John Deere and General Motors have filed a claim with the U.S. Copyright Office stating that you do not own your tractor and are merely an operator, that the tractor is property of the manufacturer for the life of the tractor. They claim that the computerization of the tractor or vehicle is a DNA that snakes through the entire system and that alteration or modification by an individual, either the mechanical or computer components, is a copyright violation and individuals should be prevented from repairing and modifying their own vehicles.
- Thread starter JimS
- Start date
Fordfarmer
Well-known Member
Sounds like a good way to loose market share.
Robert Major
Well-known Member
Hi It doesn't surprise me they are trying this, They will probably win the case to, as somebody with no brains will decide in there favor. Then open the flood gates for every other manufacturer of vehicles and equipment to follow suit. it would be an instant end to jobber parts companys and anything other than oem repair shops. Or "The system" would be pay a huge licence fee to be a non oem shop that would be unjustifiable for guys like me to pay.
I could also see it being the end of all equipment older than 10 years, A force you into new stuff kinda deal, as they would just pull all backup after that time. It would also mean the end for many hobbies we are involved in to if they won. You couldn't restore or build a pulling tractor in this situation.
Regards Robert
I could also see it being the end of all equipment older than 10 years, A force you into new stuff kinda deal, as they would just pull all backup after that time. It would also mean the end for many hobbies we are involved in to if they won. You couldn't restore or build a pulling tractor in this situation.
Regards Robert
What do you mean? Do you think the reports are false or overstated? I can understand if you believe that as no major news source is really following this, but then again, no major news source follows anything of consequence, just sports and celebrities.
This has been a trend for years. It is one of the reasons that certain industries embrace technology in that it makes it difficult for the average individual to repair anything. Certainly vehicles are more and more difficult to disassemble (hidden screws and clips, specialized screw and bolts). They want to collect that dealer rate on everything.
Other industries tried to ban resale. In fact, I would say the right to sell and maintain is indicative of ownership. The book and music industry tried to stop or at least collect a percentage on resale of books and cds. Will the tractor and vehicle industry seek something similar if they indeed are the owner for life?
This has been a trend for years. It is one of the reasons that certain industries embrace technology in that it makes it difficult for the average individual to repair anything. Certainly vehicles are more and more difficult to disassemble (hidden screws and clips, specialized screw and bolts). They want to collect that dealer rate on everything.
Other industries tried to ban resale. In fact, I would say the right to sell and maintain is indicative of ownership. The book and music industry tried to stop or at least collect a percentage on resale of books and cds. Will the tractor and vehicle industry seek something similar if they indeed are the owner for life?
They already are forcing us in to new stuff. IN CA it will be illegal to have a commercial truck engine older than 2012 by 2025. Already emissions laws are forcing individuals and companies to invest tens of thousands to be compliant, mostly crushing small business. It would not surprise me if in the years to come we see an banning of all vehicles older than a certain year.
SOmeone asked me if I was a climate change skeptic. I told them what I was skeptical of was approaching a politician with a crisis, real or not, that would allow control over virtually every aspect of life.
SOmeone asked me if I was a climate change skeptic. I told them what I was skeptical of was approaching a politician with a crisis, real or not, that would allow control over virtually every aspect of life.
Deceptive? By who? Me?
I understand that it is not in the media mainstream, and that concerns me too, but they seldom report things that are of importance to you and me. It is on sources like Wired, Techdirt, Consumerist.com, etc. If you search John Deere General Motors copyright you will find many articles.
I understand that it is not in the media mainstream, and that concerns me too, but they seldom report things that are of importance to you and me. It is on sources like Wired, Techdirt, Consumerist.com, etc. If you search John Deere General Motors copyright you will find many articles.
I like it. Or perhaps it should come with an operator?
