3 ms·
My spidey sense tells me that this isn't "DRM". In other words, it's "rights management", but it's not digital. If you follow the link chain back to the origina
by frankus 13y ago
My spidey sense tells me that this isn't "DRM". In other words, it's "rights management", but it's not digital. If you follow the link chain back to the original report, it just says that the new machine "won't work with unlicensed pods."
All that would be required is a patented physical feature that can't easily be worked around. After all, they probably don't care about someone 3D printing a compatible reusable pod at home. Rather, they want a cut of any mass-market pods that work with their machine.
Apple, for instance, has effectively prevented anyone from making MagSafe-compatible chargers without using any sort of DRM. They simply threaten to sue anyone who makes a compatible charger for patent infringement. I don't see why this would be different.
- masklinn 13y ago> My spidey sense tells me that this isn't "DRM". In other words, it's "rights management", but it's not digital. If you follow the link chain back to the original report, it just says that the new machine "won't work with unlicensed pods." Not sure if they still do, but at one point Nescafé/Nespresso started adding notches to pods (and machines) which would pierce through un-notched "compatible" pods and ruin them. Of course that "only" invalidated the current stock for new machines, it'd still work on old machines and was simple enough to reverse-"engineer". > All that would be required is a patented physical feature that can't easily be worked around. […] They simply threaten to sue anyone who makes a compatible charger for patent infringement. I don't see why this would be different. I'm pretty sure Keurig's moving to an RM system because their k-cups patents are expired (the basic ones expired a few years ago, I guess those for "upgraded" k-cups are now dead) in the first place.
- kenrikm 13y agoThere are a lot of ways they could do it without using chips. For example they could use a type of of patented ink that reflects under a certain under a certain wavelength, some type of barcode, symbol, patented cup etc. However, I think they are going about this all wrong, their not going to stop people making similar cups and will just create negative impressions with consumers - first time a valid Keurig cup that a customer purchased fails the test and you'll have a very angry customer.
- valleyer 13y ago> However, I think they are going about this all wrong, their not going to stop people making similar cups and will just create negative impressions with consumers - first time a valid Keurig cup that a customer purchased fails the test and you'll have a very angry customer. I hear this argument a lot, but I just don't buy it. If anything, the customer will be upset with the manufacturer of the coffee cup. But as is, all of Keurig's cups are clearly marked, and I suspect that the vast majority of customers will just continue to buy those (and therefore be totally unaffected by this change).
- kenrikm 13y agoMy point was actually that Keurig's own cups might fail validation 0.x% of the time causing angry customers.
- spyder 13y agoAre you saying that all of the magsafe chargers you can buy from China are original Apple chargers?
- frankus 13y agoWell they've done a thorough enough job of cracking down on them that I wasn't aware they existed (that said, I haven't been shopping for electronics outside of North America in the last decade or so). If they can keep it technically illegal to sell a compatible pod in North America and Europe, they've probably pretty well captured the available profit.