As the article states, HP has even been sued for this, yet continues to do it as it's a core part of their profits to keep people buying THEIR ink. Profit alone for the printer itself isn't worth it, they'd otherwise they'd not even bother making printers anymore, but that reoccurring revenue from ink is some sweet sweet cash. It's like google/fakebook/twits whining about people blocking ads or using encryption they…
Worlds smallest violin?
HP disables customers’ printers if they use ink cartridges from cheaper rivals
441–450 of 461 posts
Re: HP disables customers’ printers if they use ink cartridges from cheaper rivals
#442Earlier quoted context omitted.
I bought a Brother laser printer like the internet told me to, and I even paid extra money to get the one that is easy to connect on wifi, but we can't seem to connect the printer to any macs wirelessly. It only connects to the iphones and the ubuntu machine. It just doesn't show up in macs. Anyone know anything about that?
Make sure it has a fixed IP and doesn't default to using DHCP (not sure this will fix yours, but saw a thread elsewhere where that was the cure)
Re: HP disables customers’ printers if they use ink cartridges from cheaper rivals
#443The CEO and the board must serve prison time for things like this. No measure less than prison for the CEO and all board members is enough to curtail this because it just becomes the cost of doing business. No, you can’t say it wasn’t your decision. If you want to not be held accountable for the work your employees, contractors, and agents do on your behalf, you should have to prove they acted against your express wr…
Re: HP disables customers’ printers if they use ink cartridges from cheaper rivals
#444The CEO and the board must serve prison time for things like this. No measure less than prison for the CEO and all board members is enough to curtail this because it just becomes the cost of doing business. No, you can’t say it wasn’t your decision. If you want to not be held accountable for the work your employees, contractors, and agents do on your behalf, you should have to prove they acted against your express wr…
I don't think prison time is even what's needed here, I think these issues would resolve themselves if corporate fines were continually issued, rather than one-off lawsuits. For instance, a standing ruling that if your printer stops being able to print for no reason other than a contract breach, then the hardware is eligible for a refund. We don't need to put CEOs in prison for making consumer-hostile decisions, we j…
Re: HP disables customers’ printers if they use ink cartridges from cheaper rivals
#445Earlier quoted context omitted.
While I generally agree, there's something more immediate. All of us having this view can refuse to ever buy or even use HP products, and explain to anyone and everyone at every opportunity exactly why this is. Boycotts can be immensely powerful, and strike fear into the hearts of those who would exploit us. Personally, I will never buy an HP product again. Absolute, permanent blacklist. It's simply way too disgustin…
> Boycotts can be immensely powerful, and strike fear into the hearts of those who would exploit us. I cannot find a single example of a successful boycott in my lifetime. Can you?
Little of this reaches mainstream outlets, as embarrassing oneself's somewhat untenable for institutions in speedy declines, partly, from relatedly-shortsighted population-alienators.
Re: HP disables customers’ printers if they use ink cartridges from cheaper rivals
#446This issue is discussed for over 20 years now, it baffles me that there is apparently still no established solution. By the way, Apple forcing users to install apps only via its 30% fee AppStore has provoked far less outrage. Probably because people are not directly aware of the Apple premium, in contrast to the HP premium.
> Probably because people are not directly aware of the Apple premium, It's because it's developers who piss and moan about the 30%, while most consumers get value from having to go through the AppStore, such as 1.) being able to cancel subscriptions quickly and easily and 2.) ensuring that developers aren't abusing permissions to siphon data from the device.
Re: HP disables customers’ printers if they use ink cartridges from cheaper rivals
#447Earlier quoted context omitted.
Not my practice area, and I don't know all the facts. But if they sold printers and later disable those printers, it doesn't strike me as unreasonable to treat that as a fraud or swindle in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1341, or as an unfair or deceptive trade practice under 15 U.S.C. § 45. If this were anything other than tech - if, say, IKEA sold you a bed frame that disintegrated the moment you used a non-IKEA mattress…
HP also talks about dynamic security upfront in their documentation and marketing materials.
Re: HP disables customers’ printers if they use ink cartridges from cheaper rivals
#448Earlier quoted context omitted.
HP also talks about dynamic security upfront in their documentation and marketing materials.
Are non-HP cartridges a vector for hacking? If not then what does that have to do with security?
Re: HP disables customers’ printers if they use ink cartridges from cheaper rivals
#449Earlier quoted context omitted.
Same here. I would never ever buy anything from HP, but now my Samsung printer gets its support from HP. I feel betrayed. And I don't know if it's related, but my Samsung wireless network printer does not print from the network anymore.
My Samsung printer does not support networking. If I want to put it on the network, I need to put it behind a print host. That being said, at least Samsung toner is cheap: https://www.aaatoner.com/blreto4.html I can get 1kg of toner for my printer for $35 before shipping. The cartridges only hold 90 grams. There is even a third party chipless update to disable the chip: https://inkchip.net/laser/ Unfortunately, the i…
Re: HP disables customers’ printers if they use ink cartridges from cheaper rivals
#450Earlier quoted context omitted.
But in America people are overpunished. I often read titles like "he faces up to 100 years in a prison" when in reality it is just a poor Russian guy who didn't murder or hurt anyone, just collected credit card numbers and sold it to other guys. 100 years just for stealing a bit of money? That's draconian laws.
> when in reality it is just a poor Russian guy who didn't murder or hurt anyone, just collected credit card numbers and sold it to other guys. 100 years just for stealing a bit of money? That's draconian laws. So financial crimes aren't serious to you?