Right to Repair.

[JasperFrank]

The End Of Ownership, Military Edition: Even The US Military Can't Fix Its Own Equipment Without Right To Repair Laws | Techdirt

I come at this question from a more sedate place, that being repairing Home used Computers. But if this is messing up our armed forces in the field: Its a different question. Any thing used by our military, has to be freely available to them in the field to fix and in any way possible. It would be stupid to lose a hostile engagement because of some Corp Agreement.

 

[MinnesotaEric]

Bloomberg article on Right to Repair from today.

Bloomberg - Are you a robot?

 

[ruffdog]

Yeah...right to "repair" or right to hack software?

 

[PILOON]

My Kia dealer hit me with $120 to replace a rear link (that was not needed) one week out of warranty.
Link was not needed!
They offered to re install my used one for another $80.00
I later discovered that the actual problem was the tail pipe hitting the trailer attachment. (as shown by the polished areas on both parts)
I 'fixed' the annoying clanking by simply clamping a piece of dense rubber on the hitch frame.

Needless to say I never returned there but now rely on an efficient small local repair shop that is what a mechanic really should be.
He has 2 lifts and 2 mechanics and U need to book a long time ahead he is that busy. (read competent and honest)
Heck I can even supply any needed parts.

 

[ruffdog]

The issue with Deere and others with software is they don't want to expose the goods to the public. Do you think Tesla would be OK with unlocking the software for everyone to see? That is never going to happen without a court battle. I'm thinking this thing with Deere is being pushed by people looking for a money making opportunity selling reprogram kits that might even cause damage to the tractor. If a Deere blows up out in the field, who's reputation gets damaged, Deere or the software company that the farmer had work on the tractor?

 

[Threepoint]

[snip]If a Deere blows up out in the field, who's reputation gets damaged, Deere or the software company that the farmer had work on the tractor?

But isn't this the case with any after-market part replacement or non-dealer repair anyway? Regardless of whether it is ECU or software related? :confused3: Responsibility for an event, and any resulting impact on reputation, is a function of causality. How would allowing an OBD-2 (or similar) code reader to read error codes on a tractor, and then enable a reset after repair or replacement of parts, be much different on our tractors than on our automobiles and trucks? It wouldn't change causality. In fact, wouldn't it may make it easier to determine causality in a more objective, less self-interested manner?

 

[5030]

Tier 4 final, common rail Kubota's are the same deal. All the software and hardware and the diagnostic tools are proprietary. Why my tractors are Pre-4 mechanical injection. Much simpler and less expensive to repair, even with OEM parts, which I prefer anyway.

Until the issues are litigated with a positive result for the end user, nothing will change. We are a long way off from the standardized OBD serial interface auto makers use. Until then, pre 4 units will command (and get) a premium price. My tractors are like owning gold. They are appreciating in value as the new ones get more complex and more difficult for the average owner to repair.

 

[radios1]

we are taking greed here, plain and simple, it's a very strong motivator!. it wasn't always that way though, decades ago you could get service information for free, not anymore!.. I do remember when I could get full service info on computers, and make my own peripherals!..

 

[RickB]

Here is some good reading on the topic.
Viewing a thread - Farmers fight John Deere

 

[crashz]

Playing devils advocate, if you were the CEO at John Deere and your IT division spent years and millions of R&D dollars developing the software for the "digital future of farming", would you want to give it away so that your foreign competitors can copy it and sell it dirt cheap?

The same goes for more tame software for the fuel mapping (for example) of a tractor. The software took significant time and development hours. Giving it out to customers does them very little good (who really can reprogram the computers) but opens the manufactures up to theft of intellectual property that can be reused in knock-off products.

I'm not sure why the manufacturers are fighting back with the liability thing. It' probably possible, but pretty unlikely. I just don't see a lot of demand for hot-rodding a combine or such vehicle. Nor do I think that a gaff made by a farmer re-programming his tractor will even allow it to operate.

That being said, they need to be better prepared to either provide cost effective service on demand or simple plug and play components that satisfy both the manufacture and the customer. I'm of the repair-it-yourself group. But I've never reprogrammed a vehicle computer.