"Dumbass farmers" wouldn't make a car renting analogy.

This is a classic case of someone who jumps to a conclusion before they understand the problem.

If his oven at home were bricked because of software issues he'd be pissed (regardless of his claims).

But these farmers are spending millions on equipment and that equipment has to work at the right time or they are losing money - big money.

This is interesting. We operate quite a few Deere engines for gensets in the maritime business. They have aftermarket ECU displays/controllers. We never have an issue hooking up Deere troubleshooting software to ECU onboard engine. Are we talking about all the other controls on farm equipment? Maybe this applies to implement and navigation controls, not necessarily engines? If this were the case on Marine Deere engines we would all move away to CAT or Cummins.

aTmAg said:

---

TexasAggie_02 said:

---

Quote:

---

You buy what you buy not what you wish you bought. When I buy a MS Windows DVD, I do not own the right to install it on 100 computers merely because I own the CD. Nor do I own the right to make a million copies and sell it for half price. When you buy things, you don't ALWAYS buy 100% use of it.

---

you are confusing software and hardware. If I buy a PC, i can run windows, DOS, Linux, or make my own OS. I can also upgrade the RAM, hard drive, graphics card, etc, without having Dell/HP/ASUS/etc authorize it. If my computer is overheating, I can add a bigger fan, without asking Dell for permission.

You are so wrong on literally every argument here, you have to be a JD employee, perhaps a dealer?

---

I'm confusing nothing. When you buy computer hardware you are specifically buying the right to upgrade ram, HD, etc. That is NOT ALWAYS THE CASE. It is not the case when you buy a TIVO or an F-35, or a gazillion other things. JD tractors included. And the JD policy has been clear for a damn long time. People who bought JD equipment with that knowledge who THEN demand government help them get more than what they paid for are thieves. Plain and simple.

The truth hurts sometimes.

(And no, I have nothing to do with JD. I just understand economics.)

---

Like the truth of you pulling my comment from 8:37 this morning where I absolutely shredded your argument in the kindest way possible? I got the screen shots buddy.

The Ford Motor Company has over 79,000 patents globally. Yet I can take my F-150 anywhere I want to get it serviced. I can buy third party hardware to plugin to the computer in my truck and run diagnostics. I guess Ford figures their IP is secure.

What Deere is doing is wrong.

MouthBQ98 said:

---

I understand the arguments on both sides but my personal view is that the court system is precisely set up to mediate between two parties where there is a conflict and determine the lawful or acceptable outcome and is a legitimate function of government. The alternative is quite literally open conflict and/or unaddressed harms, both of which are socially destabilizing and generally harmful if allowed to aggregate and escalate. If this is worked through the legal process and that is the outcome, then that's the outcome.

---

Precisely correct.

The free market purists like aTmAg make arguments that assume that such a thing as a purely free market is possible. It's not. The purists' view of markets is like high school physics that always start off with "assuming no friction". Well, in real life, there's always friction. And in real life markets, there's always distortions and government interference.

The purists' view that the markets will always correct and that monopolies and cartels are not possible long-term is belied by the de Beers diamond cartel. It has successfully monopolized the market for diamonds for decades. Diamonds are not at all scarce. Their scarcity on the market is due solely to de Beers' success in restricting sales by diamond miners.

In sports, you have to have some type of oversight agency and referees, or the sport becomes chaotic and even violent. However, the agencies can become too burdensome and overbearing. The trick is to find the right balance which is normally the least possible oversight and refereeing.

aTmAg would have no government oversight of th markets and leave consumer protection up to the consumers. That is a naive and impossibly utopian view of markets.

And the irony is that here, in the case of JD, JD is caving to consumer demands, yet aTmAg still doesn't like it.

We run Deere equipment. Three tractors, a backhoe, dozer, and a compact track loader. I hate the restrictions and lock down by Deere, especially the silly expense of their parts compared to what is otherwise available. But we knew the deal with Deere going in. It would have been better for other companies to exploit this practice and offer an alternative model to drive Deere to change or fail rather than use the heavy hand of govt to pressure a change in Deere's practices.

sam callahan said:

---

"Dumbass farmers" wouldn't make a car renting analogy.

This is a classic case of someone who jumps to a conclusion before they understand the problem.

If his oven at home were bricked because of software issues he'd be pissed (regardless of his claims).

But these farmers are spending millions on equipment and that equipment has to work at the right time or they are losing money - big money.

