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

John Deere to pay $99M in right-to-repair settlement

thedrive.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

111–120 of 137 posts

Re: John Deere to pay $99M in right-to-repair settlement

#111

Post by pdpi »

M95D wrote: post #95
pdpi wrote: post #91

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They might be able to work around that by arguing it’s a consumable, so not a warranty issue.

Fuel is a consumable, and fuel gauge is also a consumable? You have lots of terrible judges if anyone could seriously consider that argument.

Oh the argument would never be phrased that way. Rather, you start from the completely uncontroversial point that a CR2032 battery is a consumable, come up with some reason why you can't use a bare cell like that and need some sort of assembly around it, and incrementally justify adding more functionality into that assembly.

Also, remember that you don't need to prove that the design is sensible, only that it isn't deliberately malicious.

Re: John Deere to pay $99M in right-to-repair settlement

#112

Post by pjjpo »

b112 wrote: post #62
causality0 wrote: post #11

One of the most user-hostile companies on earth. My John Deere lawnmower came with a fuel gauge that runs off a CR2032 that's embedded in epoxy. The battery runs out of charge in about six months and the gauge stops working. If you saw the gauge open and replace the battery it doesn't start working again. If you disconnect the gauge the lawnmower won't start. Replacement gauges are $60.

This is where small claims court can have a HUGE impact. Where I live, in small claims: * Lawyers are not allowed * There is no forced discovery. Sue John Deere, and they cannot ask for endless documents * There is no way to assign costs on loss. If you lose, you never pay costs for the person you sued (which makes sense -- no lawyers) * If you don't understand something, typically the judge will act as a mediator an…

Sounds like a fun anecdote and not doubting it at all. So just wondering how that max comes into play

> Explain what you found. Where I am, the max resolution is $30k, so you could easily get a refund for the tractor.

While I haven't bought a tractor before from some searching and impression they seem much higher. If fair market value is that low, I can see how 1) works but if for 2 it caps out at $30K, it doesn't seem like it would get you a full replacement with another brand.

The loss to John Deere is funny but isn't it also a loss to the customer, who would hurt more from the lost tractor?

Re: John Deere to pay $99M in right-to-repair settlement

#113

Post by koolba »

itbeho wrote: post #67

I live in a wine region in central Calif where everyone has a tractor. We bought a Kubota, enjoy using it and get a lot of work done with it. We have a neighbor that bought a new John Deere and for about a 3 month period we endured nothing but abuse from him because we didn't buy "American". Then his problems started...

Depends on which specific model as about half of them are made in the USA: https://www.kubota-kma.com/about/

Re: John Deere to pay $99M in right-to-repair settlement

#114

Post by mhitza »

gambiting wrote: post #98
M95D wrote: post #80

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In EU, a product such as this would have a 2 year minimum warranty. How long was yours?

Again, it's a misconception(and I'm from the EU). EU law guarantees that for 2 years from purchase(it's actually 6 on most items) the seller has to fix any issues that arise from manufacturing faults . In the first 6 months of ownership, any fault is automatically presumed to be a manufacturing fault, after 6 months the buyer has to prove that it is. That is not the same as a warranty, if your laptop randomly stops w…

> EU law also stipulates that you must give the consumer a minimum 2-year guarantee (legal guarantee) as a protection against faulty goods, or goods that don't look or work as advertised. In some countries national law may require you to provide longer guarantees.

https://europa.eu/youreurope/business/dealing-with-customers...

Unless there is something I'm missing on consumer protection legislation. I've seen in the past regional sellers that claimed that their provide a shorter guarantee. They sold their products on a marketplace platform, and once I reported them they changed their claims.

Re: John Deere to pay $99M in right-to-repair settlement

#115

Post by dmos62 »

miki123211 wrote: post #74
dmos62 wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Hot take: it takes mental gymnastics to think that planned obsolescence is not fraud.

I personally like to call it "forced obsolescence." Forced obsolescence is when the consumer always buys the cheapest product that checks their boxes, regardless of build quality. This forces you to either use cheap parts that you know will break, or leave the market entirely. The consumer may bitch at "planned obsolescence", but when push comes to shove and they're looking for what their next is going to be, they on…

In Europe everything has a warranty of 2 years for private individuals and 1 year for businesses: it doesn't work as a useful metric: there's no device that I rely on that I expect to run for less than ~5 years, except maybe toothbrushes. That's great as a "it's illegal to make something attrociously low-quality", but I expect at least 5 years out of every electronic appliance I have, and there's no way to assure that, except private insurance, which is more expensive than rebuying the devices that end up being defected.

So, I buy the cheapest thing that ticks the other boxes. Not because I'm inherently cheap, but because I have no trust in the market. There's no way for me to know if I'd be paying extra for luxury features, brand premium, or reliability. Yes, I try to research things I buy, and avoid red-flags, but there's only so much you can learn that way, and most people don't have neither the experience, nor the know-how, nor the time to research everything properly to high exhaustion.

Re: John Deere to pay $99M in right-to-repair settlement

#116

Post by b112 »

pjjpo wrote: post #112
b112 wrote: post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is where small claims court can have a HUGE impact. Where I live, in small claims: * Lawyers are not allowed * There is no forced discovery. Sue John Deere, and they cannot ask for endless documents * There is no way to assign costs on loss. If you lose, you never pay costs for the person you sued (which makes sense -- no lawyers) * If you don't understand something, typically the judge will act as a mediator an…

Sounds like a fun anecdote and not doubting it at all. So just wondering how that max comes into play > Explain what you found. Where I am, the max resolution is $30k, so you could easily get a refund for the tractor. While I haven't bought a tractor before from some searching and impression they seem much higher. If fair market value is that low, I can see how 1) works but if for 2 it caps out at $30K, it doesn't se…

Tractor? The comment I am replying to was for a lawn mower.

Re: John Deere to pay $99M in right-to-repair settlement

#117

Post by [deleted] »

pdpi wrote: post #111
M95D wrote: post #95

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Fuel is a consumable, and fuel gauge is also a consumable? You have lots of terrible judges if anyone could seriously consider that argument.

Oh the argument would never be phrased that way. Rather, you start from the completely uncontroversial point that a CR2032 battery is a consumable, come up with some reason why you can't use a bare cell like that and need some sort of assembly around it, and incrementally justify adding more functionality into that assembly. Also, remember that you don't need to prove that the design is sensible, only that it isn't d…

[deleted]

Re: John Deere to pay $99M in right-to-repair settlement

#119

Post by evilkorn »

amelius wrote: post #84
datahack wrote: post #65

This is woefully inadequate as a remedy. The dollar amount is minuscule and the remedy time limited. Seems like they just got a license to continue business as usual.

Isn't there some kind of three-strikes approach which judges can use against repeat offenders?

They reserve that approach for drug laws that fill prisons.

Re: John Deere to pay $99M in right-to-repair settlement

#120

Post by maxerickson »

maxerickson wrote: post #102
jojobas wrote: post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Going out of your way to make sure the gauge doesn't work after the battery is replaced surely is.

I wonder if the gauge is just a horrible design that uses the battery to keep some memory alive. Microcontrollers with persistent memory are not expensive, so something like that would just be horrible design, not something you could even try to justify as a cost reduction.

Oh, I suppose it is using the battery to write after shutdown. Bleh.
Post reply on HN