Brother (once considered one of the more consumer-friendly printer manufacturers) is now under fire over claims that its latest firmware updates deliberately degrade print quality when third-party toner cartridges are used.
Firmware Updates Allegedly Restrict Third-Party Ink
Right-to-repair activist and electronics technician Louis Rossmann has accused Brother of deploying firmware updates that hinder the use of non-OEM (Original Equipment Manufacturer) consumables. According to Rossmann, users have reported that certain printer functions, such as automatic colour registration, stop working after an update when a third-party cartridge is detected.
Several users have taken to forums and social media to confirm similar issues, with reports stating that previously functional non-OEM toner cartridges suddenly started producing lower-quality prints or experiencing feature restrictions. Furthermore, rolling back to an earlier firmware version is proving difficult, as Brother has removed older updates from its servers.
Brother Denies Any Wrongdoing
Brother has responded to the allegations, denying any deliberate attempt to block third-party consumables. The company issued a statement saying:
“We are aware of the recent false claims suggesting that a Brother firmware update may have restricted the use of third-party ink cartridges. Please be assured that Brother firmware updates do not block the use of third-party ink in our machines.”
Brother maintains that while they encourage the use of Brother-branded toner for optimal performance, their printers do not intentionally degrade print quality based on the cartridge brand. The company attributes user concerns to its standard troubleshooting process, which includes a “Brother Genuine check”, i.e. a diagnostic step that ensures a printer functions correctly with its own branded consumables.
Not the First Manufacturer to Face Backlash
Brother is not the first printer manufacturer accused of anti-consumer practices related to third-party ink. HP, for example, has implemented “Dynamic Security,” which blocks non-HP cartridges entirely. The company has faced multiple lawsuits over this strategy, with critics accusing it of monopolistic practices. HP, however, defends its approach, citing security risks associated with third-party cartridges, including claims that they could potentially introduce malware.
Similarly, Canon has been criticised for implementing firmware updates that disable scanning functions when ink is low, even when the ink is unrelated to the scanning process. Epson has also faced scrutiny for its use of DRM (Digital Rights Management) technology, which prevents cartridges from functioning after a certain period, even if they remain full.
What This Means for Your Business?
For businesses relying on printers for everyday operations, Brother’s alleged restrictions could pose challenges. Many companies opt for third-party toner to cut costs, often paying significantly less than the high price of OEM cartridges. However, with firmware updates now potentially limiting this option, businesses may find themselves locked into purchasing expensive Brother-branded supplies.
While Brother insists that these changes do not impact third-party ink compatibility, user reports suggest otherwise. Companies using Brother printers may need to consider steps such as disabling automatic firmware updates to prevent potential functionality losses. However, doing so carries security risks, as firmware updates often include patches for vulnerabilities.
The growing controversy surrounding printer manufacturers and third-party ink restrictions could push regulatory bodies to take action. Consumer advocacy groups have already called for stricter oversight of post-sale function removal, arguing that disabling previously available features through software updates constitutes deceptive business practices.
As the debate unfolds, businesses should remain vigilant, assessing how these firmware updates might affect their operations. While Brother’s printers have historically been a more user-friendly option in terms of third-party toner compatibility, recent developments suggest that the industry as a whole is moving toward tighter control over consumable use, thereby raising important questions about fairness, transparency, and consumer choice.