WESTERN PRODUCER — Not that many years ago, getting an implement or attachment to work with a tractor or other major brand machine usually just meant putting compatible ends on hydraulic hoses.
However, as technology has advanced, access to and interoperability with the machine’s digital system has become the key consideration — and now stumbling block in some cases.
In order for short-line manufacturers to get the electronics in their attachments and implements to play nicely with the onboard digital systems in a major brand machine, they need to have access to the communication protocol command set, allowing the two systems to work together. Increasingly, they say, they’re being shut out.
Scott Smith, Honey Bee Manufacturing’s components, systems and integration manager, said the company has already felt the effects of limited interoperability access for its headers, even though the ISOBUS standard protocol is in place to facilitate it.
“The protocol is defined in ISOBUS,” he said.
“But the command set is not. So when someone introduces that, when they’re a member of the ISOBUS community, as all OEMS are, they’re supposed to submit their command set to ISOBUS for ratification and inclusion in the published protocol. They refuse to do that. As such, they’re preventing us from participating on those platforms.”
As a result, the short-line brand can’t sell a header to mount on a particular combine if it can’t electronically communicate with it.
“ISOBUS is a voluntary standard, and it has been commonplace in the industry for decades,” said Anthony Rosborough, assistant professor of law and computer science at Dalhousie University.
“There’s nothing to prevent a manufacturer from developing a bespoke interface that does not work with ISOBUS.”
Currently, the interoperability problem is limited to just some machines, but short-line manufacturers are concerned it’s the beginning of a trend. At the moment, the problem exists mainly with headers for combines and swathers.
When Honey Bee builds headers directly for a manufacturer, command set details are given. But when the company markets its own header models not specifically built for an OEM, they’re sometimes shut out.
“We were exposed to the new way things were going to be done regarding controllers and such, and we wouldn’t be privy to what signalling or commands were required to make our headers work on their platforms,” said Smith.
“It depended on them supplying us with a piece of kit. They supplied it (when) we were building the product for them. But later on, products started coming out that needed something from the OEM that they weren’t willing to supply to create interoperability. That basically excluded us from participating on those … combines.
“Because there’s five major brands of platforms we build for, if we lose one or two of them, that’s a big chunk of our market opportunity in 29 countries because it’s the same platform in all the countries.”
Agricultural Manufacturers of Canada Association president Donna Boyd said the problem is growing in significance.
“We’ll continue to innovate along that digital spectrum, and it is imperative that all of our equipment is able to talk to its lead partner,” she said.
“This is something we’ve been working on at AMC over the last number of years with our industry partners.”
So far, however, the matter remains unresolved for a few reasons.
While it is technically possible in many cases for engineers to reverse engineer the command code necessary to link a header up to a combine’s digital system, that is illegal under Canadian copyright law. And in accordance with the new U.S.-Mexico-Canada Agreement a company can now be held both civilly and criminally liable for it.
“Canadian law prevents us from doing that legally,” said Smith.
“That was upheld in a ruling, Nintendo vs. King, a few years ago. They got sued $13 million for their trouble.”
Rosborough said reverse engineering requires a lot of research and development time with no guarantee of success.
“There’s also the legal impediment. Right now, those types of reverse engineering activities, for lack of a better term, are unlawful.”
Boyd said AMC and others have been lobbying on both sides of the border for eventual changes to the trade agreement to overcome that impediment.
The problem isn’t seen to be quite as significant south of the border, but Rosborough said there is now growing sentiment for changes there, too.
“The U.S. has taken a very different angle on it than we have had to here in Canada,” Boyd said.
“In the U.S. there’s a more favourable sort of lens than in Canada. Because 80 per cent of our exports go to the U.S., we want to make sure our manufacturers have the same sort of opportunities the Americans do.
“We need to be able to play a little catch up there and make sure we are in lockstep with our American counterparts.”
Smith agreed: “They already have this exemption in the States, which is why we tried to get it in play during the free trade discussion, but they signed the trade agreement prior to fixing that.”
There is general agreement that the needed changes in Canada start with updating the Canadian Copyright Act, which led to a push by a group that included Honey Bee Manufacturing and the Canada West Foundation to lobby governments.
The result was Bill C-294, which was passed with all-party support in the House of Commons but is currently awaiting passage in the Senate. Any number of things, including a federal election call, could delay or kill it.
“Economic theory would predict this (monopolistic) behaviour (by dominant companies),” said Carlo Dade, director of the Trade and Trade Infrastructure Centre at the Canada West Foundation.
“If you have the ability to return greater value to shareholders by locking down equipment and limiting choice, it’s simply rational (economic) behaviour.”
And it is something that many market segments are experiencing.
“These are trends we’re seeing across the entire tech industry,” said Rosborough.
“That increasingly now includes agricultural equipment.”
If Bill C-294 makes it through the Senate, it still won’t be a complete solution, but it will provide a foundation for the provinces to act further.
“It’s foundational,” said Smith.
“We have provincial agricultural acts that can do more. But provincial law can’t circumvent federal law. So we approached the federal law first to get the foundational changes in place so we can do more at the provincial level. Once it’s done at the copyright level, then the provinces can act.”
Dade said the premiers have been briefed.
“I haven’t received anything in return, an outreach or request for more information. Certainly the provinces are aware of this. On the federal side … the MPs immediately picked up on it.”
Rosborough said Bill C-294 leaves an ambiguity that only the provinces can clarify.
“What do we do about the terms in (USMCA)? That agreement comes up (for review) in 2026. There’s an opportunity for some of those issues to be revisited. In the U.S. there is a big movement afoot to re-evaluate its own anti-circumvention policy.
“I think there’s an opportunity for digital locks policy to be given a rethink in 2026. That could permit a bill like C-294 to be given a bigger and better life. I think this is the place to start, and the failure to do anything will have very negative repercussions on this industry.”
However, pursuing new laws may not be the only solution. The monopoly approach could fall under the purview of the Competition Bureau as well.
“It’s not all about laws,” said Smith.
“A lot of this stuff is anticompetitive behaviour, so the Competition Bureau has the ability to intervene here when a dominant player is acting in an anticompetitive way.”
He said Canadian ag equipment manufacturers won’t be the only ones to benefit from eliminating this anticompetitive behaviour. Farmers will as well.
“Farmers buy mixed fleets. They don’t buy all of one brand. There’s always some mix of equipment, and it’s always expected to work. As more and more technology comes onto the farm, the less brands are interoperable between themselves, the more that’ll be a challenge, and that’s really not helpful to anyone.
“I think the primary driver we’d like to see is some form of mandated interoperability for products sold in Canada. If that’s there, this problem goes away.”
