide to set").
These companies lobbying the hardest against the right-to-repair legislation (JD, Apple) seem to be the ones with the most user-hostile policies and practices, and seem to be supported by cultish users who insist on buying their products and then complaining about them, even though plenty of viable alternatives exist. It isn't even like Microsoft, where you can at least make the argument that the industry as a whole makes it difficult to choose an alternative because of 3rd-party software compatibility. There's plenty of phone makers besides Apple, and there's plenty of farm/heavy equipment makers besides JD.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by Zz9zZ on Wednesday March 08 2017, @07:41PM (3 children)
Still not hearing a good argument as to why we shouldn't enact legislation for Right to Repair.
Companies can update their warranties. Actually I don't think would need to, it is pretty common policy to have "your warranty is voided if you break this seal". So, no downside for the company except for a loss of revenue when users refuse to pay their exorbitant prices to get repairs / replacements.
Here is why people are upset:
It comes down to digital rights management (DRM), or the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA): these two acts made it illegal to circumvent a copy-protection system. In essence, they state the consumer doesn’t own the software of the product, only the product. John Deere is fundamentally stating that if you tinker with your tractor software to get it running the way you need it to, you are a pirate, and therefore, in violation of the law.
So, do you support the right for John Deere to sue the farmers? Do you really think THAT is a good precedent for ownership? How long before all companies take a similar stance, y'know, all cartel like. Collusion for profits, it would put small business owners (repair shops) out of business since every customer would be required to use the licensed repair shop for their product. More fees for small business owners, lack of competition, and eventually massive monopolies.
~Tilting at windmills~
(Score: 2) by Grishnakh on Wednesday March 08 2017, @09:38PM (2 children)
If customers are happily purchasing from a company that actually threatens to sue them for tinkering with their own property, I think the customers have a serious problem.
Really, it seems to me that the fundamental problem is the DMCA itself. (Aside: what "two acts" are they talking about here? "DRM" isn't a law, it's an industry acronym for something used in software. "DMCA" is a law, but only one.) I'm all for people having the right to repair their property, but it seems like this might be a band-aid for a fundamentally broken law, one which should be repealed or amended.
Anyway, these RtR laws sound great to me; I'm not arguing against them. I'm just bitching about dumb end-users who keep buying from companies that treat them poorly.
(Score: 2) by Zz9zZ on Wednesday March 08 2017, @09:51PM (1 child)
Fair enough, but at some point you will realize that with such a large population there are going to be enough uneducated / clueless people such that these business practices will always be a problem. Getting mad about human nature and other things we can't control is a pointless exercise that only hurts ourselves. Hence government intervention, but the responsibility falls back on "the people" to make sure the gov isn't going full nanny state.
~Tilting at windmills~
(Score: 2) by Grishnakh on Wednesday March 08 2017, @10:49PM
Sure, they'll be a problem, but I think it's a bit unfair to chalk everything stupid humans do up to "human nature". People can and do better. Lots of people do thorough research before buying a new car, for instance; there's all kinds of sources for information on this, from large publications like Consumer Reports and Motor Trend to various YouTube bloggers who do test drives and check-outs on a lift. There's really no shortage of product reviews out there for any mass-market item. Of course, farm equipment probably doesn't have so much of this, but I would think farmers would have their own groups, hopefully online, where they can exchange information about this stuff and badmouth companies that treat customers poorly.
The other big problem is that part of this problem is created by the government itself, in the form of the DMCA. Why should we need "government intervention" to solve a problem government created with a bad law? The government needs to fix the bad law. Of course, there's more to the RtR laws than that: they require access to diagnostic tools and manuals, which I think is a good idea and not something addressed by current laws. But the part about accessing the software is still limited by the DMCA it seems. Of course, the other big problem with government intervention is corruption: the government more often is working for big corporations and their lobbyists rather than the voters. How do we fix that? I'll honestly be surprised if any of these RtR laws actually get passed because of this factor. It would be great if they'd pass such laws in the EU though, because then we'd be able to get that information over here that way.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday March 09 2017, @01:29AM
Well, yes, but I fully expect that once I have bought and paid for the car that I can do whatever the hell I want with it, including taking it apart piece by piece, for whatever reason. What business is it to the auto dealer what I do with my own property? Of course, I also think that the manufacturer has every right to say that the warranty is void if I do decide to take the car apart and put it back together if I am not a car mechanic certified to work on their cars.
IANAL but I suspect that such a contract clause would not pass muster in a court of law. Have we got any legal scholars who would care to weigh in on this? I'm interested to see what a real contract lawyer might make of this.
(Score: 2) by sjames on Thursday March 09 2017, @02:41PM (8 children)
You're looking at it backwards. Currently, JD, Apple, and co. are using the state's willingness to use force on their behalf to enforce their anti-repair policies. A right to repair is the state refusing to have itself used that way.
