Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

We Can’t Let John Deere Destroy the Idea of Ownership

wired.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 405 posts

Re: We Can’t Let John Deere Destroy the Idea of Ownership

#11

Post by jaegerpicker »

MrZongle2 wrote: post #6
pragone wrote: post #2

Very interesting. I did not know this issue extended all the way to farming equipment. At the same time, I can't say I'm terribly surprised given the state of things currently. Thread hijack: Am I the only one who finds Wired's... "unique"... styling of links absolutely obnoxious?

In support of your hijacking: no, you're not. I find it annoying. It has the stink of "we've got to do something different but we don't know what...let's mess with something that isn't broken!" As abhorrent as I find John Deere's anti-ownership approach, I say let them continue down that road. It will provide another entrepreneur the opportunity to create and sell a more easily maintainable, you-bought-it-so-you-own-…

Right but the issue with that approach is that the better alternative rarely appears. Your own example of the home appliance shows that.

Re: We Can’t Let John Deere Destroy the Idea of Ownership

#12

Post by Loughla »

The people who have the money to buy the mega-tractors you see in the article don't care. That's why, unless someone outside the industry makes a stink, nothing will happen.

These are giga-corporations who are 'family owned' in name only. If they don't rent, they operate that machine for a few years, play the tax game, and trade it even-money for a new one. To them, ownership doesn't matter. Their service contracts with implement dealers let them not worry about who owns what. All they care about is whether or not it works.

(Off topic now) Between this and the stupidly high price for land, it's small farmers who are getting left in the dust. I say this in every thread related to farming; I am in my early 30's and I guarantee I live to see the death of the actual family farm.

Re: We Can’t Let John Deere Destroy the Idea of Ownership

#13

Post by brlewis »

The company argues that allowing people to alter the software—even for the purpose of repair—would “make it possible for pirates, third-party developers, and less innovative competitors to free-ride off the creativity, unique expression and ingenuity of vehicle software.”

Next step: weld the hood shut so competitors can't see the parts.

Re: We Can’t Let John Deere Destroy the Idea of Ownership

#15

Post by beat »

Loughla wrote: post #12

The people who have the money to buy the mega-tractors you see in the article don't care. That's why, unless someone outside the industry makes a stink, nothing will happen. These are giga-corporations who are 'family owned' in name only. If they don't rent, they operate that machine for a few years, play the tax game, and trade it even-money for a new one. To them, ownership doesn't matter. Their service contracts w…

It's not just mega-tractors that are software-controlled these days. It's all tractors. Including those used by "small family farms".

Re: We Can’t Let John Deere Destroy the Idea of Ownership

#16

Post by jaegerpicker »

Articles like this always push me towards the Stallman way of thinking that all software should be open source and everyone should have the right to modify/fix/change the software in any way they see fit as long as they aren't trying to resell it as their own work. It's a tough subject, I make an extraordinarily good living from writing closed source software but I constantly feel as though I should support open source software more.

Re: We Can’t Let John Deere Destroy the Idea of Ownership

#17

Post by tacos »

briantakita wrote: post #9

> John Deere may be out of touch, but it’s not alone. Other corporations, including trade groups representing nearly every major automaker, made the same case to the Copyright Office again and again. In Capitalism, the game is to make monetary profit & control the market, above all else. It makes sense what John Deere is doing. They are just being good Capitalists.

They're also a great fucking company. Nerds care about this sort of bullshit. People who turn seeds into fruit into dollars care that the manufacturer will drop in with a helicopter to a field and get you going fast with a loaner part the size of your entire cubicle.

They also have interesting jobs available on their test farm for software engineers.

Re: We Can’t Let John Deere Destroy the Idea of Ownership

#18

Post by petercooper »

Well that's fine. You license me the tractor for $X per month and let me cancel that license and return it on a reasonable period of notice, and you have a deal. If you're going to license things, you can sell licenses, but if you're going to sell an object, I own the object.

Re: We Can’t Let John Deere Destroy the Idea of Ownership

#19

Post by kwiens »

pragone wrote: post #2

Very interesting. I did not know this issue extended all the way to farming equipment. At the same time, I can't say I'm terribly surprised given the state of things currently. Thread hijack: Am I the only one who finds Wired's... "unique"... styling of links absolutely obnoxious?

The internet of things means this issue is coming to every single product in the world. If it's possible to add electronics to it, it will have a chip.

And that means that software IP rules now apply to hardware. Those rules need changing.

It's more urgent with physical products than with traditional software because tractors need repair on a regular basis. Copyright is taking away the independence of farmers.

Re: We Can’t Let John Deere Destroy the Idea of Ownership

#20

Post by jasonlotito »

JoeAltmaier wrote: post #10

Huh. So, like an iPhone, you don't get to see or modify the software on a tractor. What's new about that? Its the same with my desktop computer, come to think of it.

Are you saying you can't install the software you want on your computer? You can't replace the OS? Are you suggesting that this should be acceptable?
Post reply on HN