https://www.google.com/search?q=tractor+girl&espv=2&biw=1280&bih=899&tbm=isch&imgil=0N6eOZzJ2kEJbM%253A%253B8uoorjHOp9hNUM%253Bhttp%25253A%25252F%25252Fwww.thegaragegazette.com%25252Findex.php%25253Ftopic%2525253D8556.15&source=iu&pf=m&fir=0N6eOZzJ2kEJbM%253A%252C8uoorjHOp9hNUM%252C_&usg=__pmUvxlhfuUwNr_VjvH5nVTiDu7w%3D&ved=0CCsQyjc&ei=A2c6VZuxGZbaoASqwYGABg#imgrc=0N6eOZzJ2kEJbM%253A%3B8uoorjHOp9hNUM%3Bhttp%253A%252F%252Fi16.photobucket.com%252Falbums%252Fb20%252FGThunda%252Ftractor_girl.jpg%3Bhttp%253A%252F%252Fwww.thegaragegazette.com%252Findex.php%253Ftopic%253D8556.15%3B609%3B687
https://www.google.com/search?q=tractor+girl&espv=2&biw=1280&bih=899&tbm=isch&imgil=0N6eOZzJ2kEJbM%253A%253B8uoorjHOp9hNUM%253Bhttp%25253A%25252F%25252Fwww.thegaragegazette.com%25252Findex.php%25253Ftopic%2525253D8556.15&source=iu&pf=m&fir=0N6eOZzJ2kEJbM%253A%252C8uoorjHOp9hNUM%252C_&usg=__pmUvxlhfuUwNr_VjvH5nVTiDu7w%3D&ved=0CCsQyjc&ei=A2c6VZuxGZbaoASqwYGABg#imgrc=0N6eOZzJ2kEJbM%253A%3B8uoorjHOp9hNUM%3Bhttp%253A%252F%252Fi16.photobucket.com%252Falbums%252Fb20%252FGThunda%252Ftractor_girl.jpg%3Bhttp%253A%252F%252Fwww.thegaragegazette.com%252Findex.php%253Ftopic%253D8556.15%3B609%3B687
60 acre hillside
Member
Tax assessor thinks he does but he can only find one
I believe the reports. I just think that after paying a hundred and fifty thousand dollars for a tractor it is mine. If you can find some one who can work on it and do it right, you should be able to use whomever you choose. I don't believe the bill of sale states that you bought the basic tractor but the company owns the internal workings and is just letting you use them.When the company decides to not service the computer anymore and you find a guru who can ,you should be able to do so.
This reminds me of another thing that has been going on for some time: those of you who do woodworking know that Saw Stop has invented a table saw that detects the presence of flesh at the blade and triggers an instant stop before the operator loses any fingers. It's a terrific technology, but of course it's costly. Saw Stop is willing (very willing) to license that technology to other saw manufacturers, but at a large cost. That's not good enough for the lawyers and the government: now that the technology exists, they're determined that every table saw will have it. I haven't kept up with this in a while, but I assume they are well on the way to eliminating conventional table saws.
I have not read the article that you refer to and there is no need for me to do so.
Though not a copyright specialist, I did study copyright law in law school and can state without reservation that one cannot use copyright law to retain ownership of your car, truck or tractor.
Dean.
Though not a copyright specialist, I did study copyright law in law school and can state without reservation that one cannot use copyright law to retain ownership of your car, truck or tractor.
Dean.
I agree, If you bought it, it is yours. Copyright protection is supposed to protect to original owner from someone reproducing their product and selling it for a profit. If I buy a CD and rework the cover art I didn't violate any copyright laws. If I repackaged it and made copies to sell I did. They can protect their design by patent but that is about it. If they state they own it then the can pay for the upkeep and taxes on them. Where is this world going to? lol....
Good point
Once one company can do it, others will follow as well as other industries.
Supposedly the computers in the cars now can tell when a chip has been replaced with a performance chip and then replaced with the
original for a SMOG. This information is then relayed to DMV so they may fine you. GPS and computers will likely automatically
fine us for traffic violations. Wouldn't surprise me if they would then remotely disable the vehicle.
Once one company can do it, others will follow as well as other industries.
Supposedly the computers in the cars now can tell when a chip has been replaced with a performance chip and then replaced with the
original for a SMOG. This information is then relayed to DMV so they may fine you. GPS and computers will likely automatically
fine us for traffic violations. Wouldn't surprise me if they would then remotely disable the vehicle.
Nancy Howell
Well-known Member
Think this through. Even if the claim is upheld, how can they enforce it? Can they force parts suppliers to stop selling parts or repair shops to close?
When you buy a tractor you get a SALES receipt or a sales contract not an operator's permit. Either the item was sold or it wasn't. Is anyone going to hand them tens of thousands of dollars just to "operate" their equipment?
If they are going to claim they own the tractor and you are only the operator, as the owner, won't that make them responsible for paying the cost of all repairs? Isn't the "owner" liable in the case of accidents or damage to other property?