(Score: 2) by Grishnakh on Thursday March 09 2017, @03:13PM (7 children)
No, not exactly. As I understand it, part of these RtR bills is forcing the mfgr to provide access to diagnostic tools and repair manuals to 3rd-party repair shops and end-users. The state isn't using "force" to enforce mgfrs' refusal to provide access to this, unless you count the willingness of the police to use force against someone who would forcibly enter the mfgrs' facilities and steal these things. There's a lot more here than just twisting the DMCA around.
(Score: 2) by sjames on Thursday March 09 2017, @03:31PM (6 children)
Withdrawal of force is at least part of the bill. I emphasize that since opponents of the bill would have us forget that the manufacturers have been happily enjoying the backing of state force for some time.
Once that force is withdrawn, the rest will happen with or without the manufacturer's cooperation. Repair manuals, spare parts, and diagnostic tools will come into existance with or without the OEM's help. The OEMs have long argued that this creates a danger from people doing it wrong or using substandard parts. The RTR bill says OK, so then you shall provide correct parts, diagnostic tools, and manuals, problem solved.
(Score: 2) by Grishnakh on Thursday March 09 2017, @03:52PM (5 children)
Exactly what force are you talking about? You're free to work on these machines all you want, you just won't get the mfgr to honor the warranty any more (though you might be able to sue them under the Magnusson-Moss Warranty Act, depending on exactly what you did). The OEMs have no ability to forcibly prevent people from attempting to repair their own equipment, or use 3rd-party parts. They do have the ability, however, to refuse to help.
(Score: 2) by sjames on Thursday March 09 2017, @04:04PM (4 children)
So if I grab up the repair manuals and diagnostic equipment and begin distributing copies, I may expect no visit from a LEO and no summons? Will the state really refrain from applying force against me?
(Score: 2) by Grishnakh on Thursday March 09 2017, @04:38PM (3 children)
If you use force to take things that aren't yours, then yes, you can expect to receive force in return from the state. What's so hard to understand about that? Theft has never been allowed in any civilized country (and that's ignoring the whole issue of copyright law, I'm just talking about your initial theft of the originals).
Where did you ever get the idea that the state isn't justified in using force against you when you commit a crime (namely theft)?
(Score: 2) by sjames on Thursday March 09 2017, @05:20PM (2 children)
So, if I simply crack JDs encryption and produce a diagnostic system that uses that discovered key, no issues at all?
And who said anything about taking? I'm talking about copying, perhaps while employed by JD.
No way around it, JD is depending on a state application of force to deny the right to repair.
What makes it such a problem if the state withdraws it's offer to apply force in those situations?
(Score: 2) by Grishnakh on Thursday March 09 2017, @06:43PM (1 child)
The main problem I see is Federal copyright law. State law can't trump Federal laws.
But this law isn't just removing the state protections for copyright and hoping some insider sticks the information on the internet somewhere; it's literally forcing the mfgr to provide information. That's rather different from removing a government-provided protection.
(Score: 2) by sjames on Thursday March 09 2017, @08:05PM
Due to federal copyright law, it's the only way the states can get that information out there where it belongs.
Of course, let's not forget that JD only exists because of an act of the state. It is a legal fiction created by the state. I'm not so sure it's in the public interest to let them use DRM and the DMCA to lock people into their repair services.
The point is that state backed force is already all over this. It seems disingenuous to argue that applying it in the other direction is somehow less permissible.
(Score: 2) by LoRdTAW on Wednesday March 08 2017, @07:23PM (2 children)
I'd wager it's part brand loyalty and part nationalism. John Deere is an American icon and the most respected brand of AG equipment in the USA. It's as as synonymous with AG equipment as Mack is to commercial trucks. Telling a loyal JD owner to switch to another, foreign brand would be like convincing a loyal German Mercedes owner to switch to a Toyota. It ain't gonna happen.
(Score: 2) by Grishnakh on Wednesday March 08 2017, @07:32PM (1 child)
So why do we need to coddle these idiots? They've made their beds, now let them lie in them.
Also, I'm fairly sure CASE and International Harvester and CAT are at least somewhat American, and I think New Holland still makes stuff here too (though the ownership is now Italian).
This seems more like telling a loyal, nationalistic GM owner to switch to a Ford, and him turning up his nose. It's just dumb. Or telling a loyal German Mercedes owner to switch to BMW or even VW.
(Score: 2) by fido_dogstoyevsky on Wednesday March 08 2017, @09:34PM
...telling a loyal, nationalistic GM owner to switch to a Ford, and him turning up his nose...
I've met several gm and ford owners EXACTLY like that.
It's NOT a conspiracy... it's a plot.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday March 08 2017, @07:03PM
If it looks like a duck, it's a duck.
So, if it looks like a sale, it should be a sale.
No have your cake and eat it too.
If you wish to use copyright to protect something, then first sale and fair use should apply and special license terms should not apply.
