When Patents Keep You from Getting an Ice Cream: The Scandal of McDonald's Ice-Cream Machines and Why IP Law Needs a Radical Reform

The Cost of “Broken” Ice Cream Machines

We've all faced it: that familiar craving for a McFlurry, only to be met with the infamous "Our machine's broken." This isn’t a one-off inconvenience. With 15% of McDonald’s ice

cream machines in the U.S. out of commission at any given time—and a staggering 32% in places like New York—this persistent issue goes deeper than machine flaws. It's a consequence of restrictive intellectual property (IP) laws that inhibit independent repairs.

IP law, initially designed to protect and encourage innovation, now often supports monopolies that prevent local businesses from accessing, repairing, and maintaining their equipment. In the case of McDonald's ice cream machines, strict IP rights granted to the Taylor Company—the machine’s manufacturer—have contributed to a near-exclusive repair monopoly. With recent local initiatives and growing government support for the Right to Repair movement, however, this story is starting to change.

When IP Law Keeps Ice Cream off the Menu

The ice cream machine saga centers on Taylor’s control over the diagnostics and repair of their machines. Franchisees and independent repair shops have long been blocked by "technological protection measures" (TPMs) that make bypassing Taylor’s exclusive repair rights illegal. These TPMs are enforced under the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA), originally meant to prevent digital piracy, but now a barrier to local innovation and service.

Taylor machines are notorious for their complex, proprietary error codes and require specialized tools—tools that Taylor holds. By enforcing these TPMs, Taylor effectively locks franchisees into a cycle of dependence, requiring expensive service calls for repairs they might otherwise handle themselves. This raises costs, increases downtime, and limits consumer access to ice cream.

The "Right to Repair"

Recent advocacy efforts led to a significant but partial victory for the Right to Repair movement. In October 2024, the U.S. Copyright Office granted an exemption to the DMCA, allowing franchisees to bypass software locks on their equipment legally. This change, while promising, doesn’t allow franchisees to access or distribute the tools and diagnostics essential for these repairs.

In response to this systemic issue, local governments and institutions are introducing reforms that push for greater transparency and repair rights. For instance:

- New York’s Right to Repair Law: This legislation, one of the first comprehensive Right to Repair laws in the country, requires original equipment manufacturers (OEMs) to make parts and tools available to independent repair shops and the public. Inspired by the challenges faced by franchise owners, New York's legislature aims to reduce monopolistic repair barriers, especially in food and agricultural equipment.

- California’s Consumer Protection Division: The California State Assembly recently introduced a set of IP reforms intended to support small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) and local franchises in overcoming restrictive repair practices. This includes IP-backed financial incentives to businesses that offer open access to repair manuals and diagnostics, fostering a market that supports faster, less restrictive repairs.

- The U.S. FTC’s Anti-Repair Monopoly Actions: The Federal Trade Commission (FTC) has increased its support for Right to Repair policies, citing concerns over monopolistic practices. The FTC is currently investigating companies that block independent repairs under Section 5 of the FTC Act, which prohibits “unfair or deceptive acts or practices.” With the recent ruling, the FTC is examining IP reform to encourage business flexibility, speed up local adoption, and remove barriers to essential services.

What the experts think

IP experts from institutions like the Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) argue that copyright protections, as they stand, block the commercialization of valuable local services and reduce community-based economic activity. Attorney Kyle Wiens, CEO of iFixit, emphasizes, “The unintended consequences of the DMCA and other IP protections have shut small businesses out of vital repair capabilities. Allowing franchisees and small businesses to bypass these restrictions would unlock jobs and reduce dependency on monopolistic service structures.”

The Public Interest Research Group (PIRG), a national consumer advocacy organization, also highlights the economic benefits of Right to Repair for local economies. PIRG’s director, Nathan Proctor, explains, “Allowing individuals to repair their own equipment not only reduces costs but opens up the economy for local entrepreneurs, creating more opportunities for practical innovations that meet community needs.” According to PIRG’s research, expanding Right to Repair across industries could inject nearly $40 billion annually into the U.S. economy by reducing waste, increasing business flexibility, and keeping money within local communities.

"IP Should Serve Commercialization and Encourage Rapid Adoption"

A Call for IP Reform

To truly serve businesses, IP law must balance protection with practical accessibility, ensuring both the inventor and entrepreneurs benefit. Protection is vital, but successful adoption is what transforms ideas into innovations. IP law should encourage collaboration between inventors and entrepreneurs, ensuring inventions become meaningful products that benefit society.

With local governments supporting broader IP reforms, inventors are increasingly incentivized to partner with business leaders to deliver products that meet market needs. In a real-world example, a McDonald's franchisee with a broken ice cream machine could work with an independent technician to restore service faster and at a lower cost. This shift isn’t about damaging inventor rights; it’s about fostering a dynamic IP environment that values commercialization as much as protection.

Why Local Government and IP Reforms Matter to Us All

These recent initiatives in New York, California, and beyond show that local governments are beginning to recognize the importance of repair and IP reform. With the Right to Repair, local businesses stand to gain, and consumers enjoy better access to goods and services. However, without significant federal reform, the broader issue remains: we still need legislation that truly addresses repair monopolies.

The Freedom to Repair Act, recently proposed in Congress, would address many of these issues by mandating that equipment manufacturers provide independent businesses access to necessary diagnostics and tools for repairs. The Canadian government’s similar efforts, particularly with Bill C-244, would ensure Canadian businesses are also covered. These forward-looking reforms promise to reshape the U.S. repair landscape, allowing local businesses and consumers alike to reclaim the right to repair.

"An IP System should Drive Value, Not Just Protection"

Each time you hear, “The machine is broken,” it’s a reminder of the barriers that current IP laws can create. With reforms, however, IP can become a powerful tool that fosters innovation and commercialization—one that aligns the interests of inventors and local entrepreneurs.

By creating an IP system that values fast adoption, we enable consumers to access better products, small businesses to grow, and innovators to create meaningful solutions. With sustained advocacy and policy reform, we can build a future where IP law protects inventors while also paving the way for the products we love to reach everyone—without the dreaded “machine broken” sign.