---

It doesn't matter what analogy the farmers would make. If they think buying a JD tractor is the same as buying a oven for their house, then they are naive and wrong. This has been a known issue with JD for a long time. So much so that there has been documentaries and "right" to fix movements against it. Yet these farmers either bought JD with that knowledge anyway or were so clueless that they refused to read the agreement and had their head in the sand. Now they want to force JD to change the agreement after money has traded hands and use the threat of government to force their way.

Just because you are losing big money doesn't give you the right to force somebody to provide you something you never paid for.

Quote:

---

rather than use the heavy hand of govt to pressure a change in Deere's practices.

---

I'm going to push back on this. What evidence is there that the government was actually going to do anything? Wasn't the noise coming from the government simply just that - noise? And wasn't that noise simply a reflection of the complaints coming from consumers?

All of the evidence is that John Deere is changing its policy in response to consumer complaints.

Isn't this the market working the way that it should?

aTmAg said:

---

sam callahan said:

---

"Dumbass farmers" wouldn't make a car renting analogy.

This is a classic case of someone who jumps to a conclusion before they understand the problem.

If his oven at home were bricked because of software issues he'd be pissed (regardless of his claims).

But these farmers are spending millions on equipment and that equipment has to work at the right time or they are losing money - big money.

---

It doesn't matter what analogy the farmers would make. If they think buying a JD tractor is the same as buying a oven for their house, then they are naive and wrong. This has been a known issue with JD for a long time. So much so that there has been documentaries and "right" to fix movements against it. Yet these farmers either bought JD with that knowledge anyway or were so clueless that they refused to read the agreement and had their head in the sand. Now they want to force JD to change the agreement after money has traded hands and use the threat of government to force their way.

Just because you are losing big money doesn't give you the right to force somebody to provide you something you never paid for.

---

I invite you to call me personally

361-676-5172

You are more than welcome to tell me this to my face

Aaron Turner
All-Terrain Ag Management

Quote:

---

Hashtag arguments in TexAgs. Hilarious. You are making a fool of yourself.

---

You cannot spell.
You #cannotmake real tags
Look! A cloud! Quick! Yell at it!

Quote:

---

And what do custom cars have to do with any of this?

---

They own the car. They do what they want with it including "repairs". So ends the lesson.

Quote:

---

When you own a car, you bought the right to do whatever you want to it.

---

Talking out of both sides of your mouth is your superpower. You should run for office. You previously posted: Just because I bought and physically possess a product, does not mean I own every possible use of that product. Enjoy banging on those hoods hero.

Quote:

---

That is not the case if you buy a JD tractor. The concept shouldn't be that hard with a person with a HS diploma. Yet it's hard for you. Pretty sad.

---

Says the guy with a college degree that is loopy on rentals vs real ownership.

Quote:

---

JD contracts spell out the terms and conditions too. Sorry to break it to you.

---

So did Apple's
Then they changed.
Need the Kleenex app?

(I have so missed the old aTmAg "I will take on all you!" threads! This is so fun)

Put your money where your mouth is and call me

aTmAg said:

---

TexasAggie_02 said:

---

Quote:

---

You buy what you buy not what you wish you bought. When I buy a MS Windows DVD, I do not own the right to install it on 100 computers merely because I own the CD. Nor do I own the right to make a million copies and sell it for half price. When you buy things, you don't ALWAYS buy 100% use of it.

---

you are confusing software and hardware. If I buy a PC, i can run windows, DOS, Linux, or make my own OS. I can also upgrade the RAM, hard drive, graphics card, etc, without having Dell/HP/ASUS/etc authorize it. If my computer is overheating, I can add a bigger fan, without asking Dell for permission.

You are so wrong on literally every argument here, you have to be a JD employee, perhaps a dealer?

---

I'm confusing nothing. When you buy computer hardware you are specifically buying the right to upgrade ram, HD, etc. That is NOT ALWAYS THE CASE. It is not the case when you buy a TIVO or an F-35, or a gazillion other things. JD tractors included. And the JD policy has been clear for a damn long time. People who bought JD equipment with that knowledge who THEN demand government help them get more than what they paid for are thieves. Plain and simple.

The truth hurts sometimes.

(And no, I have nothing to do with JD. I just understand economics.)

---

This is a poor comparison. Most PCs have interchangeable parts (much like JD equipment) whereas TiVos have fully integrated circuit boards. It's not a permission thing. There are actually businesses that have been stood up to upgrade TiVo hard drives - the only upgradeable part inside the box. It'll probably void your warranty, but it's not illegal.

