Ink Cartridges with Built-In Self-Destruct Dates

Linker3000 writes "The Inquirer has an article about HP ink cartridges having a built-in expiry date that can cause them to become unusable even if they aren't empty! Another twist on the 'chipped cartridge' stories--and also another kick in the teeth (and wallet) for the consumer methinks." This isn't really a new problem - here's a good piece about the problem.

Comments

Let's not forget...

[byolinux]

That Lexmark are using DMCA against a company that sells chips that allow third-party cartridges to be used...

This just adds to a list of reasons why I will never, ever, own a printer again...

Isn't this illegal

[LorneReams]

With cars, it's illegal to do this (Brady law I think). Why is any other hardware different? Car makers tried to get the monopoly on parts, and then got slapped down by laws to keep them from doing this. Can that be used as a precedent to prevent this?

This Has To Be Stopped

[Anonymous Coward]

Thanks to the DMCA, we are powerless to do anything to
prevent this. A vendor can't sell after-market printer
ink cartridges for some products as they would be in
violation of the DMCA -- hence restraint of free trade,
not the original intent of the DMCA. This only serves
to keep prices higher and harms consumers, again not
the intent of the DMCA.

Can you purchase after-market products, new seats,
new engines, new spark plugs, new oil and gas for
your car? Imagine if GM did the following:

• Built a car with major components on the car area
  network, all using encryption (seats, radio, engine)
  
• Had a computer that would not allow
  the car to start unless you had all the original parts
  
• Enforced the DMCA so you could only buy replacement
  parts from them
  
• Sued all the after marketers for engine parts (no souped
  up engines, no customized or replacement seats,
  no super stereo).
  

What's to prevent them from doing that?

Re:It's a free market.

[chamenos]

the problem is that if having printer ink cartridges that self-destruct after a certain amount of time becomes the status quo, then pretty much -all- printer manufacturers are going to follow suit and consumers won't be left with any more choices.

in an ideal world, consumers would vote with their wallet and such manufacturers would have to change their practices. however in reality, the large majority of consumers are not well-informed, hence they make wrong choices that ultimately put everyone at a disadvantage. to be brutally honest i think this would be rather inevitable, given the general knowledge the average joe or jane has about computers and its related peripheral devices. the manufacturers probably know this, and are likely to prefer to keep it the way it is.

Cannon

[Anonymous Coward]

I bought a Cannon inkjet recently precisely because they don't screw me for refills. There are no chips, prices for official cartridges are reasonable, and there is a large selection of 3rd party inks. Better yet there is one refill per colour so if I run out of cyan, I don't have to throw out my magenta, yellow or black.

Of course, the printers are a bit more, but if you're doing a lot of printing, they're cheaper in the long run.

It's not a free market

[AtariAmarok]

It is not a free market, thanks to the DMCA. Without the DMCA, we'd have the freedom to hack and bypass these limits.

The Brady Law

[AtariAmarok]

"With cars, it's illegal to do this (Brady law I think)."

Does the Brady Law on cars mean that there is a 3-day waiting period if you want to buy a Chevy Beretta?

Re:The Brady Law

[Smallpond]

Its full name is the Magnuson-Moss Warranty Act and yes, a manufacturer cannot make a "tie-in" requirement that purchasing a part from someone else voids your warranty. You could argue that adding someone else's ink is no different than adding someone else's carbur^H carbo^H transmission, for example.

The Gillette Business Model.

[bdowne01]

For those of you who aren't familiar with business practices, HP is following the Gillette business model in their printer division.

This was thought up by Mr. Gillette himself (you know, the razor guy). He would sell razors at a loss, and then sell the refills at much inflated prices to make up the difference. Even today, a pack of 8 or so refills for a Gillette razor equals the price of just buying a new one.

HP is trying to pull this off in the computer world, and I don't know if it's such a wise thing to pinch your customers until they bleed dollars. Look at recent history:

1. HP inkjet carts used to be freely refillable, until HP modified the design to keep this from happenning.

2. HP printers generally stopped accepting third-party cartridge replacements.

3. Now the HP-only cartridges have a expiration date.

Now, since the first two steps haven't gotten the average printer user keeping up with ink cartridge consumption to keep the stock-holders happy; I guess just make the things stop working after a while! Perfect business plan, guys.

I really would love to see large companies use the good-ol sense of customer service to make a buck than bend-the-customer-over-because-we-can.

I know I'm not buying anymore HP stuff from now on.

Re:It's a free market.

[chamenos]

true, but they apparently think they're invulnerable. besides, the EU still won't have any judicial power over the manufacturers' operations in other regions of the world.

in my opinion, this whole fiasco started due to bad foresight by a bunch of marketing guys. they tried to emulate the shaver business model, but failed to realize that brand recognition is not as important in the computer industry; people in general would be more willing to pay less for an X-brand printer cartrige that works almost as well as the original, but wouldn't be as willing to buy a Y-brand replacement razor for a shaver that might nick your skin when you shave due to poorer QC that manifests itself in more obvious and painful ways.

now that they've set the standard for ridiculously low prices for printers, they realize their share of the profits of the ink cartridge business isn't as large as they anticipated it to be due to third-party manufacturers. unfortunately, they can't raise the prices of printers to the level they were once at to make up for this loss, since consumers would certainly cry foul and instead rely on older printers that are not fussy about ink cartridges. they've got themselves stuck in a rut, and they have only themselves to blame for it.

now they've even implemented self-destructing ink cartridges....sheesh. i don't forsee this going very far.

Re:It's a free *market*.

[Adam J. Richter]

"Free market" is not a boolean value. The market is less free due to the Digital Millentium Copyright Act. As a result of the Lexmark DMCA decision, the suppliers of toner and inkjet cartridges can be limited to the few companies that make printers and those that they authorize (presumably for fees that eliminate much of the economic advantage for consumers).

Basically, companies that can manufacture ink jet cartridges (relatively small products) but cannot manufacture their own printers can be locked out of the market, eliminating consumers' ability to choose to buy from these smaller companies.

Re:It's a free market.

[Niten]

Try Canon, for one. The S750 I purchased last summer uses the same non-chipped ink tanks as most of their other new-line home and small office printers, so even though I don't see the S750 on their web site any more, I'm pretty sure that they will be making their ink this way for some time to come.

(It's a very good printer, besides, if you were wondering for your own reference... Prints fast (I don't have a ppm count... not nosebleed fast, but notably faster than my roommate's HP), works well with the gimp-print drivers if you use Linux, prints photos well enough for my eyes, and has all sorts of other bells and whistles.)

Offset by the cost of a slightly more pricey printer ($140), the ink is pretty inexpensive. The black cartridge will set you back $15; the full set of three color cartridges costs $30. Canon ink comes in transparent plastic "dumb" cartridges that are completely sucked dry when the driver tells you they're empty... the printer won't cheat you out of any of it, as it actually measures how much ink is left in the tank rather than using HP or Epson style guesswork.

There are a few other non-evil printer manufacturers, I'm sure, but Canon seems to be the best as far as I've heard. Any other suggestions, anyone?

Re:Time To Expiration

[Moofie]

Speaking of bullshit analogies...

HP's cartridges still have ink in them. The ink worked satisfactorily yesterday, but today I can't use it because HP has decided that it's "expired". There is no physical reason that the cartridge shouldn't be working just fine: The ink is still there, and while it's not the "freshest", it still makes the marks on the page well enough.

Designing a product to wear out in a specified amount of time is done all the time, although I think it's reprehensible. However, ENFORCING that planned obsolesence by an artificial date-stamp is appalling.

I mean, should Sony get to come break my stereo because they decided it only is supposed to work for five years?