So then where are the old firmwares for download? Surely you wouldn’t care if I downgraded my firmware if you aren’t trying to brick my printer
If your printer is working fine, and is not on the network, leave the firmware alone.
I hope this is true because we can’t afford to lose the last good guy printer manufacturer.
I’m using a Brother laser with third-party cartridges, and everything still works after the recent firmware update. So I’m inclined to believe them.
I can confirm this. Latest firmware and a generic toner cart. I just printed some stuff yesterday
Same. Updated firmware today.
This is why you shouldn’t get your news from clickbait YouTubers. Especially when their source is a three-year-old reddit post that doesn’t even support their claim.
This is disappointing for Rossman. I like his content a lot and he’s on the right page, but I think he’s big enough that he needs to start adopting some journalistic standards. For example, if he reads that some company is doing something stupid, at least bothered to call them and ask for a comment before he drags them through the mud on his channel.
I used to like and trust him, but he has gone way off the deepend of jumping to accusations for clickbait, exactly as this shows. It is sad because of how much he has fought for our rights, but sometimes I wonder if it is all getting to him.
Rossman is a modern day Ralph Nader; he lives on outrage and the money it generates. He’s generally correct but when he swings and misses, like he did in this case, it hurts his reputation.
he lives on outrage and the money it generates
I don’t think he makes much from YouTube, and he’s said as much. He just uses it as a platform to push pro-Right to Repair sentiment, and he’s right way more often than he’s not (with a healthy dose of hyperbole most of the time). Any miss here is because he didn’t bother doing a bunch of research, because he doesn’t really have an incentive to do so.
He owns a repair business and works for FUTO, that’s where his money comes from.
Yeah, I generally trust him but he can be quick to accusations. I can understand why, especially when a company behaves badly. It’s almost expected that companies are going to make their shit worse. But definitely needs to follow up and recant.
He usually apologises when he’s discovered to be wrong. I know he’s quick to accusations and stuff but he does seem level-headed (to me) overall.
Apologies don’t make up for being wrong in the first place. Usually they don’t have the same reach, so the mis/disinformation spreads and many people never see the correction.
It’s the same bullshit “news” companies do to sway opinion. They’ll say something wrong, then a few days later put out a correction that a small fraction of people who saw the first part see. This let’s them spread any lie they want while maintaining an image of being actual journalists to those not paying attention.
I absolutely agree and think misinformation is terrible and disinformation is worse. However, I don’t think he should be held to the same standard as a journalist. He just reads news from other people. He should definitely make sure it’s truthful and factual ahead of time. But I do agree, it’s kind of why we’re in a crap state in the world right now.
Although his apology doesn’t make up for it, he does at least make his apology on his main channel. I have seen other YouTubers make their apologies and such on alternate channels. I also don’t think he makes excuses for it either.
If you have a platform, which he absolutely does, you have a responsibility for what you put out. He needs to check if it’s true. If he can’t, he needs to hire someone that will. Either he doesn’t deserve the views or he needs to be responsible for his content. He doesn’t deserve to get views with no responsibility. Everyone should be held to this standard.
He collects and edits news for media. He is a journalist.
Mistakes happen. He comes with receipts, and sometimes those receipts are misleading. I don’t think he’s being intentionally wrong here, he took information from various communities reporting negative experiences, and extrapolated that there may be an issue there.
And it’s not clear he’s actually wrong. We have the company claiming they don’t do it, but then what about the accusation that older firmware isn’t available? Surely if they don’t intend to break third party cartridges, they’d keep those available for people who want to downgrade. Maybe there’s a good reason for that too, idk, but my point is that Brother could be hiding something, it’s still unclear and we need more data.
Yeah, I do appreciate that he generally does apologize when he’s wrong.
Company’s PR dept saying “we didn’t do it” is not proof of anything.
If they’re not blocking 3rd party cartridges, why even implement DRM?
Do they have so much extra money that they’re developing features they’re not planning to use just because they’re bored?So when someone uses random sludge instead of ink and breaks the printer they can point at that as the cause.
It’s basic CYA. They’ll let you do whatever you want, but if something goes wrong and it breaks then you’re on your own.
That’s a very charitable way of looking at DRM.
In this case, I kind of don’t blame them in terms of warranty work. Like yeah, if the machine faults out within the warranty period, they should replace it. But if the machine breaks because someone uses $3 ink from a bodega that’s made from busted open bic pens, then no manufacturer should be on the hook for replacement when caused by user negligence, and I don’t blame a company for using some measure to determine that.
$3 ink from a bodega
That’s actually a fair price for 3rd party replacement.
I used to work at a computer shop, and people only ever bought the cheapest available cartridges.
We also used to do printer repair, do you know how many printers had to come in because of shitty ink?
The answer is zero.And anyway, in your example the printer manufacturer has no business tracking your ink usage, whether it’s by spying on you and phoning home, or recording this info in the printer’s memory.
My main concern here is that they (allegedly, I haven’t confirmed) remove old firmware. If customers want to try out older firmware to see if that fixes their problem, they should be able to. It doesn’t cost much, so why not?
Yeah, voiding a warranty because the customer used something that could cause irreversible damage makes sense. Removing access to older firmware does not.
Ah, that’s fair on the old firmware bit, I hadn’t heard about that. I have a Brother laser printer, but it’s locked down on my network for phoning home.
What’s the domain you blocked?
