HP Apologizes for Bricking Third-Party Cartridges, Will Restore Functionality | Hacker News Reader

HP Apologizes for Bricking Third-Party Cartridges, Will Restore Functionality

hothardware.com

This article promised a "sincere apology", but what followed instead was

> 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's insincere as hell. It all paraphrases to "We did this for your own good and we're sorry you got upset".

It is like the apology Sony gave for the BMG rootkit thing which basically amounted to "we are sorry we got caught and embarrassed our shareholders wit this sort of publicity".

I don't know whose worse, De Beers or HP.

Even worse, as the article points out: This is a one-time thing. They'll do it again in the future, only that time with a warning in the EULA or something like that.

Yeah, that's how I read their "apology", too:

> We should have done a better job of communicating about the authentication procedure to customers, and we apologize.

Note that the apology was for not properly disclosing what they were doing, rather than for what they were doing.

I was recently in the market for a label printer. Dymo is the leader on this kind of products and as I was about to buy one I read this review

https://www.amazon.com/review/R2VG8JOAJDWJ0E/ref=cm_cr_dp_ti...

as well as many like it, that explain how the printer will only accept original, overpriced Dymo labels.

I bought a Brother QL-700 instead, with ordinary labels that cost 1/5 of the price of the Dymo ones, and couldn't be happier.

Let's hope those practices hurt the businesses instead of helping their bottom line, that's the only way we will get rid of them.

I doubt it, do you know how the GNU project started?

You have to thank Xerox for it.

https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/rms-nyu-2001-summary.txt

Interesting, good to know.

We've bought a handheld Dymo LabelManager 280 for our Hackerspace. We've tried third-party labels, but we'll be back to official ones. Not because the third-party ones aren't supported - they very much are! It's because they turned out to be shitty; the quality of print is quite bad. Not a showstopper, but you don't spend money on a label printer to have shitty-looking labels everywhere.

To my paranoid side that raises an interesting question. They have the ability to know when approved labels are used in the device. They could just reject them, creating all kinds of bad publicity. Or they could degrade output quality on "unapproved" mediums then say earnestly, "This lack of quality is why we recommend using only Genuine Dynamo Labels®. Buy some today!"

You know, I'd be fine with the printer detecting the use of 3rd party ink cartridges and signalling this fact to the computer, so that a warning C n be displayed, as long as the printer and driver don't use that information to deliberately degrade the output.

And I'm not necessarily against using that information to void the warranty too.

> And I'm not necessarily against using that information to void the warranty too.

In the US a manufacturer can't use a simple indicator like "you broke the seal" or "that's not an Original Manufacturer cartridge" to void a warranty. A warranty may only be voided if the specific act involved was the actual proximal cause of the failure of the product.

Anyone who tries to use "that voids the warranty" is usually just trying to invoke FUD with no legal standing.

I've never heard this, could you provide some sort of evidence of this? I was always under the impression that warranties were purely manufacturer defined and could be voided for any reason the manufacturer stated up front.

The Magnussen-Moss Warranty Act [1] lays out many requirements and terms of reference for warranties in the US. One specific requirement:

"Warrantors cannot require that only branded parts be used with the product in order to retain the warranty.[7] This is commonly referred to as the "tie-in sales" provisions,[8] and is frequently mentioned in the context of third-party computer parts, such as memory and hard drives." [Wikipedia]

Edit: Additionally, the onus is on the manufacturer to prove that a non-OEM part or service was the proximal cause of a warrantied failure. They don't get to put it back on you without proving their case.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magnuson%E2%80%93Moss_Warranty...

Yeah, the problem with that was how quickly manufacturers used that to get out of any problem.

"Our records show that you had the oil changed at a third party, which we do not support. As a result, we are unable to repair [unrelated powertrain failure] under warranty."

No, Dymo is not the leader in label printers; they make consumer-grade crap.

Zebra is the leader for label printers. And you can print on any label paper you want with a Zebra. For the direct-thermal transfer labels, you can buy them cheaply on Ebay. They also have thermal-transfer printers (they use a separate roll of ink-tape rather than just heating up thermally-activated paper). Zebras aren't cheap, however. You'll commonly see them in places like UPS/FedEx stores or depots, and cost maybe $500 each for the 4x6 models. You can get good used ones on Ebay.