Don't do it aTmAg!!

This guy sleep between Inez and Eda.
His biceps have those names on each.
Boll weevils see him coming and they skedaddle.
He crushes 55-gallon drums with his hands.

TxTarpon said:

---

Don't do it aTmAg!!

This guy sleep between Inez and Eda.
His biceps have those names on each.
Boll weevils see him coming and they skedaddle.
He crushes 55-gallon drums with his hands.

---

Stink bugs and thrips shiver at the mere thought of my Bidrin bomb!

G. hirsutum Ag said:

---

Put your money where your mouth is and call me

---

What is going on here? Seems like a message board discussion is perfect for this topic. What is the purpose of taking this to a phone call? Silliness.

I am laughing!
Thank you for that.

Nothing like harvest season in South Texas.

Proc92 said:

---

G. hirsutum Ag said:

---

Put your money where your mouth is and call me

---

What is going on here? Seems like a message board discussion is perfect for this topic. What is the purpose of taking this to a phone call? Silliness.

---

Can't have a discussion on a message board when he gets the discussion disproving his argument by a farmer removed from the board because he doesn't like what I have to say. Then you can't call someone, dumb, stupid, naive, and a child and not get to answer for it. Anyone who will openly say that about farmers and then silence us for talking needs to have a long discussion about things

Real World vs. Virtual World

TxTarpon said:

---

Quote:

---

And what do custom cars have to do with any of this?

---

They own the car. They do what they want with it including "repairs". So ends the lesson.

---

And this is not the case with other things, including JD equipment.

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

When you own a car, you bought the right to do whatever you want to it.

---

Talking out of both sides of your mouth is your superpower. You should run for office. You previously posted: Just because I bought and physically possess a product, does not mean I own every possible use of that product. Enjoy banging on those hoods hero.

---

*Sigh*. When you buy something, you are buying whatever the purchase agreement stipulates. In the case of a car, that usually includes the privilege to do what you want with it. That is not the case for everything. Software, TIVOs, JD tractors, and many others do not allow that.

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

JD contracts spell out the terms and conditions too. Sorry to break it to you.

---

So did Apple's
Then they changed.

---

When companies change on their own due to competition then that is great. When they do so because of frivolous BS lawsuits, government threats, or actual legislation it is bad. Government needs to stay the hell out of it. If you think otherwise, then you lose any claim to be conservative.

You can't keep ignoring me forever.

I have never once signed an agreement with John Deere. I have signed a purchase order and a check. That's it. So again. Your argument is invalid

aTmAg said:

---

eric76 said:

---

Is John Deere required to give away their software and equipment to farmers?

It seems to me that the farmers can now take their equipment to other mechanics or do it themselves with their own equipment and software.

I don't know about John Deere, but there have been instances of manufacturers having a stranglehold on their customers even though there are other companies who have independently developed their own equipment to test and repair faulty and broken machines.

---

Those other mechanics are being provided John Deere IP (by force of government) in order know how to fix them.

And the "stranglehold" was something the customers agreed to when they purchased the equipment. Now they want the government to force John Deere more than they originally agreed to. It's government assisted theft, plain and simple.

---

And there are a lot of ag producers that refuse to buy "big green" because of JD's policy...

So exactly how much money should I pay to be able to own the software in the machine that I never signed an agreement to use? Apparently the answer is more than $970,000. Is $1.5M enough to say that I own my machine?

TxTarpon said:

---

Real World vs. Virtual World

---

I guess his mouth is too full to talk on the phone.

/EOT

Doubtful that jd offers the software for sale at any price to a purchaser of a piece of equipment. I would think you buy the equipment and get a license of the software.

aTmAg said:

---

Teslag said:

---

Quote:

---

When I rent a car, I'm not buying the ability to set it on fire. I'm merely buying the privilege of driving it for a few days.

---

What if I bought the car? Could I set it on fire then?

---

Yes. When you buy the car you are purchasing the right to do whatever you want with the car including setting it on fire. That's why that costs $30K vs a few $100.

---

But apparently when you spend $500,000 on a combine, you don't buy the right to diagnose or repair it when something goes wrong and have to depend on JD to come fix it whenever is convenient for them.

But you can still burn in to the ground I guess?

Great logic you have there.

aTmAg said:

---

tremble said:

---

aTmAg would have made a great Supreme Court Justice for the Lochner era.

