Screwy Epson firmware updates

It's not specifically about the P800 but about ' Disabling third -party ink options' in general
https://www.eff.org/files/2018/10/10/letter_to_epson_final_2018.10.10.pdf
The EFF organisation should very well be informed about the specifics of the P800 situation

You are making assumptions about the EFF. I think you both are missing the point.
First, that the aftermarket did not develop their own solution to allow aftermarket cartridges to work.
Instead it appears that they "stole" Epson keys. That stops action dead. Epson does allow the use of aftermarkets only IF the aftermarket develops their own workaround. The NAG screen will appear when a non Epson but acceptable key is presented. It does not on the P800 and possibly others.
It should not be taken for granted that an aftermarket item HAS to be made avaiable and Epson must release operating details. If the aftermarket is skilled enough and the market warrants a product, then that product will appear. Nowhere does it say that Epson stopped the aftermarket. Only if you make assumptions that the details on how the printer works must be released to the aftermarket does the argument the EFF is proposing hold.

Look, I used aftermarket ink with my P800....using Epson chips. So the use of aftermarket ink is NOT stopped by Epson. That there are no NAG screens that appear when the aftermarket chips were used and when the decoder is used, should allow a strong smell of perhaps thievery.

I don't like what Epson did and that COST ME, but I certainly see their position and whether I like it or not, I don't but I do believe they have a right to do what they did. If the aftermarket wants to survive in the Epson game, they need to step up....the odds against them are high.

Remember a similar issue held for a long time for OEM branded lenses and aftermarket lenses. If a new protocol is released by a major camera brand it is entirely up to the aftermarket to figure out the operating protocol and one reason why I stayed away from third party lenses for quite a while because they were not fully compatible electronically. Again, I used aftermarket ink and the machine never protested...So what's the EFF point.

Remember the class action suit that Epson lost and it was for totally stupid reasons...that a normal consumer would not understand. Techincally Epson was on firm ground and the consumer here was "ignorant" of the real purpose of leaving reserve liquid in the cart.


Edit:

Don't forget a similar situation also evolved in the PC world. That Compaq developed a really compatible BIOS and others followed truly turned the situation around with IBM PCs. Then eventually the alliance of compatible PC makers then eventually made having an IBM bios not so important because they became secondary. This aspect is lost on many. Had IBM developed a much more complicated BIOS then that could not be independently reverse engineered, the situation in the PC world would be very very different today.

Same for flash units for cameras. Years ago, I stayed away from third party sources and always stuck with OEM units. Today I enjoy the use of a couple Yongnuo flash units that "appear" to operate similarly to Canon units or they do an excellent job. Again that was not always the case and Canon was not obligated to disclose how their flash protocols worked. Same for Nikon etc....Where was the EFF then? how many complained they could not afford Canon flash units.

Let's see how the case develops, I would assume that the Attorney General will ask Epson for their position and decide from there whether and how to proceed. I think technical details - reverse engineering of signals/firmware etc is just one part of the story , but how is the customer informed/upfront about particular restrictions when he makes his buying decision is another aspect - we'll see.
Just imagine the situation that some printer companies put a sticker on their printer boxes - 'This printer is not designed to work with arbitrary 3rd party inks/cartridges/supplies, but using those will void the manufacturer's warranty' - the customer is informed and how would he decide - buying a printer without such sticker instead ?
Compaq - I remember talking several times to Rod Canion at the early days about the design of a compatible BIOS when he became the Compaq CEO. EFF - they have their agenda , other flashes have not been rejected by those cameras, and Sigma etc are offering firmware updates for most compatibility problems, but a game was/is played with some camera batteries, they come with a chip, similar to ink cartridges, and 3rd party batteries may be rejected by some camera models (for claimed reasons of reliability etc).

Ink stained Fingers said:

Rod Canion

Click to expand...

Googled him and found the curious mention of "Metered Parking" (circled in yellow). What the heck is that?

Could it be that he designed an electronic device for metered parking to replace the mechanical clocks.?

Did he? Is a project now passing for "education"?