FTC forces John Deere to share repair tools 53%

By Séamus Bellamy0%

7/10/2026, 1:09:00 PM

BS Summary: This article contains 27 faulty reasoning types, including Biased Writer Voice, Framing Effect, and Appeal to Emotion, with Negativity Bias as the most egregious example at 42% saturation with 244 hits. Analysis detected 1,651 faulty-reasoning hits from 581 analyzed words, generating a BS Score of 52.1% and a BS Rank of 53% (9,699 of 20,471 articles). This article is worse (more manipulative) than 52.60% of the article peer group.

John Deere (promotional image) 
For a long while now, farmers using John Deere tractors to plow their fields have been getting plowed by John Deere. 
The storied heavy equipment company decided that selling farmers their hardware to help them in their hard work wasn't making them quite enough. 
Modern tractors live and die on the software that controls their many systems, just like your car or home computer. 
And, like so much software we use daily, the programs that make a tractor go BUUURRRRR don't belong to its owner: it's licensed by John Deere for the operator to use. 
In short, Johnny D decided to make repairing their hardware anywhere but an authorized John Deere dealer as difficult as possible. 
It also controlled how customers used its tools, copyrighted its software so only authorized parties (folks who work for the company, or pay for the privilege) could tinker with it, and cornered the market on repair and maintenance. 
Why, that almost sounds like a monopoly… because it was. 
But that's a-gonna change, thanks to a decision made by the FTC and a number of States , earlier this week. 
For the next 10 years, Deere must give farmers and independent repair shops the same repair resources its dealers get. 
The deal resolves a lawsuit accusing Deere of blocking repairs by farmers and independent shops. 
FTC Bureau of Competition Director Daniel Guarnera said: 
"Today's settlement enables farmers to do what they've done for generations  fix their own tractors and other farm equipment  without having to pay an authorized John Deere dealer to do it for them." 
He added that the settlement will lower costs for farmers, and that the FTC will keep fighting repair restrictions. 
So, for the next decade farmers and the technicians they choose will have the right to clear fault codes, restore a tractor out of limp mode, install new hardware, and update the software that keeps it humming along. 
And this is crazy: John Deere hardware owners can read the repair and maintenance manuals, once the sole territory of the company's anointed wrench monkeys. 
John Deere settles right-to-repair lawsuit for $99 million 
John Deere must face right-to-repair lawsuit, rules court 
FTC finally investigates John Deere's creepy repair restriction scheme 
Meta has patented a wearable that listens to you all day and guesses how you feel. 
As 404 Media reports, the device would continuously record audio and surroundings, then use... 
READ THE REST 
According to IP over Avian Carriers, the internet's standards body once published a straight-faced proposal "to carry Internet Protocol (IP) traffic by birds such as homing pigeons." 
RFC 1149, written... 
READ THE REST 
Oh, Lordy, my wallet: I'm not one to invest in, or generally write about, crowdfunded hardware. 
I've been burned one too many times. 
But a decidedly old-school Personal Digital Assistant... 
READ THE REST 
Disclosure: Boing Boing earns a commission on purchases made through links in this post. 
TL;DR: Work on your self-growth, boost your professional skills, and become a trivia night menace... 
READ THE REST 
Disclosure: Boing Boing earns a commission on purchases made through links in this post. 
TL;DR: New Costco Gold Star Members who enroll in auto-renewal can receive a $50 Digital Costco Shop... 
READ THE REST 
Disclosure: Boing Boing earns a commission on purchases made through links in this post. 
TL;DR: 1min.AI bundles GPT-4o, Claude, Gemini, and a pile of other AI tools into one lifetime subscription... 
READ THE REST 