---

There is a reason we had an unprecedented boom during the industrial revolution. People back then understood that freedom was the key to prosperity. Unlike moronic politicians today who buy the votes of constituents with other peoples' money. In this case, they are buying the votes of farmers with John Deere's money. It's corruption under the guise of "caring" plain and simple.

---

This is just a dumb take.

We had a great boom during the industrial revolution because new technology was constantly being invented and brought to market, and we didn't have a government that had 30,000 regulations that companies had to ump through in order to bring that technology to market.

But rest assured - people could fix the stuff they bought without having to take it back to whomever they bought it from.

They don't offer an option to get it without the software and they will not run without the computer. So they are one in the same. You can jailbreak it and open it up but you void the warranty and I'm not taking that risk with a $900k machine.

rab79 said:

---

aTmAg said:

---

eric76 said:

---

Is John Deere required to give away their software and equipment to farmers?

It seems to me that the farmers can now take their equipment to other mechanics or do it themselves with their own equipment and software.

I don't know about John Deere, but there have been instances of manufacturers having a stranglehold on their customers even though there are other companies who have independently developed their own equipment to test and repair faulty and broken machines.

---

Those other mechanics are being provided John Deere IP (by force of government) in order know how to fix them.

And the "stranglehold" was something the customers agreed to when they purchased the equipment. Now they want the government to force John Deere more than they originally agreed to. It's government assisted theft, plain and simple.

---

And there are a lot of ag producers that refuse to buy "big green" because of JD's policy...

---

Case IH says "hi'

Here's a running list of aTmAg's critical mistakes:

• This was government action. - No, it was JD giving in to farmers. Free market at work!
• It's in the JD contract. - How does he know? And as an actual farmer has posted, that farmer has no contract with JD. And aTmAg can't provide us when JD changed its mythical contract terms and if it applied them retroactively and without the farmers' consent or knowledge.

Feel free to add to this list.

This is a slippery slope as it could and will trickle over to the Med Device industry. I have worked for two large players in this field (Radiology and Ophthalmology). 3rd Party competition has always been a concern. You have no way to vet or regulate someones training, certifications or parts they are putting into systems. A few examples are a laser that cut a cataract out of someones eye or an injector used to inject contrast into someones heart at 1200PSI. You don't want Jim Bob working from his garage being able to work on something that could affect someones vision or life. It is scary how often facilities try to cut corners and use people like this. Proprietary software and parts is currently what saves this from happening most of the time. Just my two cents

I am all for the government forcing right to repair on JD, but I'm
very surprised the answer here isn't "let the market fix it, don't buy green"

Jabin said:

---

Here's a running list of aTmAg's critical mistakes:

• This was government action. - No, it was JD giving in to farmers. Free market at work!
• It's in the JD contract. - How does he know? And as an actual farmer has posted, that farmer has no contract with JD. And aTmAg can't provide us when JD changed its mythical contract terms and if it applied them retroactively and without the farmers' consent or knowledge.

Feel free to add to this list.

---

Probably the biggest mistake is he pissed off a farmer after 3" of rain in January. I could do this all day. And plan to! Working up an email to the staff at TexAgs now.

aTmAg said:

---

Just because you are losing big money doesn't give you the right to force somebody to provide you something you never paid for.

---

That is the heart of the matter.

That " something" is what JD is calling IP.

That is ludicrous beyond comprehension and intelligent debate.

aTmAg said:

---

Against this. Let the free market handle it. Government always makes things worse.

Just because I bought and physically possess a product, does not mean I own every possible use of that product. When I rent a car, I'm not buying the ability to set it on fire. I'm merely buying the privilege of driving it for a few days. If I wanted to be able to set it on fire, then I would need to spend a LOT more for that car than I spend to rent it. When I buy a copy of MS Windows, I'm not buying the source code, I'm buying the ability to install a copy of it on my own computer. If there is a bug in the software, I don't get to demand the source code and internal documentation so that I can fix it myself. If I wanted to buy THAT privilege, then I would probably need to spend a billion dollars.

Likewise, when you buy a John Deere you aren't buying access to all their software or detailed plans. If you were, then they would be a LOT more expensive. By government forcing John Deere to provide more value than the customers bought, they are stealing from John Deere and giving it to others. Now what will likely happen is John Deere tractors will go way up in cost. Then you will hear these dumbass farmers whine that they are too expensive.

---

This is letting the free market handle it. Why should John Deere have a monopoly on the repair of their products? This introduces competition into that market

[Staff note to the board: Enough disrespectful comments and personal attacks. The next offenders will receive bans. There's your warning -- Staff]