JD Right to Repair

[CobyRupert]

If you want to keep your technology a secret, don’t sell it to the public.
How is software different than (say) a limited slip differential?

Could you imagine the inventor of the differential selling you a vehicle and putting a fool proof lock on it and saying you’re not allowed to open THE THING YOU OWN. That you must call a dealer for a special key and pay them at their rates.

Patents, copyrights and warranty restrictions have always protected the manufacture from someone else duplicating and profiting from their research and development investment, not accessing it.
Of course you can take apart YOUR differential, you can fill it with sand or grape jelly if you want, it’s YOURS, You bought it to do what you want, to suggest otherwise is ridiculous.

 

[rScotty]

Had to have a new engine computer in our late model JD last year. Installation is two screws and one plug. It doesn't even require removing a panel for access. Time: two minutes.

Diagnosis is done by proprietary software at the dealer. Refurbished (reprogrammed) part is $2000. Dealer gets the old one to be refurbished and reprogrammed by JD.

Whether done at the dealer or in the field there is an additional charge after installation for the JD technician to input the serial number of the tractor which activates the engine computer. 5 minutes, $200.

 

[WinterDeere]

It seems everything is becoming more and more complicated and more expensive to repair. We may be approaching a time when things become so complicated that they may not be fixable or too expensive to fix. Or the software is no longer supported. That's when the equipment becomes disposable. How are we going to save the environment when large machinery becomes disposable?

I remember making the same argument, re: automobiles with ECM's in the mid-1980's. But it's proven an unfounded concern, as any mechanic or DIY'er today knows how to swap an ECM, or to source aftermarket electronics. The knowledgebase required to keep new machines going 30 years from now is definitely changing, but our kids will be well-equipped by then to deal with it.

Also note that electronics nearly always have a mean time to failure many tens of times longer than the mechanical components to which they're connected. Electromechanical components (i.e. sensors) fail frequently enough, but the actual core electronics do not commonly fail.

Patents, copyrights and warranty restrictions have always protected the manufacture from someone else duplicating and profiting from their research and development investment, not accessing it.

Unfortunately, that's often not the case. A patent only gives you the right to defend theft of your technology, not the means with which to detect it or the funds lost in defense of it. I've worked for companies put out of business by another infringing on their patent(s), and deal with patent law and trade secrets everyday, as part of my business. If you want to keep proprietary IP secret, you do not explicitly patent it, but even that statement is simplifying a very complicated problem too big to discuss in a few forum posts.

 

[rScotty]

SNIP

Patents, copyrights and warranty restrictions have always protected the manufacture from someone else duplicating and profiting from their research and development investment, not accessing it.
Of course you can take apart YOUR differential, you can fill it with sand or grape jelly if you want, it’s YOURS, You bought it to do what you want, to suggest otherwise is ridiculous.

No, that's not entirely right. Or at least the part about patents is not complete. I agree with your point that when you buy something it is yours to do with as you please. The only thing you cannot do with an existing patent (or copyright) is duplicate it for profit.

Interestingly, with a patent, a person is specifically agreeing to educate the world about a better process in exchange for a period of protected use. That is why a patent includes such comprehensive instructions and why the protection is limited to a few years. Patents are designed to be duplicated by anyone once the period of use protection expires. That is why they exist.... to educate.

Copyrights offer more protection and longer term fnancially oriented protection than patents - but their field of application is different.

The only protection that either patents or copyrights have outside of the country issuing them is when both countries agree to honor each others patents and copyrights. Otherwise, nothing.

There are many advantages to simply using trade secrets.

rScotty

 

[loggin]

I remember making the same argument, re: automobiles with ECM's in the mid-1980's. But it's proven an unfounded concern, as any mechanic or DIY'er today knows how to swap an ECM, or to source aftermarket electronics. The knowledgebase required to keep new machines going 30 years from now is definitely changing, but our kids will be well-equipped by then to deal with it.

Also note that electronics nearly always have a mean time to failure many tens of times longer than the mechanical components to which they're connected. Electromechanical components (i.e. sensors) fail frequently enough, but the actual core electronics do not commonly fail.


Unfortunately, that's often not the case. A patent only gives you the right to defend theft of your technology, not the means with which to detect it or the funds lost in defense of it. I've worked for companies put out of business by another infringing on their patent(s), and deal with patent law and trade secrets everyday, as part of my business. If you want to keep proprietary IP secret, you do not explicitly patent it, but even that statement is simplifying a very complicated problem too big to discuss in a few forum posts.

There have already been examples in the fabrication industry where machinery is no longer usable because of software and circuit boards no longer being supported or made.

Just sayin..

 

[WinterDeere]

There have already been examples in the fabrication industry where machinery is no longer usable because of software and circuit boards no longer being supported or made.

Just sayin..

Good point, and I've been caught up in some of that myself, on manufacturing or test equipment where perhaps only dozens of assemblies were ever built. But those of us who've always bought tractors made in sufficient quantities to ensure a long lifetime of replacement parts, are much less likely to be caught up in that. Those buying less popular machines will be the first to see it, just as they are with mechanical components.

I guess the point I'm making is that you don't need to see a circuit board, even one carrying firmware, as anything different than a machine-specific casting, or really any other mechanical component that's not easily substituted or re-manufactured. It's just another part.

 

[rScotty]

There have already been examples in the fabrication industry where machinery is no longer usable because of software and circuit boards no longer being supported or made.

Just sayin..

That's right. The problem with all of the arguments in favor of electrical control devices vs mechanical control devices is the level of supporting technology involved. It's not a matter of "just another type of part".

A mechanical device can be refurbished using simple technology, tools, and basic self education. None of those will help with an electrical component or ECM repair. That is why mechanical technology came first, it is why older machinery retains its value, and is why modern manufacturing would like to change the game.

rScotty

 

[alpha&omega]

of you have a good scan tool and the adapter, all is good. My Autel can handle anything but it's not cheap.

Which Autel are you running and do you recall which adapter you needed for your tractors? I have two different Autel scanners, but I’m not sure if I have the adapters for my Deere.