SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
Submitted via IRC for Bytram.
Following a story that we reported a few days ago which covered how the latest software update issued by HP for its printers prevented them from working with other cartridges, HP have responded and promise another update to re-enable other ink cartridges. But HP is still defending its practice of preventing the use of non-HP ink and is making no promises about refraining from future software updates that force customers to use only official ink cartridges.
"We updated a cartridge authentication procedure in select models of HP office inkjet printers to ensure the best consumer experience and protect them from counterfeit and third-party ink cartridges that do not contain an original HP security chip and that infringe on our IP," the company said.
The recent firmware update for HP OfficeJet, OfficeJet Pro, and OfficeJet Pro X printers "included a dynamic security feature that prevented some untested third-party cartridges that use cloned security chips from working, even if they had previously functioned," HP said.
For customers who don't wish to be protected from the ability to buy less expensive ink cartridges, HP said it "will issue an optional firmware update that will remove the dynamic security feature. We expect the update to be ready within two weeks and will provide details here."
While I'm sure that we recognise that HP cannot guarantee the operation of any printer not using their own cartridges, how often are similar techniques used to lock-out fair competition? What are your experiences and views?.
(Score: 3, Informative) by bzipitidoo on Thursday September 29 2016, @08:50PM
I was thinking of Keurig's proprietary coffee packs as an example outside of printing. Kirby tries it with their vacuum cleaners, insisting that only genuine Kirby branded shampoo can be used in their shampooing attachment. That one is laughably false, of course. Big Pharma tries to scare the US public away from Canadian pharmacies with vague fearmongering that medicine produced outside the US might not be up to the quality control standards of American products. As if they don't peddle lots of drugs of questionable benefit, so that a pharmacy or drug producer that switched real drugs for sugar pills might in those cases actually be doing the patients a favor. Car parts is another area with strong advertising for Genuine GM/Ford/Toyota Parts, and there's some justification for it, as there are shady car parts providers who will pull crap like cleaning up a worn out used part but not going to the trouble to rebuild it well, so it looks shiny but won't work for long. Then there's the RIAA's schemes to tie the playability of music files to being able to contact a licensing server, only to suffer embarrassment when their servers permanently go down causing irate customers to no longer be able to play their entire music collections. The MPAA and their unskippable commercials and region encoding was another bad one. We all know about Microsoft, as well as Apple, IBM, Oracle, and more. But litter boxes? Wow.
The public successfully bucked Keurig's attempt to shackle their customers. The RIAA also had to back off. However, I would like to see a more coordinated effort, and the establishment of "no locks" and open access as a custom that no manufacturer will dare violate. In the early days of Internet commerce, it became a custom not to bill customers for merchandise until it had actually shipped. Be good to have the same thing happen with lock in schemes.