Article reasoning-pattern comparisonThis article: 1.7%Séamus Bellamy: 0.4%Boing Boing: 0.4%Confirmation Bias1.7%This article: 0.0%Séamus Bellamy: 0.0%Boing Boing: 0.0%Anchoring Bias0.0%This article: 8.8%Séamus Bellamy: 2.5%Boing Boing: 2.5%Availability Heuristic8.8%This article: 8.1%Séamus Bellamy: 2.0%Boing Boing: 2.0%Representativeness Heuristic8.1%This article: 0.0%Séamus Bellamy: 0.0%Boing Boing: 0.0%Hindsight Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Séamus Bellamy: 0.0%Boing Boing: 0.0%Overconfidence Bias0.0%This article: 23.9%Séamus Bellamy: 10.6%Boing Boing: 10.6%Framing Effect23.9%This article: 2.9%Séamus Bellamy: 0.7%Boing Boing: 0.7%Loss Aversion2.9%This article: 1.2%Séamus Bellamy: 0.3%Boing Boing: 0.3%Status Quo Bias1.2%This article: 1.2%Séamus Bellamy: 0.3%Boing Boing: 0.3%Sunk Cost Effect1.2%This article: 16.0%Séamus Bellamy: 5.7%Boing Boing: 5.7%Optimism Bias16.0%This article: 8.3%Séamus Bellamy: 2.1%Boing Boing: 2.1%Pessimism Bias8.3%This article: 42.0%Séamus Bellamy: 17.7%Boing Boing: 17.7%Negativity Bias42.0%This article: 4.0%Séamus Bellamy: 1.0%Boing Boing: 1.0%Self-Serving Bias4.0%This article: 7.6%Séamus Bellamy: 3.8%Boing Boing: 3.8%Fundamental Attribution Error7.6%This article: 0.0%Séamus Bellamy: 0.0%Boing Boing: 0.0%Actor-Observer Bias0.0%This article: 6.0%Séamus Bellamy: 1.5%Boing Boing: 1.5%In-Group Bias6.0%This article: 0.0%Séamus Bellamy: 0.0%Boing Boing: 0.0%Out-Group Homogeneity Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Séamus Bellamy: 0.0%Boing Boing: 0.0%Halo Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Séamus Bellamy: 0.0%Boing Boing: 0.0%Horn Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Séamus Bellamy: 0.0%Boing Boing: 0.0%Dunning-Kruger Effect0.0%This article: 5.2%Séamus Bellamy: 1.3%Boing Boing: 1.3%Recency Bias5.2%This article: 0.0%Séamus Bellamy: 0.0%Boing Boing: 0.0%Primacy Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Séamus Bellamy: 0.0%Boing Boing: 0.0%Blind-Spot Bias0.0%This article: 4.3%Séamus Bellamy: 2.2%Boing Boing: 2.2%Ad Hominem4.3%This article: 0.0%Séamus Bellamy: 0.0%Boing Boing: 0.0%Straw Man0.0%This article: 8.3%Séamus Bellamy: 2.1%Boing Boing: 2.1%Appeal to Authority8.3%This article: 0.0%Séamus Bellamy: 0.0%Boing Boing: 0.0%False Dilemma0.0%This article: 0.0%Séamus Bellamy: 0.0%Boing Boing: 0.0%Slippery Slope0.0%This article: 0.0%Séamus Bellamy: 0.0%Boing Boing: 0.0%Circular Reasoning0.0%This article: 10.2%Séamus Bellamy: 4.3%Boing Boing: 4.3%Hasty Generalization10.2%This article: 0.0%Séamus Bellamy: 0.0%Boing Boing: 0.0%Red Herring0.0%This article: 0.0%Séamus Bellamy: 0.0%Boing Boing: 0.0%Bandwagon0.0%This article: 23.4%Séamus Bellamy: 9.9%Boing Boing: 9.9%Appeal to Emotion23.4%This article: 1.7%Séamus Bellamy: 0.4%Boing Boing: 0.4%Begging the Question1.7%This article: 3.6%Séamus Bellamy: 0.9%Boing Boing: 0.9%Post Hoc (False Cause)3.6%This article: 0.0%Séamus Bellamy: 0.0%Boing Boing: 0.0%Tu Quoque0.0%This article: 0.0%Séamus Bellamy: 0.0%Boing Boing: 0.0%Burden of Proof0.0%This article: 0.0%Séamus Bellamy: 0.0%Boing Boing: 0.0%Appeal to Nature0.0%This article: 0.0%Séamus Bellamy: 0.0%Boing Boing: 0.0%Composition/Division0.0%This article: 9.8%Séamus Bellamy: 2.5%Boing Boing: 2.5%Anecdotal9.8%This article: 0.0%Séamus Bellamy: 0.0%Boing Boing: 0.0%No True Scotsman0.0%This article: 8.1%Séamus Bellamy: 2.0%Boing Boing: 2.0%Ambiguity (Equivocation)8.1%This article: 0.0%Séamus Bellamy: 0.0%Boing Boing: 0.0%Gambler’s Fallacy0.0%This article: 6.5%Séamus Bellamy: 1.6%Boing Boing: 1.6%Middle Ground6.5%This article: 0.0%Séamus Bellamy: 0.0%Boing Boing: 0.0%Personal Incredulity0.0%This article: 0.0%Séamus Bellamy: 0.0%Boing Boing: 0.0%Special Pleading0.0%This article: 0.0%Séamus Bellamy: 0.0%Boing Boing: 0.0%Genetic Fallacy0.0%This article: 5.5%Séamus Bellamy: 1.4%Boing Boing: 1.4%Unattributed Quote5.5%This article: 6.0%Séamus Bellamy: 1.5%Boing Boing: 1.5%Quote-first Misdirection6.0%This article: 41.1%Séamus Bellamy: 30.2%Boing Boing: 30.2%Biased Writer Voice41.1%This article: 0.0%Séamus Bellamy: 0.0%Boing Boing: 0.0%Indoctrination0.0%This article: 0.0%Séamus Bellamy: 5.4%Boing Boing: 5.4%Politically Left Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Séamus Bellamy: 0.0%Boing Boing: 0.0%Politically Right Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 18.8%Séamus Bellamy: 12.5%Boing Boing: 12.5%Attempt to Sell a Product or S…18.8%