I mean “Brother says” is most definitely not proof that that person was wrong. Here’s the question: Has anyone else able to verify their claim? Surely there are tens of thousands of printers out there that someone could verify…?
I dont see how the burden of proof is on Brother. If you’re looking for verification from tens of thousands of other printer users and hearing crickets, i think you have your answer.
I dont see how the burden of proof is on Brother.
There is no “burden of proof” at all. Anyone is welcome to provide proof at any time.
If you’re looking for verification from tens of thousands of other printer users and hearing crickets, i think you have your answer.
I didn’t look.
The burden of proof should be on whoever is making a claim. If someone accuses me of doing something with no evidence, my verbal denial shouldn’t be skeptical without proof. Brother isn’t in a position that they should require to provide proof against the claim being made against them. I didn’t see any mention in the article of other user’s printers being bricked aside from the original claim from 2022. Maybe some further investigation would come up with something, but claims made on Reddit posts and YouTube videos hardly count as proof of anything.
Sure, but they don’t need to be proof of anything. Rossmann reported on some users (I think there were multiple?) claiming something to be the case, and provided one bit of verifiable evidence: no access to older firmware.
Brother claims they don’t intentionally brick printers that use third party cartridges, but that’s not verifiable. Brother also didn’t mention anything about why older firmware isn’t available. That’s a significant concern, since that would be a way for customers to prove that the firmware itself is the issue (printer works -> upgrade -> broken -> downgrade -> printer works).
I think it’s 100% fair to raise the concern. It’s certainly not enough to warrant any kind of legal action, but it is enough for customers to investigate the claims for themselves. I think that’s worthwhile.
I can agree with that, perhaps I misinterpreted the previous comments.
There is no “burden of proof” at all. Anyone is welcome to provide proof at any time.
Maybe I misinterpreted either your previous comments or what the article is saying. But I can agree with that.
I notice it talks about not blocking 3rd party inks, but not (that I saw) about deliberately degrading quality. I hope they’re not doing that either!- but that was the recent accusation.
I read a bit on that though, and what I think happened, is someone got lower quality while using 3rd party ink, after an OTA firmware update, and called customer service. The customer service rep couldn’t answer how to fix it, except using genuine Brother ink, and the user asked a careful question about whether that was the only way. Rep answers yes, which is probably not true but seems like the ‘right’ answer to give; user interprets it as the Rep knowing that there’s a secret and deliberate degradation of quality with 3rd party ink.
Really because it happened to me until I was able to force a software roll back which required obtaining their closed proprietary service software.
Problem of course, is that 100 people see the lie (most believe the first thing they hear even if false), then 15 see the truth, and 10 believe it.
But is it a lie?
Here’s what I’ve seen so far:
- Rossmann reports on claims about Brother blocking third party cartridges on auto-updating firmware, and not providing older firmware
- Brother denies intentionally blocking third party cartridges
There’s still the claim about the older firmware. If it was available, it would be pretty easy for customers to prove that a change in the firmware caused issues w/ third-party cartridges:
- cartridge works fine
- upgrade
- cartridge doesn’t work
- downgrade
- cartridge works fine
That doesn’t prove it was intentional, it just proves it was the firmware update that caused the problem. If users want to stick w/ an older firmware, they should be allowed to, because Brother shouldn’t be able to decide what firmware they use.
The broader point here is certainly valid though, I’m just unconvinced that it’s applicable. Why should we trust Brother on this when they make the way to prove the issue nigh impossible?
“A lie will go round the world while truth is pulling its boots on.” - C. H. Spurgeon (1859)
And those ten who believe it will be the most virulent and arduous propagators of that lie.
I actually wondered that at the time simply because whenever a new person discovers the horrors of HP printers people in the comments are always boosting Brother printers.
Like, if Canon had been accused of bricking third-party printer ink I’m not sure it would have made the feed.
Exactly. The style of accusations, and the aggressive tone the perpetrators use… This really looks and feels like a smear campaign against Brother.
I’m glad to hear this because I read the other article on the day my Epson decided to suddenly take umbrage with my third party cart after using it without issue for 2 years.
As there is no other viable alternative for a relatively-no-nonsense printer on the market than Brother’s offerings it sounds like I’m not completely out of options quite yet.
Incidents like this are a perfect excuse for the bean counters and marketing experts to chime in and recommend that the firmware be updated specifically to block third party ink or toner.
There’s no downside, the world is already trash talking your company, even if you didn’t do anything wrong, but while it’s happening, you get to sell a shitload more ink and toner.
If they’re smart they won’t do that as they know people are buying their products specifically for that reason.
If they’re smart…Except right now it’s clear they ARE allowing third party cartriges.
We need an open-source printer project. But apparently it’s very difficult to do.
We actually don’t need an entire Open Source Printer, just an open source controller. So you can buy $printer and then replace it’s control board with an Open Source version. We’re doing this already with things that weigh hundreds of pounds, spin at thousands of RPM, and literally contain explosions!
Gear heads (car people) are very familiar with this. There’s at least three major, and many minor, Electronic Fuel Injection / Engine Management Systems out there that will allow you to strip the factory “brains” out of a car and replace them with stuff you can control / program yourself.
A printer is just an assembly of mechanical parts and there’s no reason that an Open Source controller couldn’t command them.
No this is not good logic because the specific people that buy your product and use third party supplies know it to be untrue.
There’s no downside
I mean if people are buying your products specifically because they don’t have this bullshit, you’ve carved out a niche for yourself, and if you abandon that niche, you have nothing.