(Fixing your tractor should certainly be fair use.)
If you wish to protect it as proprietary licensed thing, you need to give up claiming copyright so disputes over license misuse are civil, not criminal.
(DCMA should not cause storm troupers to descend on a guy trying to help someone fix his tractor.)
(Score: 4, Touché) by snufu on Wednesday March 08 2017, @07:29PM (1 child)
You do not own this comment. You are granted a license to percolate said comment through your neurons for personal enjoyment only. Ancillary thoughts generated in your brain by this comment may not be redistributed for commercial purposes. This comment comes with a hemisphere site license. The comment may not be processed by separate hemispheres in your brain simultaneously. All rights reserved by the author.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday March 08 2017, @08:53PM
Must be why mods can only be inreresting or funny but not both.
(Score: 5, Funny) by redneckmother on Wednesday March 08 2017, @10:30PM
John Deere are famous for the slogan:
"Nothing runs like a Deere."
Soon, we'll have to add a tag:
"...but nothing smells like a John."
Mas cerveza por favor.
(Score: 2) by el_oscuro on Thursday March 09 2017, @01:45AM (3 children)
There is a strange place where you can still get "right to repair" tools:
Harbor. Freight. Tools.
Yes, the butt of jokes in Mad Magazine and Saturday night live. They do sell plenty of junk, and their stores make K-Mart look up scale. But some of their shit is actually pretty good once you get it set up and tuned. You will find heavy duty features like cast iron tables and induction motors at lower price points.
And almost all of their tools have parts diagrams and replaceable parts. I have ordered replacement parts from them several times and sometimes for tools that are several years old.
I purchased this bad boy [harborfreight.com] about 15 years ago and still have it. It's manual [harborfreight.com] contains the full parts diagram. If something breaks just call them to special order a replacement.
SoylentNews is Bacon! [nueskes.com]
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday March 09 2017, @04:31AM (2 children)
Most HF stuff is cheap Chinese junk. The Chinese though basically made everything right to repair. They did that because everyone else does. If you don't you go out of business. Just keep in mind most of their power tools are junk.
I use them all the time as most of my projects are one offs. I do not need the best tool. I just need the tool. I usually save a lot because many times that tool will not be used again for several years if at all. If I use something all the time I start with the junk stuff see if it works out. If not I buy the best one I can find. This has the nice effect of optimizing my spending. Many times I can blow out a tool and buy 3-4 more of them at HF vs a name brand one.
But you get what you pay for... https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eKB-zDJghZ0 [youtube.com]
(Score: 2) by Grishnakh on Thursday March 09 2017, @03:24PM
This isn't completely true. Most HF hand tools (wrenches, sockets, etc.), in particular, aren't Chinese, they're Taiwanese, and they're very high quality. They're a lot better than the Crapsman junk these days (which is made in China from what I've seen). And they have a lifetime warranty. According to a mechanic I met a couple years ago, he prefers the HF hand tools to Snap-On, because it's so much cheaper, and the quality is about the same these days.
But you're right about the power tools; they're not that great, but serviceable usually for one-offs or light usage.
(Score: 2) by el_oscuro on Thursday March 09 2017, @11:38PM
I go news for you. Practically all power tools are made in China, and most of them are cheap junk too. I replaced my 10 year old HF drill press with a larger and considerably more expensive Delta model (also made in China), and which I hadn't. That little benchtop was a beast. The hand-tighten chuck never slipped, and I was only able to stall the motor once - while drilling a 3 1/4" forestner bit into walnut. The POS Delta chuck was worse then useless. Regardless of how tight you tried to make it, even small bits would slip and strip. I eventually bought a replacement hand chuck (also made in China) that was like the one on my old HF drill. Still not as good as it stalls more but at least the drills don't strip.
Try ordering a replacement set of armature brushes for your Dewalt (also made in China)
That saw I linked to? I bought it for a one off project in 2002. I probably need to take it apart and clean it, but with the parts manual it makes it a lot easier to put together.
While all power tools are made in China, it is pretty easy to find top quality US made hand tools at reasonable prices.
SoylentNews is Bacon! [nueskes.com]
(Score: 1, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday March 09 2017, @04:45AM
Louis Rossmann will be speaking in support of the bill at the hearing and has brought a camera person and gear to live stream the event on Youtube. This isn't just about farm equipment, the right to repair could make OEM batteries and parts available to consumers and provide repair shops with schematics and materials needed to do board repair on failed devices. Properly repaired devices are good for the economy (jobs), consumers (alternative to buying new), and lessen the amount of otherwise repairable electronics sitting in landfills. Rossmann has an excellent Youtube channel featuring hundreds of hours of board repair content, electronics tutorials, micro-soldering, and commentary on the right to repair movement.
https://www.youtube.com/user/rossmanngroup/videos [youtube.com]
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday March 09 2017, @03:48PM
is more like it.