581 words analyzed.

Speakers

6speakers33%attributed speech392writer words
Voice mapSelect a segment to jump to its words
FTC • 8 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 4 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 21 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 23 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 20 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 31 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 21 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 38 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 10 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 21 words • 0.0% coverageFTC • 20 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 15 words • 100.0% coverageDaniel Guarnera • 8 words • 0.0% coverageDaniel Guarnera • 35 words • 100.0% coverageDaniel Guarnera • 19 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 38 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 25 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 8 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 8 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 9 words • 100.0% coverageMeta • 16 words • 0.0% coverage404 Media • 14 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 3 words • 100.0% coverageIP over Avian Carriers • 27 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 3 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 3 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 16 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 7 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 7 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 3 words • 100.0% coverageBoing Boing • 14 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 15 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 3 words • 100.0% coverageBoing Boing • 14 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 17 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 3 words • 100.0% coverageBoing Boing • 14 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 17 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 3 words • 100.0% coverage
100%flagged-word coverage
27 attributed words14% of attributed speech95% writer coverage
0%32.5%65.0%Biased Writer Voice-61.0 ptsWriter: 61.0%IP over Avian Carriers: 0.0%0.0%Attempt to Sell a Product -17.1 ptsWriter: 17.1%IP over Avian Carriers: 0.0%0.0%Unattributed Quote-4.6 ptsWriter: 4.6%IP over Avian Carriers: 0.0%0.0%

Attribution is sentence-level. Pattern percentages are calculated only from words assigned to that voice.

Loading…
Loading…
Loading…
Loading…

Analysis

Hover over highlighted words in the article to view the associated bias or fallacy analysis.