Your argument is somewhat flawed in a few spots there, AftrmktSales, but I do appreciate the discussion and your view. please allow me to address what I see as the inconsistencies in your viewpoints.
1.) No end user should have to pay for the research and development of extra bells and whistles that does not benefit the end user, and only benefits the dealer with 'lock-in'.
2.) The forklift manufacturer buys from their suppliers and does not do the research and development of the controls systems that are the causes of this "lock-in". However the dealer does respond to government regulations, and this response is where this 'lock-in' is generated, as it is a response to the regulation that says only trained and authorized people may work on and adjust the controls, and that the controls must be 'tamper proof' to prevent those not properly authorized to work on those controls from accessing the controls and adjustments. The law does NOT require the manufacturer to control who the employer is, of the people who will access the controls.
3.) The profit margin that a dealer gets for his goods and services are that dealers choices, based upon market forces and choices made by that dealer, and in no manner are the 'fault' or responsibility of the end user, and the same is true of the expenses the dealers decides is needed to sell their machine.
4.) Customers are not property of the dealer who sold the equipment. Competition is a good thing for the end user/consumer and to work to defeat competition is self defeating in the long run (you may win every race you run if no one else is running, but you will never have a championship). Customers will vote with their wallet and feet in the long term.
5.) While dealers find they have no choice but to train their techs on the particulars of the machines they warranty, in all but very rare cases, the techs have invested thousands of their own money in tools and years of industrial education prior to ever being considered as a possible hire in a forklift dealership. I do not think this web site's technical section forum board would exist if your assumption about tech training was true, that it was the dealers who provided all the training to the techs.
Techs find their training where they can get trained.
6.) While I don't doubt there are people who would like to be able to, as you claim " who has not taken a single risk", this is insulting to those techs who recognize their 10 to 20 thousand dollars* in tools is an investment in the distribution processes of the dealer they work for.
* a techs tool investment often is more than their investment in anything other than their home, should they be so fortunate to be able to own a home after purchasing the tools they need to do their job without having to add a few thousand dollars in computers, cables, and software licenses.
Again, thanks for your input into this discussion.

Forklift Dealers make in the low single digits % for profit on the sales of a forklift. By the time a dealer pays for all of the sales process including the salesman paycheck, he probably losses money to sell a new forklift.

It is parts and service that turns the lights on and pays for everyones salary in a dealership. So, you want to pass a law that says after the manufactuer has invested $miilions into R&D and Training and distribution etc... to just just hand over all of their potential profit to a guy who has not taken a single risk in the whole development and distribution process? That same dealer is who probably trained you to be a good technician, and now you want him to just hand over the keys to operation.

I got an idea.. Go build your own forklift, market it and sell it yourself. Then come back and tell me how "unfair" it is that you have to give all your potential profit to someone else.

i remember in 1996 when OBD 2 came into effect. We tossed thousands of dollars of hand scanners out and bought one that fit all cars. Now anyone can purchase a scanner at Wal-mart and access codes for their car. Not all the codes, just basic ones. But lift trucks are no where near as popular as cars. Lift manufacturers cannot afford to give their software out. Some makers wont even sell you a manual!
Onboard access to codes and learn features should be made manditory with the right to purchase manuals as well.
I work on 3 wheel Daewoo's that give access codes on the dash. But when replacing some items, you need the software to learn the new steer pot position. If you dont set it with the laptop, the drive motors will go full current on turns, this causes blown power amps or logic modules. I'm just luckey that a disgruntled tech gave me the software do these adjustments because it would cost an arm and a leg to call them each time! Some makers do allow learn without using software. I agree that we should be allowed better access!

monte_j e-mail me we can talk further about your issue.

I know that TVH (used to be SMH) in the USA offers a course to learn the impco spectrum system.
I see it being addressed by people voting with their wallets, with the resale of units, where a unit a year older sells for more money because it doesn't have the "lock in" to the brands dealer.

What his concern is that Hyster, Yale, Cat and others have programs that only the dealer can get into via Laptop. You can not get these programs period. It not only affects the little guys, but the customers who no longer want that dealer doing the maintenance have no choice but to use them. I have this issue now where we took over a Yale account and sometimes have to call them in to hookup the laptop to trouble shoot the lift. It needs to be addressed.

Some companies may train repairmen but would your company train a competitor ?

One issue you will face is that the majority of the controls placed on forklifts now is due to emissions regulations that have been put onto lift trucks. Being in California this will be hard for you to overcome. Honestly I'd recommend your company looking into training from impco and other control companies or at joining a factory dealership.

The best chance of success for a powered industrial truck right to repair law would be to team up with those trying to enact such legislation for motor vehicles and to broaden the proposed legislation to include powered industrial trucks, construction equipment, farm equipment, etc.

HR2694 is a bill that was introduced into the House of Representatives in 2007. It has not been enacted by Congress. Public efforts are still being made to enact a right to repair law for motor vehicles at the federal level and at some state levels.

One major organization behind this movement is the Automotive Aftermarket Industry Association (AAIA) and its Right to Repair campaign.

Google: righttorepair.org/index.htm

To view a copy of HR 2694, Google: righttorepair.org/HR2694.pdf

For information on state activity, Google: careauto.org

Our fleet maintenance department have training classes that are conducted on site, by the specific lift truck manufacturer. Recently they just went through a week long class and they received training manuals and repair references, so I know the information is out there, you, as a company, need to get with the specific companies and get these training classes set up.

I completely agree the fact that the dealers (whom I worked for for over 10 years) think they can cut out the smaller companies by over engineering their product is crazy, I often here coplaints from one dealer to the next that they cannot get info to work on other manufacturers trucks but they perpetuate the problem by not selling repair manuals or offering info over the phone. I think it is an exxelent idea and would like to know how you do so I can do the same herer in illinois