\n<\/p>\n
Wednesday, John Deere agreed to give farmers broader access to repair their tractors and farm equipment under an antitrust settlement agreement with the Federal Trade Commission, one of the biggest wins in the long right to repair battle. The settlement is the latest and by far the most important development in several recent lawsuits against John Deere, and is finally an agreement that isn\u2019t full of half measures and doesn\u2019t have massive, obvious loopholes.The FTC settlement is far better than a recent, highly controversial settlement in a separate class action lawsuit against Deere brought by farmers in Illinois, and it\u2019s worth breaking down the differences. Two years ago, I wrote an article called \u201cThe Walls Are Closing in on John Deere\u2019s Tractor Repair Monopoly,\u201d which followed that Illinois case, in which several farmers brought a complex, class action antitrust lawsuit against Deere. The judge in that case, Iain Johnson, wrote several scathing opinions about Deere\u2019s anti-repair practices that indicated that he was seemingly inclined to hit Deere with stiff penalties.\u00a0But after years of litigation, the plaintiffs in that case decided to settle with Deere in April, earning a $99 million payout for farmers who paid for repairs over the last decade, and several right-to-repair protections that did not have much in the way of legal teeth.This $99 million payout was roughly $79 million after legal fees and to be divided among more than 200,000 farmers; this means each farmer will receive roughly $395, or \u201cless than the cost of a single authorized dealer service call for a typical 500-acre farm,\u201d according to an analysis by Willie Cade, a longtime farm right to repair advocate.\u201cBottom line is that farmers are getting $0.79 per acre for the eight years of Deere abuse,\u201d Cade told me. \u201cBad settlement. The settlement is insufficient \u2026 the money is a small fraction of what the class could recover at trial, the claims process depends on labor-hour data only Deere holds, and the repair “fixes” are riddled with loopholes that leave Deere’s monopoly intact.\u201d\u00a0Demand Is Booming for New No Tech, Repairable Tractor\u201cThere is consumer pressure to back away from technology that is unnecessary to perform everyday tasks.\u201dThe Illinois settlement would prohibit farmers covered by it from filing any future repair-related litigation against Deere, and only required Deere to provide parts and repair guides to farmers under poorly defined \u201cfair and reasonable\u201d terms, a loophole that other manufacturers have used to claim that their parts and tools are constantly out of stock or cost astronomic prices.\u00a0\u201cThe \u2018fair and reasonable terms\u2019 standard is not price equality with dealers, nor is it a guaranteed price ceiling,\u201d Cade wrote in his analysis. \u201cDisputes about whether Deere\u2019s pricing meets this standard are subject to Court oversight, but individual farmers may have limited practical ability to challenge pricing that does not obviously cross the line.\u201dThe settlement in the Illinois case was so bad that one of the plaintiffs in the case, Wilson Farms, filed a 53 page formal objection to it two weeks ago, in part because it claims that there are many \u201cunlitigated and uncompensated\u201d cases in which farmers suffered under Deere\u2019s monopoly. Under the settlement, farmers would no longer be able to sue Deere by \u201cterminat(ing) Class members\u2019 ability to collectively challenge Deere\u2019s repair aftermarket monopolization for a generation.\u201d\u201cRather than provide any meaningful benefit to the Class, it appears that the proposed Settlement\u2019s most important effect will be to give Deere its most powerful tool yet in its decades-long effort to block farmers from repairing their own equipment,\u201d the objection says. \u201cExtinguishment of farmers\u2019 rights under the law.\u201dOther farmers called the Illinois settlement \u201cdisingenuous\u201d and \u201cunfair.\u201dThe good news is that the wildly disappointing and seemingly unnecessary selling out of farmers\u2019 rights in the Illinois case that Deere appeared to be losing very badly is greatly mitigated by the FTC\u2019s settlement from this week. The FTC case was brought by Lina Khan under the Biden administration; to its credit, the Trump administration decided to continue litigating.The FTC settlement does not have monetary damages for farmers, but it has far better right to repair protections for John Deere customers moving forward. In the FTC deal, the \u201cfair and reasonable terms\u201d are better defined and are based on the price that John Deere dealers actually pay for repair parts and tools. Deere and its dealers are not allowed to \u201cdiscriminate or retaliate\u201d against farmers who repair their own equipment (manufacturers have been known to brick devices that consumers fix themselves). The FTC settlement also includes access to farmers for \u201cfuture repair resources,\u201d meaning repair tools, guides, software, and parts that Deere creates in the future.\u00a0Deere must also file \u201ccompliance reports\u201d with the FTC, and the FTC will have oversight of the compliance. Crucially, the FTC settlement also does not affect farmers\u2019 private grievances against Deere, meaning it is possible for farmers to sue Deere if the company\u2019s repair practices have affected them.\u00a0The FTC settlement is one that has actual legal teeth and enforcement mechanisms that Deere should at least theoretically have to comply with. Earlier agreements and right to repair \u201cwins\u201d for farmers were often half measures (though it\u2019s worth mentioning that Colorado passed a good agriculture right to repair law in 2023 after years of struggle from farmers and advocates). Deere and various farmers\u2019 public interest groups had previously agreed to right to repair \u201cmemorandums of understanding\u201d in which Deere promised to make repair parts and tools available to farmers. In practice, however, these tools and parts were often not available, were not as good as what dealers and authorized service providers had access to, or were unreasonably expensive. These memorandums of understanding also had few or no enforcement mechanisms.\u00a0Cade told 404 Media in an email that this settlement order \u201cgives farmers real hope.\u201d\u00a0Nathan Proctor, senior right to repair campaign director for consumer rights group U.S. PIRG, said in a statement that the FTC settlement \u201cis much better than the deal secured in (the Illinois) class action lawsuit.\u201d\u201cDeere has now agreed to make available all materials needed to conduct repairs, including some which it has previously withheld,\u201d Proctor said. \u201cI want to thank the FTC for its work on this case. Our goal from the start of our campaign was to ensure that farmers and independent mechanics get everything they need to fix equipment. We will continue to monitor the situation and advocate to ensure that goal is a reality.\u201d\u00a0In other words, farmers finally have an actual, major win in the right to repair fight that goes far beyond earlier piecemeal and moral victories. <\/p>\n