Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

HP disables customers’ printers if they use ink cartridges from cheaper rivals

telegraph.co.uk

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 461 posts

Re: HP disables customers’ printers if they use ink cartridges from cheaper rivals

#61

Post by mcny »

gameman144 wrote: post #51
mcny wrote: post #12

The 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…

I used to think this as well but then I learned of something called a principal-agent problem. I am talking in general, so while fines might work in this exact case, they won’t work in general. The CEO and board supervising the crimes might be long gone and no longer a part of the corporation by the time the law catches up with them and the owners / shareholders are left holding the bag.

I understand what I am advocating might seem against existing case law about LLC and as I’ve said before I am not a lawyer so it might not be something straightforward to codify but I know it is possible if we have the will and we make it a priority.

I would hope we should have the owners of our economy, the 0.0001% of the population on our side on this matter because upper management is robbing them or they will if we institute reasonably high enough fines instead of prison time.

Re: HP disables customers’ printers if they use ink cartridges from cheaper rivals

#62

Post by mrighele »

avewa wrote: post #27
rvense wrote: post #20

Imagine if IKEA sent someone to your house to smash your plates if you used cutlery they didn't like. The CEO and board who are supervising this ought to be barred from ever running a company again.

A more apt analogy would be that you entered a contract in which IKEA rented you a house at a great discount and in exchange you can only furnish the house with IKEA furniture and then they caught you buying stuff somewhere else and kicked you out. The "smash your plates" part is not adequate because the 3rd party ink cartridges are not being destroyed. If you promise to keep buying IKEA furniture they'll let you ret…

It's not an apt comparison at all because renting a house and buy an appliance are two completely different things. In particular when you buy a printer you don't sign any contract so HP cannot say "you accepted our terms when you bought it". No I didn't.

Re: HP disables customers’ printers if they use ink cartridges from cheaper rivals

#63

Post by elbigbad »

mcny wrote: post #12

The 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 like the sentiment a lot but curious what law this is against that has prison time as a consequence? I can’t think of any, but if there are none, we should pass laws that allow this to put these people on notice and then aggressively prosecute.

Re: HP disables customers’ printers if they use ink cartridges from cheaper rivals

#64

Post by sgc »

wongarsu wrote: post #58
DiabloD3 wrote: post #35

Did you know Brother makes really good printers that are inexpensive and live a long, happy, life? And their drivers aren't user hostile? This is one of those really good "vote with your wallets" situations.

Or buy a laser printer. They cost a bit more upfront, but a single toner cartridge lasts ages (and won't dry out or get used up in cleaning cycles), the printers are generally much more robust and longer lasting, and because laser printing isn't as patent-encumbered there's more actual competition and less outright user-hostile behavior.

I use a Brother laser with non-oem cartridge. That is what Brother is known for.

Re: HP disables customers’ printers if they use ink cartridges from cheaper rivals

#65

Post by WirelessGigabit »

lostlogin wrote: post #38
cubefox wrote: post #11

This 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.

Apple would get the outrage if other app stores existed but you risked bricking your phone if you installed apps from them. Part of the difference here is likely due to Apple primarily penalising the developers (second order effects hit the consumer). If Apple were directly hitting consumers it would be a louder series of protests. HP are targeting the consumers, not the 3rd party suppliers, which Apple hits.

Apple (reversibly) bricks parts of the phone, even when you buy genuine parts, because they want you to pay them for the new components to be allowed to talk to each other.

Re: HP disables customers’ printers if they use ink cartridges from cheaper rivals

#66

Post by kerkeslager »

DiabloD3 wrote: post #35

Did you know Brother makes really good printers that are inexpensive and live a long, happy, life? And their drivers aren't user hostile? This is one of those really good "vote with your wallets" situations.

Yes, I was going to mention Brother. They're excellent; I've bought their products for years.

But, given advertising is legal, and HP advertises much more aggressively than Brother, we can't rely on "vote with your wallet" to solve this problem. "Vote with your wallet" doesn't work when one competitor is spending money on making quality products and the other is spending money on advertising.

The entire premise that capitalism brings the best products at the lowest cost is falsified by advertising.

Re: HP disables customers’ printers if they use ink cartridges from cheaper rivals

#67

Post by Bran_son »

NoMoreNicksLeft wrote: post #52
CoastalCoder wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm curious if this violates U.S. code 1030(a)(5) [0] "(5) (A)knowingly causes the transmission of a program, information, code, or command, and as a result of such conduct, intentionally causes damage without authorization, to a protected computer; (B)intentionally accesses a protected computer without authorization, and as a result of such conduct, recklessly causes damage; or (C)intentionally accesses a protected…

Are we even sure that the customers legally own the printers? For instance, has anyone bothered to read the EULA that came with whatever bundled software someone installs now days to get the printer driver working? Even if there isn't surreptitious transfer of the hardware, they could certainly have a clause in there that authorizes them to do such things.

Given that it is near impossible to participate in modern society without patronizing contract-abusing corporations, we should ask ourselves:

Do we want to be ruled by laws, or by contracts?

Re: HP disables customers’ printers if they use ink cartridges from cheaper rivals

#68

Post by wongarsu »

kayson wrote: post #14

It seems like there is enough competition in the printer market that this wouldn't be a thing. Are the margins so thin that all manufacturers depend on ink sales? Otherwise I don't understand why one wouldn't make universal ink compatibility a major selling point and force everyone to follow suit.

They sell printers at a loss and make the money back on ink sales. You can get printers with refillable ink tanks from all (three) major manufacturers, but they cost significantly more because they aren't subsidized by ink sales

Re: HP disables customers’ printers if they use ink cartridges from cheaper rivals

#69

Post by crazygringo »

I just want to be clear, because this headline is borderline clickbait.

HP is not bricking the printers. The printers will continue to work if you put the HP cartridges back in.

I'm not condoning HP at all, not in a million years.

But the verb "disable" carries connotations of permanence, so it seems like a disingenuous word choice at best, if it's not outright clickbait. Just so people aren't confused here.

Re: HP disables customers’ printers if they use ink cartridges from cheaper rivals

#70

Post by bluGill »

NoMoreNicksLeft wrote: post #52
CoastalCoder wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm curious if this violates U.S. code 1030(a)(5) [0] "(5) (A)knowingly causes the transmission of a program, information, code, or command, and as a result of such conduct, intentionally causes damage without authorization, to a protected computer; (B)intentionally accesses a protected computer without authorization, and as a result of such conduct, recklessly causes damage; or (C)intentionally accesses a protected…

Are we even sure that the customers legally own the printers? For instance, has anyone bothered to read the EULA that came with whatever bundled software someone installs now days to get the printer driver working? Even if there isn't surreptitious transfer of the hardware, they could certainly have a clause in there that authorizes them to do such things.

I doubt you have have any problem convincing that printers are goods that you own and the EULA is meaningless. Eulas already are questionable from a legal standpoint as they don't really meet the standards of a contract.
Post reply on HN