For years, more ham-fisted printer manufacturers have waged a not-so-subtle war on consumers by blocking the ability to use cheaper, third-party printer cartridges. HP and Canon have both been part…
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.
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 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.
There is no “burden of proof” at all. Anyone is welcome to provide proof at any time.
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.
Maybe I misinterpreted either your previous comments or what the article is saying. But I can agree with that.