‘Battling Big Ag: Safeguarding farmers from data exploitation’
Modern farming relies heavily on advanced machinery equipped with sensors and tracking devices, which improve efficiency but also raise significant antitrust concerns. For example, in cases involving Deere, farmers were unable to repair their equipment independently or choose non-Deere repair services due to software restrictions, resulting in expensive repairs by authorized mechanics.
This article offers insights into recognizing and addressing potential concerns related to monopolistic practices within the agricultural sector. It provides guidance on distinguishing between practices that align with regulatory standards and those that may raise antitrust issues. Understanding these distinctions can help you navigate your rights and available options should you encounter similar situations.
Tying and bundling in farm machinery
A potential antitrust issue is tying and bundling, where manufacturers force farmers to buy machines with unnecessary integrated sensors. This limits competition and inflates costs. For example, a farmer might want a basic combine and separate yield monitors but is forced to buy a more expensive bundled product included in the machine. Requiring farmers to purchase data services bundled with other products could be illegal if it limits competition or forces farmers to pay for unnecessary services.
A recent example is Deere & Co.’s attempt to dismiss lawsuits alleging they unlawfully restricted maintenance and repair services, which was denied by a federal court. This decision allows “right to repair” claims from over 17 farmers to proceed (AgricultureDive, 2023). The lawsuits claim Deere monopolized the repair-service market, as Deere’s control over access to repair information and proprietary software limited the farmers’ ability to repair their machinery independently or choose alternative service providers, potentially leading to higher costs and operational disruptions. (The University of Chicago, 2024).
Text continues below picture
Data ownership and use
Farmers often don’t know how their data is used, allowing large corporations to exploit it for profit. For instance, if a company learns from farmers’ data that a region has a high crop yield, it might manipulate market prices downward. This can harm farmers who unknowingly consent to data collection without fully understanding its implications.
Even if farmers agree to share their data, large companies with a lot of market power must be careful. Using this data to manipulate prices or harm competitors could still be seen as unfair. EU laws protect fair competition, so companies in strong positions need to use farmers’ data responsibly to avoid causing harm. The European Commission is actively engaging farmers in efforts to fight unfair practices, emphasizing the importance of farmers providing relevant information if they feel affected. (EU, 2024).
Why understanding antitrust laws is crucial for farmers
It’s crucial for farmers to understand what is illegal in antitrust law because of the unique dynamics of the agricultural market. Unlike many industries, farming is characterized by a large number of producers who are dependent on a small number of suppliers and purchasers. This imbalance of power can easily lead to anti-competitive practices that harm farmers. While high levels of competition helps keep prices low, significant antitrust risks arise when competition in the rest of the sector is limited and concentrated among a few companies.
While most companies are not allowed to fix prices, farmers have some exceptions. They can sometimes set prices together, especially to fund sustainable practices. These collaborations must follow specific rules to ensure they don’t harm competition. If farmers are unsure if their price-fixing is legal, they should contact their national competition authority. For instance, in the Netherlands, the ACM’s Leidraad landbouw samenwerkingen (ACM, 2024) provides guidelines for these collaborations. Similarly, farmers can collaborate on fair data-sharing practices, which can give them more negotiation power and help them make better decisions.
By addressing these antitrust issues, regulators can help maintain a fair and competitive agricultural sector, ensuring that technological advancements benefit rather than exploit farmers. While it is often challenging for farmers to substantiate such practices, regulatory watchdogs must assume significant responsibility to ensure farmers are protected from potential harm.
Disclaimer: This article does not constitute legal advice and should not be interpreted as such. If you have concerns regarding antitrust issues or unfair practices in the agricultural sector, please consult competition authorities or legal professionals to explore your options and understand the relevant laws and regulations.
Join 17,000+ subscribers
Subscribe to our newsletter to stay updated about all the need-to-know content in the agricultural sector, two times a week.
