I've been under the weather here in Summit, but am now pursuing some interesting leads for original reporting.
Meanwhile, the Minnesota Reformer has published commentary by Minnesota Farmers Union President Gary Wertish on the Digital Fair Repair Act.
Traditionally, Minnesota farmers took pride in repairing their own tractors and farm equipment, but that changed as equipment manufacturers demanded exclusive rights to repair newer equipment.
Wertish looks at some of the loopholes in Minnesota's Digital Fair Repair Act. Let's hope the legislature can repair these loopholes.
Digital Fair Repair Act is important to farmers but not enough
By Gary WertishBeginning July 1, Minnesotans will gain new options for fixing their smartphones, laptops and even home appliances. This is all thanks to the Digital Fair Repair Act, which is the most comprehensive right to repair law in the nation and was passed by the Minnesota Legislature last year.
When the new law goes into effect equipment manufacturers will be required to make spare parts, tools and repair information available to consumers and independent repair shops. This will help break the monopoly over repair held by manufacturers such as the Big Tech firms that produce smartphones and is a massive victory for Minnesotans.
Yet for as comprehensive as the Digital Fair Repair Act is, it includes some critical and notable omissions, including motorcycles, power tools, off-road power equipment and – of importance to Minnesota Farmers Union (MFU) members – farm equipment such as tractors and combines.
While right to repair bills in Minnesota have included agriculture equipment for years because of the advocacy of MFU, equipment manufacturers have constantly lobbied against the right to repair and fought hard for an exclusion from the Digital Fair Repair Act. Just three companies manufacture most combines and tractors and these powerful companies were successful in protecting their repair monopoly, which has become a key source of revenue as farm equipment has become more technologically advanced.
One key argument manufactures have made is that recent industry agreements make right to repair legislation unnecessary and redundant. Early last year John Deere, which controls over half of the market for large tractors and combines, signed a memorandum of understanding (MOU) that provides access to a customer-facing diagnostic tool. Other major equipment manufacturers have since signed nearly identical MOUs making similar diagnostic tools available. Yet a close analysis of the diagnostic tool made available by Deere suggests these MOUs fall well short of providing farmers and independent repair businesses the access they need.
The Public Interest Research Group (PIRG) Education Fund found that the Customer Service ADVISOR tool John Deere has made available lacks the full range of capabilities offered by the Service ADVISOR tool available to Deere dealers. These limitations can make it difficult to address minor issues and ensure problems have been properly diagnosed. Customer Service ADVISOR also maintains Deere’s ability to require parts-pairing, which requires a company’s software to recognize and approve a replacement part, allowing manufactures to maintain control of the repair process.
In addition to the shortcomings of Customer Service ADVISOR, Deere gets to be judge and jury when it comes to enforcing the provisions of the MOU. In a letter the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) wrote in March supporting legislation to add farm equipment to the Digital Fair Repair Act the agency said MOUs are “easily terminable and have no enforcement mechanism—beyond “consultation”—upon which farmers and independent repair shops can depend.” In short, these MOUs are nothing but a handshake agreement.
The farm equipment monopoly has also claimed that legislation guaranteeing farmers the right to repair will be used to skirt emissions requirements and other environmental protections. However, the Environmental Protection Agency has made it clear that the “Clean Air Act and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s implementing regulations clearly support repair by parties other than manufacturers.”
The lack of right to repair has real consequences for farmers in Minnesota. Our members have shared stories with me of how simple issues they could fix themselves create costly delays because they do not have access to the necessary diagnostic tools, which has also locked out their local independent repair businesses from being able to assist them. These challenges have been exacerbated by the consolidation of dealerships, which requires many farmers to travel hours to get equipment repaired or creates delays in getting a technician to their farm.
While the Legislature failed to act on removing the farm equipment exemption this session, momentum is building both in Minnesota and across the country. Legislation adding farm equipment to the right to repair law had a bipartisan set of authors in the Minnesota House. Federal agencies like the FTC and the Department of Justice have acted to use existing law to ensure the right to repair, and states are working to pass new laws, which includes Colorado’s recently enacted law granting farmers the right to repair.
What legislators did in 2023 in passing the Digital Fair Repair Act should not be understated. Despite its exemptions, legislators stood up to powerful companies and demanded more fairness in the marketplace. In our highly consolidated economy we need more of that from policymakers. They can start by ensuring that family farmers can fix the equipment they own and rely on every day.
This Minnesota Reformer commentary is republished under Creative Commons license CC BY-NC-ND 4.0.
Photo: A farmer's spring field work in Renville County can go after sunset. Via Facebook.
Related posts
- Large livestock farms would face additional environmental scrutiny under proposed bill
- MN Farmers Union president: A legislative agenda for Minnesota’s family farmers
- Congratulations to Renville farmer Gary Wertish, new Minnesota Farmers Union president
If you appreciate Bluestem Prairie, you can mail contributions (payable to Sally Jo Sorensen, 600 Maple Street, Summit SD 57266) or use the paypal button in the upper right hand corner of this post.
Or you can contribute via this link to paypal; use email [email protected] as recipient.
I'm on Venmo for those who prefer to use this service: @Sally-Sorensen-6
Comments