There are lots of generic parts made by other manufacturers, like hoses, belts, spark plugs. Can they force these other manufacturers to stop selling parts that fit their tractors or vehicles?
How many of the parts in the tractor or vehicle did JD or GM actually manufacture? If the tractor or vehicle is assembled using parts purchased from another manufacturer, how can JD or GM claim the tractor is theirs through copyright? That's a like a home builder claiming the house is his because he put it together.
Trying to retain ownership of a vehicle or tractor would be a legal nightmare. A gazillion law suits would be filed overnight.
When you buy a tractor you get a SALES receipt or a sales contract not an operator's permit. Either the item was sold or it wasn't. Is anyone going to hand them tens of thousands of dollars just to "operate" their equipment?
If they are going to claim they own the tractor and you are only the operator, as the owner, won't that make them responsible for paying the cost of all repairs? Isn't the "owner" liable in the case of accidents or damage to other property?
There are lots of generic parts made by other manufacturers, like hoses, belts, spark plugs. Can they force these other manufacturers to stop selling parts that fit their tractors or vehicles?
How many of the parts in the tractor or vehicle did JD or GM actually manufacture? If the tractor or vehicle is assembled using parts purchased from another manufacturer, how can JD or GM claim the tractor is theirs through copyright? That's a like a home builder claiming the house is his because he put it together.
Trying to retain ownership of a vehicle or tractor would be a legal nightmare. A gazillion law suits would be filed overnight.
They are simply trying to stop the manufacture of conventional table saws; the government for Big Brother reasons, and the lawyers for liability reasons. Actually the tort lawyers would like to see the conventional saws continued: since this technology is now available, anybody who injures himself on a conventional saw has grounds for a suit, saying that the manufacturer did not do everything possible to prevent that mean old saw from hurting the doofus. In other words, pay Saw Stop a licensing fee or continue to make conventional saws at your own peril. Same mindset as the suit against Smith & Wesson some years ago---somebody got hurt by a gun, so it was S&W's fault.
Nancy makes valid points, and there is a major difference between "owning" a copyright, and a tractor or vehicle. Stop and think about it, this would put a damper on not only sales tax, but property taxes, liability, who pays repair, licensing, insurance, you name it. Some are quick to jump on "government motors", but you can bet what is good for the goose is good also for the gander, and if there are profits to be made, it would not just be John Deere, "government motors", but Dodge/Chrysler/Fiat/Ram (whatever they are today), Ford, etc would be right there to jump on the proverbial bandwagon. In todays world, most big manufacturers are all about the profits, and most of the profit today is not necessarily in the sale of vehicles, but in the service departments - just take a look at not only the expansion those dealerships have done to look attractive, but their shop rates. Not sure about anyone else, but some of my experiences with those shops are less than pleasant experiences. Usually when I take a vehicle in, it comes out with more wrong with it than it was when it went in, and I find out I paid a very high shop rate for someone whose only skill is part swapping, and trial and error, and I end up being charged for unneeded items, or they try to "upsell" me things that have nothing to do with what I brought the vehicle in for. With that said, yes, there are honest shops out there, but in my opinion those are the exception rather than the rule. I guess I got off topic a bit, and on a rant, but I somehow doubt the copyright office would have much success in enforcement of vehicle ownership. They have had limited success with enforcing copyrights on other things, and I am like others, in that if I pay for something, I do what I wish with it aside from trying to market it for a profit.
Donald Lehman
Well-known Member
Harley Davidson tried to pull this crap about 30 years (?) ago. When all of the Japanese bike makers start putting out V-twins Harley tried to copyright the SOUND of their bikes. They also went after a large Harley shop here in NY for copyright and patent infringements after this particular shop almost single handily kept the Harley name alive while Harley was trying it's best to destroy itself. Harley lost both lawsuits. It took years of fighting in the courts, but Harley lost both suits. I'd guess something similar might happen in this case too, eventually?
Everyone has made some valid points and Nancy has some particularly sticky ones.
My opinion is that this will die quietly. If it doesn't a farmer that purchased a 1 million dollar combine with heads will file suite for the return of his money since it was an invalid sale. Just think of the amount of money JD or GM will have pony up. It would break them.
Questions:
1) What is the manufacturer going to do with the returned equipment when the "operator" is finished?
2) How is the manufacturer going to get the equipment repaired to keep it running during a critical time? Say the middle of harvest on Sunday with a major storm approaching. After the crop is lost due to the storm the manufacturer is responsible for the loss. That's better then crop insurance!
