The Dolphins Make Me Cry.com - Forums

A while back, I bitched about Keurig starting to implement digital rights management into their pods.  You could only operate a Keurig by using specific Keurig coffee pods.  It would read or scan the top of the container and only work with their specific pods.  This made you a slave to their product only, if you had that machine.

Obviously, fuck that.  I didn't own this device, but I swore off any product that had it and use a different brand.

Today, I discover that my refrigerator has this technology with its water filters.  It uses RFID to communicate with the fridge (hiding behind the premise that it is there to detect leaks) and will not work with anything other than an official filter from the manufacturer (that costs $50 a pop and has to be replaced about every 4 months.)  I'm pretty pissed about it.  It seems anti-competitive to me.  It's not something I could have foreseen when buying a fridge and they cost thousands of dollars, so it's not like I can just swap out.

I have ordered a plug from the manufacturer that allows me to bypass filtration altogether, but that's still pretty donkey, if you ask me.

there's probably a way to bypass the RFID check .. i'm sure it's been hacked by someone just as upset as you but with way more skills

I see people talking about it on Reddit.  What a pain in the ass.  I think I'll just drink water out of the hose.

having worked in mobile electronics for 16+ years, we used to get phones returned to us with problems, damage, etc that was caused by third party accessories.  It costs the company a ton in warranty claims, when in fact its the third party accessory that causes the issue.

Your refrigerator manufacturer is not able to test their product with every filter that will ever be made.  Therefore they must create a way to ensure that you only use the filter with which they have confirmed the best fit and use.

Your real gripe should be why do filters cost $50?  If they charged $10 for the filter, the third party filter makers would be out of business and there would be no need for this. 

Also, I have a Keurig and I have never had to buy ONLY keurig pods.  I get my coffee pods from dozens of different places and brands.

I would not go so far as to make it illegal.

But I would support a law requiring that the seller indicate both on the outside of the box and in all advertisements that the product is not compatible with third party consumables. 

What model of keurig do you have and how long have you had it?  Keurig 2.0 launched in 2014.  They got sued by seven competitors and several purchases for anti-competitive actions.   Their sales also underperformed and dropped 23% after the DRM inclusion.   They started a backtracking campaign in 2015 that included a reusable K-cup for regular coffee.  I'm not sure where they stand on DRM today.

I am but one person, but I know that I specifically bought a different coffee pod brand specifically because of that DRM issue.

Why should they be allowed to tell you how you can use your property. If they don't like how other products might work in their fridge, void the warranty. But it isn't about that, it is a clear cash grab...

I bought a Keurig-branded K-Elite C from Costco for my office in 2018.  It takes any K-Cup sized pod, including refillables.  At home, I have some offbrand unit that I bought at Target 10+ years ago, and it does the same.

If you have a Keurig machine that only takes chipped pods, you were unfortunate enough to buy in a specific window where Keurig was trying to lock down the market.  You probably need to knuckle up and spend the $50 (https://www.amazon.com/BELLA-Single-Adjustable-Personal-Removable/dp/B08DVWWKMG/) to buy a new one.

i completely agree its a cash grab, but filters don't need to be a revenue stream.  The price of water filters is absolutely absurd.  You can also bypass the filter (as Dave mentioned) and get an in-line filter with your water input.  There is always a work-around, if you want it bad enough.

It is actually the business model.  I am not sure if it is still the case but computer printers were being sold at a loss to generate cartage sales.

How much does the handle of a razor cost compared to the blades?   Britax business model is give away the pitcher profit on the filter

^^^ sure, but last I checked Dave didn't get his refrigerator for free to generate filter sales.  we're talking about a thousand-dollar appliance...

Brita filters are around $18 for a 3 pack and Walmart Brita compatible filters are $8 for a 3 pack.

I understand the business model, but it's still ultimately the customer's choice.

My razor and my Brita do not have DRM.  I can use brita's filters or Gillette's razors, but should I use something else, the pitcher isn't using a chip to prevent the water from coming out of the spout.

I agree.  It should be a consumer choice.  That is why I don’t think it should be illegal, but that the advertising must clearly indicate that the product has it.

My understanding of the current state of the law is that manufacturers may implement these types of chips, but it is also legal to reverse engineer a solution to bypass this check.

In the IT world, there are printer ink/toner cartridges with chips that function in the way described in the OP.  One of the workarounds (e.g. for the laser printer I have at home) is to remove the chip from the original cartridge and install it in the replacement cartridge.