Inkjetmall has a new opinion (recommendation)

[jpegman]

Just received an email from IJM today-

 

[mikling]

I was warning about the decoder boards getting zapped in the future to people who had discussed this with me. I initially also called out the very routine that Epson had employed when I had seen it happen to me on the ARC chips before a decoder board was available. A couple of tests and I saw what they had done. It is not that the decoder boards are being tampered with. No it is that the keys that the decoder boards were holding were non genuine. It was making it through the key filtering routine of Epson and being accepted by the firmware. Epson had two ways to counteract this aspect, change the filtering routine.....which would be a lot of work and possibly not possible or simply preinstall the non genuine keys into the board non volatile NVRAM. I think they did the latter. The UPDATE is also installing the very keys that the decoder boards are holding and thus not allowing the decoder to work because according to the printer, that key has already been seen and is now considered a USED chip or cartridge.

What is NOT mentioned by inkjetmall is that it is likely that NEWER or machines leaving the factory recently also have these keys preinstalled as firmware. So until there is a V2 of the decoder board, and it will probably take another year or so, one needs to be careful very careful about picking up a new P800 from this time forward. You will not be able to tell what is in the firmware until you try using a decoder board.

Also Epson is not tampering with the decoder board as those can operate..well once the decoder loads the key assignments into the static memory on the decoder board, the active portion of the key management can be powered OFF.

Is this legal. Sure it is. They do not touch or even presume you are using a decoder board. They also allow ONE use of an aftermarket cart so they fulfill whatever ACT is in place to allow aftermarket supplies.

So far Canon has not gone after this level of dirty play and thus in the 17" arena, the Pro-1000 is still an active player for refillers. For refillers, the tide should shift towards Canon who has been a lot looser with refilling ...a LOT of room was left.
Epson wants their cut and all their space.

 

[The Hat]

I’d like to know what is it about Epson and Mac owners, WHY they insist on upgrading their respective machines when there is nothing wrong with them, “If it Ain’t broke” clearly is not working any more...

 

[Ink stained Fingers]

I'm not sure whether this firmware downgrade (at a charge) would not work anymore today, or may only work with the European/non U.S. firmware version, somebody may evaluate further and test if feasible
https://printerkeys.com/fix-epson-sc-p800-incompatible-ink-cartridges-error.html
The text refers to the SC-P800, the sample images to an XP-330 which is confusing.
Does anybody use the P800 maintenance software, does that offer a firmware update/downgrade function ?

 

[mikling]

One consideration that owners should seriously contemplate about when/before using this is the real possibility that they might end up bricking an expensive printer. This is not messing around with a crappy desktop worth less than 100 bucks. Think seriously about playing with uploaded firmware. At best it could work, yes, at worst, a series of unfortunate events could also occur. It could end in tears.

 

[Walker Blackwell]

There is a chance that this firmware can be downgraded (or dechipped) with WicReset or similar. I am investigating of course.

Also, HP did this very thing and was slapped with a class action lawsuit almost immediately and they backed down by issuing a reversion of their firmware that let third party consumables work again. The lawsuit is tied up on a technicality but most indications are that it will be resolved in the customer's favor and not HPs as consumer laws are pretty clear in the US. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magnuson–Moss_Warranty_Act In other words: our customers have solutions already in their printers that work. By deactivating the cartridges in firmware (blocking their function) Epson (HP, etc) would be breaking the law as the products are already working. Imagine if you put oil in your car from some company called "TheGreatestOilOutThere" and it worked great. Then Toyota came along and changed the software to detect if there was Toyota branded (or accepted) oil or some other oil and then deactivate the car if it detected some other oil. Suddenly you car is no longer functional until you use Toyota oil even though in reality your car worked great before. The egg already hatched here so there is a strong case to be made that these larger companies are breaking consumer protection laws by bricking equipment already owned by the consumer.

What I'm saying is that consumers are the ones with a complaint here. If they band together their case is stronger.

best,
Walker


R&D InkjetMall.

 

[john kervin]

Quoting mikling: "So far Canon has not gone after this level of dirty play and thus in the 17" arena, the Pro-1000 is still an active player for refillers. For refillers, the tide should shift towards Canon who has been a lot looser with refilling ...a LOT of room was left."

I'm not here often, so if I'm repeating someone else, it's not intentional.
I've retired & closed my refilling business.

I find with my Canons (MG 7120) (using the 250 /251 cartridges) that the printer does go through a lot more "cleaning" cycles
and the "First print of the day" warm-up seems to take forever.
I'm thinking that if the Canon recognizes non OEM chips, it might have a "waste the ink" mode that makes the user pay extra for using non OEM's

John

 

[mikling]

The maintenance cycles on Canons are far more complicated than initially meets the eye. Even something as simple as the optical sensor is not as simple as one assumes. Same of course for Epsons.

 

[mikling]

There is a chance that this firmware can be downgraded (or dechipped) with WicReset or similar. I am investigating of course.

Also, HP did this very thing and was slapped with a class action lawsuit almost immediately and they backed down by issuing a reversion of their firmware that let third party consumables work again. The lawsuit is tied up on a technicality but most indications are that it will be resolved in the customer's favor and not HPs as consumer laws are pretty clear in the US. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magnuson–Moss_Warranty_Act In other words: our customers have solutions already in their printers that work. By deactivating the cartridges in firmware (blocking their function) Epson (HP, etc) would be breaking the law as the products are already working. Imagine if you put oil in your car from some company called "TheGreatestOilOutThere" and it worked great. Then Toyota came along and changed the software to detect if there was Toyota branded (or accepted) oil or some other oil and then deactivate the car if it detected some other oil. Suddenly you car is no longer functional until you use Toyota oil even though in reality your car worked great before. The egg already hatched here so there is a strong case to be made that these larger companies are breaking consumer protection laws by bricking equipment already owned by the consumer.

What I'm saying is that consumers are the ones with a complaint here. If they band together their case is stronger.

best,
Walker


R&D InkjetMall.

What no one so far has determined is whether or not the keys contained within the ARC chips and decoders are in fact legal to begin with. If these keys are actually Epson old keys that are expired, recovered and then reproduced on third party chips then Epson has every right to block those illegal keys. Once you can determine exactly how those keys were generated and prove that you have a legal algorithm to produce those independent of any knowledge from Epson. Then you have a case. But as it stands now, I suspect those keys within the decoders are "stolen" keys and not legal. If they were legal then Epson firmware would ask that you acknowledge that it is third party ink. If you did not get that request to proceed, you can be pretty sure they are stolen keys which are illegal. The decoders and ARC chips on the P800 do not request that acknowlegement. At least the decoder I have that is working does not.
Is there a way to get around the latest hack by downgrading the firmware. Yes, pretty easy actually. Wait for Epson to catch up. If they anticipated this then they will have further provisions to counterattack. Remember Epson has been in the game of firmware traps for over ten years and with the processing power within the printers and memory available, there is literally hardly anything they cannot do to achieve a goal.

 

[The Hat]

Often fact is strange than fiction and it very much misunderstood...