As I said earlier this too shall pass.
My opinion is that this will die quietly. If it doesn't a farmer that purchased a 1 million dollar combine with heads will file suite for the return of his money since it was an invalid sale. Just think of the amount of money JD or GM will have pony up. It would break them.
Questions:
1) What is the manufacturer going to do with the returned equipment when the "operator" is finished?
2) How is the manufacturer going to get the equipment repaired to keep it running during a critical time? Say the middle of harvest on Sunday with a major storm approaching. After the crop is lost due to the storm the manufacturer is responsible for the loss. That's better then crop insurance!
As I said earlier this too shall pass.
You guys are constantly croaking about how "main stream media" twists facts to suit their agenda. This news article sounds pretty agenda-rich to me, that agenda being to incite anger and panic in a fringe element of society.
What this probably is, is a move to keep aftermarket companies from hacking or reverse-engineering the proprietary software to change the performance of the vehicles/tractors.
The problem is people put these programmers/chips/etc. on their vehicles, remove emissions equipment, and it screws up the computer. So what do they do? They take it back to the dealer and DEMAND it be fixed, UNDER WARRANTY!
It costs the manufacturer millions of dollars every year in fraudulent warranty claims that raise the price YOU, the honest consumer who uses the vehicles as intended, pay for the vehicles.
If people were honest and say, "Yes, I put a programmer on it. It is my fault. I will pay for the repairs." Then it wouldn't be a problem. Everyone's looking to blame someone else. The manufacturers are just trying to protect themselves.
Freedom only works when people are honest and take responsibility. Since nobody wants to take responsibility for their actions, this is what we get.
What this probably is, is a move to keep aftermarket companies from hacking or reverse-engineering the proprietary software to change the performance of the vehicles/tractors.
The problem is people put these programmers/chips/etc. on their vehicles, remove emissions equipment, and it screws up the computer. So what do they do? They take it back to the dealer and DEMAND it be fixed, UNDER WARRANTY!
It costs the manufacturer millions of dollars every year in fraudulent warranty claims that raise the price YOU, the honest consumer who uses the vehicles as intended, pay for the vehicles.
If people were honest and say, "Yes, I put a programmer on it. It is my fault. I will pay for the repairs." Then it wouldn't be a problem. Everyone's looking to blame someone else. The manufacturers are just trying to protect themselves.
Freedom only works when people are honest and take responsibility. Since nobody wants to take responsibility for their actions, this is what we get.
On your first point, only authorized shops will be allowed to perform service. That in itself will be a big money maker. Just as any licensing or certification it will narrow the field, i.e. the supply and drive up the price (what they really want).
If they can change the legal wording for animal and livestock owners to guardian or caregiver thereby altering legally what is required of you they can certainly do it with a non-living piece of equipment. You may have use of the equipment, but it has to stay exactly as it was manufactured and you wil be forced to keep it that way. Furthermore, if the state of California can essentially outlaw all commercial vehicles with engines older than 2012 or require upgrades of tens of thousands of dollars, I think they might get away with this. It would not surprise me if one day they say all vehicles older than a certain year are illegal and have to go to scrap and all new vehicles must be professionally maintained.
As far as costs, the end user always pays in one way or another.
As far as aftermarket parts, yes, they can stop. If you cannot attach to a Microsoft product then you can't attack t a JD. Only OEM parts will be authorized. It must remain true to the copyright agreement.
Yes. It is a nightmare, but why should that stop them. Trying to provide health care to every individual is a nightmare, but that doesn't stop anyone. The USDA tried to tag every animal in the US electronically and would have to be recorded every time it was moved. They temporarily shelved that idea because it was a nightmare, but I promise you it will come back and will eventually be done. Changing absolutely everything to combat climate change is a nightmare, but that isn't stopping anyone.
When people are chasing legal means to control a market logic doesn't enter into it.
If they can change the legal wording for animal and livestock owners to guardian or caregiver thereby altering legally what is required of you they can certainly do it with a non-living piece of equipment. You may have use of the equipment, but it has to stay exactly as it was manufactured and you wil be forced to keep it that way. Furthermore, if the state of California can essentially outlaw all commercial vehicles with engines older than 2012 or require upgrades of tens of thousands of dollars, I think they might get away with this. It would not surprise me if one day they say all vehicles older than a certain year are illegal and have to go to scrap and all new vehicles must be professionally maintained.