If I squint my eyes (or brain) really hard I can just about believe that zero day exploits could exist for a printer cartridge.

But then I just arrive at the conclusion that if you didn't add DRM and try to make cartridges "smart" there wouldn't even be a security vector...

That can be said about a lot of things now. Coffee makers, anyone?

DRM is mostly a tool to support shitty business models, and above that, it tends to introduce new attack vectors.

Spend a bit more and get yourself a Brother monochrome laser printer, you won't have to deal with it squirting half of its ink down the drain every time it needs to unclog.

I've got a Samsung monochrome laser printer, best purchase ever.

Good you have one now, HP just agreed to purchase Samsung's printer division. [1]

I can't see this ending in a better customer experience for future Samsung printer models.

It's a shame. I've had several Samsung CLP series laser printers and they've all worked amazingly well for many years.

[1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12478699

"When ink cartridges are cloned or counterfeited, the customer is exposed to quality and potential security risks, compromising the printing experience." [1]

I know there's security risks in the printer and in any other thing plugged into a network, but what's the security risk in a cartridge? A cartridge can be hacked and then...? Can a cartridge really be owned? What can possibly be done then?

[1] http://www8.hp.com/us/en/hp-news/blog/Small-Business-Printin...

If you can hack an HP printer by installing a cartridge from a third party, then HP has even more embarrassing security problems to apologize for.

I would love to meet the person who owns a printer using a hacked ink cartridge.

Why bother, just go with the new Epson Eco-Tank printer ET-3600 and you get the ink tanks on the side, basically a continuous ink system. You can buy a gallon off non-epson ink (like Nano Digital brand ink) and literally print color for fractions of a penny per page. Cartridges seem so outdated.

Just looked this up as I have not heard of it before.

"Cartridge-free printing — comes with up to 2 years of ink in the box" - I really like this bit.

Any idea how this works from a dollars & cents perspective?

They're filling radio adverts here in the UK about them, claiming "new tanks cost as little as £6".

If replacements won't be needed for 2 years I figure most people will expect it to have broken and been taken off the market by then...

They are excellent document printers. The ones I've used have been okay for printing photos, but that isn't what they are tuned for.

Partially because some people don't want to spend that much money on something they'll rarely use (cheapest I found from a quick search on amazon UK for any of the Eco-Tank series was £185)

Got a Canon ink jet and a third party tank. Win win. Never ever will go with HP again, after buying the biggest POS HP inkjet printer. First printer shipped broken. Second wouldn't feed paper after a year. Not to mention the color ink drying out. Brother Laser is amazing. I am a small business owner, Civil Engineering firm, that prints plans constantly. Epson may have the future locked up for those who print large scale plans. Otherwise Canon and Brother all the way.

Don't care. HP is on my no-buy list until they promise to not do this again. Ever. I don't own an HP printer today and I probably now won't for a while. DRM stunts like this, the surprise bricking of working hardware, are not forgiven overnight.

Apologies and promises are worthless. If they move to free software and firmware, I might consider them again. No trust required.

My first inkjet printer was a HP Deskjet 500. It was fantastic (for its day and my requirements), robust and seemingly lasted forever. I eventually upgraded to something that did colour, but no printer I've had since, HP or otherwise has ever been as reliable as that old printer.

It is sad that I'm now in a position where I won't buy another HP printer while the cloud of them restricting my ink choices lingers.

Just give up on ink. Laser printers are much better in every regard, and are only bought less because they can't be pushed out the door for less than a restaurant bill.

This headline lacks the words "getting" and "caught".

I thought I'd had the inkjet game beat when I saw Epson color printers at Walmart for < $50.

Since it cost $50+ for new color and black cartridges I figured I'd just buy a new printer every time the old one ran out.

Sadly new printers come with super small cartridges.

So now will they stop bricking "Genuine HP" cartridges every time I look away from the printer for a few days?

This is normal. I'd expect the sales of ink cartridges to be a bigger business than the sale of printers itself.

> I'd expect ...

Yes, that has been the case for many years.

Why would you expect that though?

It is indeed the state of things today but I can't, from a technical standpoint, see how this is a natural or "normal" conclusion.

Yes, I want a better user experience. That's why I'm not buying any more HP Inkjets

Good luck the customers will be very happy with your apology. /s

Reply on news.ycombinator.com