Right‑to‑Repair Momentum Continues With John Deere Settlement

The “right‑to‑repair movement” continues to gain momentum and appears to have reached another important milestone last month when Deere & Company (John Deere) agreed to pay $99 million to settle class action claims that it unfairly restricted farmers’ ability to repair their own equipment in violation of federal antitrust law and state law. If approved, the settlement would resolve consolidated right‑to‑repair litigation pending in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois.

Although John Deere admitted no wrongdoing, the settlement requires it to make certain digital tools for equipment maintenance, diagnosis, and repair available to farmers and independent repair providers for at least 10 years. The $99 million will be used in part to refund eligible customers who paid John Deere’s authorized dealers for repairs dating back to 2018. Mot. for Prelim. Approval of Settlement and Settlement, In re: Deere & Co. Repair Servs. Antitrust Litig, No. 3:22-cv-50188 (N.D. Ill. Apr. 6, 2026), ECF Nos. 333-1, 333-3.

For farmers, the settlement addresses a long‑standing concern—software “locks” could disable essential equipment during critical planting or harvesting periods, leaving owners dependent on scarce dealer technicians. While the settlement does not change John Deere’s intellectual property ownership, it does expand practical access to some digital tools needed to diagnose and repair equipment farmers already own.

Notably, even if approved, the settlement does not end all legal proceedings involving John Deere’s repair practices. A separate lawsuit filed by the Federal Trade Commission, along with the attorneys general of Illinois and Minnesota, remains pending. FTC v. Deere & Co., No. 3:25-cv-50017 (N.D. Ill. filed Jan. 15, 2025).

The agreement comes amid growing legislative and regulatory pressure on manufacturers across industries—from agricultural equipment to consumer electronics—to loosen repair restrictions. For example, California and Minnesota recently enacted laws that address rights to repair certain electronic products. Although many states have not yet adopted comprehensive right‑to‑repair laws, the John Deere settlement appears to reflect a broader national trend toward increased repair access.

So what should interested parties do? For one, manufacturers that rely on software‑based restrictions to control repairs should expect continued scrutiny from courts, lawmakers, and customers—even in industries where formal right‑to‑repair legislation has not yet been enacted. Before more laws are enacted, they may consider implementing clear guidelines and policies that allow for some repair options but also protect their valuable trade secrets and intellectual property. Meanwhile, customers should ask about repair options prior to the sale, and both customers and service providers should learn about their rights concerning post-sale repairs.

For more information about how right‑to‑repair developments may affect your business, please contact Laura Brenner or any member of Reinhart’s Commercial and Competition Law Team.

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.