Smart technology is becoming a bigger part of farming every year. From robotic milkers and GPS-guided sprayers to soil sensors and drones, today’s farms are filled with tech that quietly collects data, often without the farmer fully realizing just how much.
According to Bill Oemichen, professor of practice law and local government law educator at UW-Madison Extension, understanding the difference between the types of data being collected is critical.
“Small data is what comes directly from your farm,” he says. “That’s your yield records, soil samples, herd info and so on. It’s useful — but on its own, it doesn’t show the full picture. Big data is what happens when that small data gets combined with other farms’ data — plus weather records, land use history and more.”
And big data is where the real money is. Tech companies collect and store small data, then work with global tech firms like Amazon Web Services or Google Ventures to aggregate, analyze and monetize it. When Oemichen first learned Amazon was interested in ag data, he was surprised.
“I thought, why would Amazon care? But now it’s obvious. There’s huge value in knowing what’s happening on farms at a national scale,” he says.
Ashley Ellixson, an extension legal specialist at the University of Maryland, draws attention to some of the risks associated with this.
“The issue of farm data has been a contentious point of debate with respect to ownership rights and impacts when access rights are misappropriated,” she explains. “Although no specific laws or precedence exists, the possibility of trade secrets is examined and ramifications for damages are discussed.”
That legal gray area becomes even more complicated when you consider how farm data differs from traditional, tangible assets, she notes.
“Farm data are not a tangible asset, like a bushel of grain,” she says. “Instead, ownership should be considered in terms of rights and responsibilities of the parties with access to the data.”
That value stretches far beyond simple crop recommendations. It influences land prices, marketing strategies, artificial intelligence tools and even investment trends. Hedge funds are now using farm data to evaluate the productivity of farmland and outbid farmers for it.
“They’re putting a number on your land based on what the data says it could produce,” Oemichen explains. “That number may not match how you see your land. But to an investor, it tells them how much they’re willing to pay. And that information is often based on your own data.”
Ownership is One Thing, Control is Another
While many ag tech agreements state farmers own their data, that doesn’t mean they have full control over how it’s used. In practice, signing a user agreement often grants the company broad rights to analyze and share the data, similar to what happens on platforms like Facebook.
“You might technically own your posts, but you still gave the platform permission to use, analyze and sell that data,” Oemichen says. “The same thing is happening in ag.”
Companies and platforms like Bayer’s Climate FieldView, WinField United, Farm Business Network, Syngenta, John Deere, Corteva and Cargill all collect and use U.S. farm data, according to Oemichen. Bayer alone is believed to hold more than half of the world’s ag data, thanks in part to its partnership with Amazon Web Services.
And with scale comes leverage. Despite the immense value farm data can create, farmers typically aren’t being compensated for it.
“You might get better seed recommendations,” Oemichen notes. “But you’re not seeing a check for the value your data is creating in the marketplace.”
The Legal Gap
To be clear, data-driven tools offer undeniable benefits. Farmers are using them to boost efficiency, improve decision-making and solve problems faster. Agronomists and seed reps now show up with drone maps, pest forecasts and application schedules all powered by data.
Still, important questions remain:
- Who controls your data?
- Who profits from it?
- What protections do you actually have?
Surveys show farmers are concerned. Data privacy and transparency are top-of-mind, especially with ag tech consolidation on the rise. Interestingly, according to Oemichen, many farmers say they trust cooperatives more than private companies to handle their data responsibly.
“That’s not surprising,” he adds. “Farmers own the co-op. They can sit on the board, and they know the data isn’t being sold to outside companies.”
Several organizations are already testing farmer-first models. The Farm Credit System has policies against sharing farmers’ data with outsiders. Texas-based Grower Information Services Cooperative and the Ag Data Coalition are exploring similar models.
But there’s a larger problem: the law hasn’t kept up.
“There is no law defining who owns farm data,” Oemichen says. “It all comes down to the fine print in contracts.”
And those contracts? Most farmers don’t read them.
“You download the app, check the box and boom — you just gave them permission to collect and share your data,” Oemichen says. “Even as an attorney, I’ve reviewed thousands of contracts. They’re hard to follow.”
He warns these agreements often allow companies to de-identify data (removing names and specific details) and combine it with other data — something they can then profit from. Once the user clicks “accept,” companies usually don’t need to ask again.
Ellixson points out how courts often struggle when applying existing laws to rapidly advancing technology like farm data.
“History shows the law rarely keeps up with technology, and farm data are no exception,” she says.
She also argues farm data should be considered intellectual property, specifically, trade secrets.
“Broadly speaking, any confidential business information providing an individual or enterprise with a competitive edge may be considered a trade secret,” Ellixson explains.
Can Farmers Take Back Control?
So, what power do farmers really have to push back or negotiate?
“The horse is out of the barn,” Oemichen says bluntly. “Most farms lack the size or legal support to negotiate with ag tech giants. Only the biggest players might get a voice. For smaller and mid-size farms, meaningful change will likely require policy reform.”
Unfortunately, regulation is lagging in the U.S. While Canada and California are beginning to explore protections for farm data, most states have little to no framework in place. Even intellectual property law offers limited support. Raw data isn’t copyrightable and trade secret protection requires special agreements most farmers don’t have the time or legal counsel to pursue.
There are a few bright spots. One is the Ag Data Transparent certification, a voluntary program that signals a company’s commitment to transparent data use. Companies that meet the program’s criteria earn the Ag Data Transparent seal.
“If you’re working with a vendor and they have that seal, that’s a good sign,” Oemichen says. “At least you’ll know what they’re doing with your data.”
Ultimately, he believes farmer co-ops could lead the way in protecting and leveraging farm data. If farmers already trust co-ops, why not build data-sharing systems that serve their members instead of selling access to third parties?
Creating these systems won’t be easy, but it is doable. And with so much at stake, Oemichen says farmers can’t afford to stay passive.
“This issue is growing fast,” he says. “It’s tough to stay ahead of it. But the more you know, the better chance you have to protect yourself and your farm in the digital age.”
His final advice? Read the contracts. Ask questions. And look for the seal.