As far as costs, the end user always pays in one way or another.
As far as aftermarket parts, yes, they can stop. If you cannot attach to a Microsoft product then you can't attack t a JD. Only OEM parts will be authorized. It must remain true to the copyright agreement.
Yes. It is a nightmare, but why should that stop them. Trying to provide health care to every individual is a nightmare, but that doesn't stop anyone. The USDA tried to tag every animal in the US electronically and would have to be recorded every time it was moved. They temporarily shelved that idea because it was a nightmare, but I promise you it will come back and will eventually be done. Changing absolutely everything to combat climate change is a nightmare, but that isn't stopping anyone.
When people are chasing legal means to control a market logic doesn't enter into it.
Mark - IN.
Well-known Member
Glad all of my iron is older. I OWN it, them.
Mark
Mark
Rollie NE PA
Well-known Member
I think what John Deere and Gm are saying is that they retain all rights to the software in their vehicles and anyone who would access it to make diagnostics, repair or modification software would violate the copyright law.
If one can not gain access to their software, then one can not make repairs to the equipment. So in a sense J_D and GM own the owners of the vehicles.
I think I made sense. LOL
If one can not gain access to their software, then one can not make repairs to the equipment. So in a sense J_D and GM own the owners of the vehicles.
I think I made sense. LOL
jimg.allentown
Well-known Member
This all smacks of monopoly, which is prohibited by the Sherman Anti-Trust law.
Some years ago, Ford motor company had owned Autolite as a sole source of repair parts for Ford vehicles. They were forced by the government to allow the third party suppliers into "their" market, and to divest themselves of the Autolite brand.
I agree with much of what has been posted on this subject. Apparently, GM and JD have taken lessons from Apple computer company. They seem to have the idea that they still own your Apple computer even after you have paid an inflated price for it. For that attitude, I will never "own" any Apple equipment.
Some years ago, Ford motor company had owned Autolite as a sole source of repair parts for Ford vehicles. They were forced by the government to allow the third party suppliers into "their" market, and to divest themselves of the Autolite brand.
I agree with much of what has been posted on this subject. Apparently, GM and JD have taken lessons from Apple computer company. They seem to have the idea that they still own your Apple computer even after you have paid an inflated price for it. For that attitude, I will never "own" any Apple equipment.
CenTex Farmall
Well-known Member
Similar things have been the way of commercial aviation for decades. When I worked for AMR (as Eagle) the engines on the Saab 340's were owned by General Electric. GE stipulated maintenance and inspection schedules and the work had to be done whether the planes were actively being flown or parked in the desert. The APU's on the Embraer fleet belonged to Sunstrand and the company paid them based on hours used. The company maintained them and when they broke they went back to Sunstrand. They had other odd arrangements with other parts of the aircraft too including software.
I read some about the JD and GM deal and it's more about the software and computer parts. The market will straighten things out. If JD is not only high initial cost but also too costly to maintain and with field repairs taking to long then people will go elsewhere. They will price themselves right out of the market.
I read some about the JD and GM deal and it's more about the software and computer parts. The market will straighten things out. If JD is not only high initial cost but also too costly to maintain and with field repairs taking to long then people will go elsewhere. They will price themselves right out of the market.
Similar threads
We sell tractor parts! We have the parts you need to repair your tractor - the right parts. Our low prices and years of research make us your best choice when you need parts. Shop Online Today.
Copyright © 1997-2024 Yesterday's Tractor Co.
All Rights Reserved. Reproduction of any part of this website, including design and content, without written permission is strictly prohibited. Trade Marks and Trade Names contained and used in this Website are those of others, and are used in this Website in a descriptive sense to refer to the products of others. Use of this Web site constitutes acceptance of our User Agreement and Privacy Policy TRADEMARK DISCLAIMER: Tradenames and Trademarks referred to within Yesterday's Tractor Co. products and within the Yesterday's Tractor Co. websites are the property of their respective trademark holders. None of these trademark holders are affiliated with Yesterday's Tractor Co., our products, or our website nor are we sponsored by them. John Deere and its logos are the registered trademarks of the John Deere Corporation. Agco, Agco Allis, White, Massey Ferguson and their logos are the registered trademarks of AGCO Corporation. Case, Case-IH, Farmall, International Harvester, New Holland and their logos are registered trademarks of CNH Global N.V.
Yesterday's Tractors - Antique Tractor Headquarters
Website Accessibility Policy