Keurig Begins Demonstrating Its Coffee DRM System; As Expected, It Has Nothing To Do With 'Safety'
from the it-has-to-do-with-expired-patents dept
Back in March, we told you about how the famed makers of the Keurig single-cup coffee brewing "pod" contraption was about to launch a new version with DRM. A competitor, Treehouse Foods, was taking Keurig makers Green Mountain Coffee Roasters to court over this attempt to block them out of the market. To say that post got a lot of attention would be a bit of an understatement. Green Mountain tried to hit back by claiming that the new DRM was about adding "interactive-enabled benefits" and safety to the single-cup coffee space. Because, you know, it was so unsafe before. And, besides, who doesn't want more "interactive-enabled benefits" with their first cup of java in the morning?Keurig has now started demonstrating the new system, and it's exactly what everyone feared: a DRM system to make coffee pods more expensive and to keep out competitors' refills.
When the Keurig employee tried to use an old-model pod, one without a new ink marker on the foil top, the brewer wouldn’t run. "Oops!" read a message on the touchscreen display, explaining that the machine only works with specially designed pods and directing the user to a Keurig website and helpline. The employee wouldn’t elaborate on how it worked, except to say that the ink is proprietary and inspired by counterfeiting technology used by the US Mint. Ian Tinkler, Keurig’s vice president of brewer engineering, went into a bit more detail, explaining that an infrared light shines on the ink marking and registers the wavelength of the light reflected back.What about those promised interactive-enabled benefits? As far as I can tell, they appear to be the following:
With its new machine, Keurig is combining its two main product lines, the single-cup brewer and the carafe-brewing Vue.... The anti-counterfeiting system doubles as a way to distinguish between carafe-size pods and regular ones. If the sensor detects the green dot that marks carafe cups, it brews a large pot. If it detects the ring of black symbols on the standard pod, it brews a smaller cup. If it doesn’t detect a Keurig-approved marking at all, it tells you "oops!"Yes, the "interactive-enabled benefits" will apparently maybe kinda save you from having to push a button or flip a switch between "cup" and "carafe." Of course, it could do that same thing without a bogus code designed to block out competitor refills and just compete on the quality of its coffee. But, who wants to do that?
Of course, that story at the Verge also reveals why Keurig/Green Mountain Roasters is really doing all of this:
In September 2012 key patents on its K-Cups expired*Ding* *Ding* *Ding*. We have a winner. None of this has anything to do with safety or benefits. It has to do with doing anything possible to avoid competing in the marketplace. There are lots of ways to play in a market and compete. One is to try to add more value than your competitors. Another is to try to block your competitors by taking away value. I never understand companies that seek to do the latter, but that's what Keurig has decided to do.
Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.
Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.
While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.
–The Techdirt Team
Filed Under: coffee, coffee drm, coffee pods, competition, drm, keurig, patents, single cup
Companies: green mountain coffee roasters, keurig, treehouse foods
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
"We're very pleased our brand name will be relevant again. To assure our customers, we have no intention of making DRM filters for our brewers."(1)
You know, my Mr. Coffee is looking a little dated. Maybe I'll invest in "safety" and "features" of an upgraded pot size.
(1) This really didn't happen, but it could.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
"We're very saddened that our brand is no longer able to compete in the marketplace on its own merits. To assure our customers, our coffee isn't really that much worse than anybody else's."
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Here's a suggest for Green Mountain
Build your own design that detects the new "interactive" bs by sensing the pod, not the ink.
Then make sure it's compatible with all of the original pods too, and give manual override control for any pod.
Price it *under* the Keurig model and watch the profits soar, as Keurig pouts and goes out of business as the sore losers that they are.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Here's a suggest for Green Mountain
At the very least, I bet there will be a healthy "used" market for older Keurig machines that don't have the limitations of the new ones.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
I think you intend Treehouse
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: I think you intend Treehouse
Sorry gang.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Here's a suggest for Green Mountain
What for? To make my friends and family mad at me? pffft. No thanks.
First manufacturer that produces a pot that works with all the Keurig accessories gets my business.
But what seems to have expired was the patent on the K-cups which isn't that big of a deal.
There have been a multitude of mfg. making permanent filter type baskets that fit in Keurig. Melita makes one that comes in a 2-pack (got that), some off brand makes another that comes in a 2-pack (got that), and yesterday at Walmart, I saw different mfg. that has a 4-pack. Probably get that too. You can re-use k-cups (have been able to for some time) and purchase lids for them. They all work (cause I use them).
I just fill them up with my own coffee, and store them in plastic zipper bags.
Life is good.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Hacked in 3...2...1...
Just like copy protection, this was probably a lot of wasted money and resources that are going to keep the competition out for maybe a month or two at most.
And then what? Will Keurig abandon these devices for another new technology, forcing all the people who bought them to continue using "counterfeit" pods rather than upgrading again?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Hacked in 3...2...1...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Hacked in 3...2...1...
(not that that would stop them from suing, but still...)
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Hacked in 3...2...1...
You're forgetting that DMCA applies to copyright, not coffee ;)
There is conceivably some "image" that they are reading from their special ink, and perhaps that image can be copyrighted...
But I suspect a judge might consider this a gross misuse of copyright law - and we may see this severely backfiring in court.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Hacked in 3...2...1...
If only that were true. However, the anti-circumvention clause has been successfully used in many non-copyright cases. That nastiness with refilling the Lexmark inkjet cartridges, for example.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Hacked in 3...2...1...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Hacked in 3...2...1...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lexmark_Int'l_v._Static_Control_Components
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Hacked in 3...2...1...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Hacked in 3...2...1...
Not sure if there's been an overriding precedent.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Hacked in 3...2...1...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Hacked in 3...2...1...
And, before you protest, yes, that's pretty dumb. It's Congress, talking about technology, in the 1990s. What did you expect?
More importantly, if this reads ink off a Keurig foil top, what's to prevent people from putting a "legit" Keurig foil top on top of their cheap substitute K-cups?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Hacked in 3...2...1...
In other words the "technical measure" being circumvented has to protect access to the work covered by the copyright otherwise it doesn't apply.
You can't simply say that because something has some component in it that is protected by copyright and happens to have some technical measure in it protecting something else that circumventing the technical measure for some reason other than gaining access to the copyrighted material is a violation of the DMCA. That would be silly and a massive overreach. For example, given that most modern cars today have computerized components in them with programming that is undoubtedly covered by copyright. All cars today have door locks designed to control access to the interior of the vehicle. If that broad interpretation of the law were the case, and you accidentally locked your keys in your car, having a locksmith circumvent the door locks on your car would be illegal simply because the car has some part of it covered by copyright which would be utterly stupid.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Hacked in 3...2...1...
To anticipate your argument that it's printer cartridges, not coffee filter baskets, I would invite your attention to the fact that the filter basket and the printer cartridge do more or less the exact same thing.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Hacked in 3...2...1...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Hacked in 3...2...1...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Hacked in 3...2...1...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Hacked in 3...2...1...
If that is the only feature of the system counterfeiting is not going to be hurt even a little.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Hacked in 3...2...1...
it's like walking through the whitehouse while holding up a piece of paper in front of your face with obamas picture on it.
except in this case, it should work. :-)
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Hacked in 3...2...1...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Hacked in 3...2...1...
Since the scanning cannot take place until after it's punctured, it's perfectly feasible that it would work again, unless it keeps track of a serial number, and only lets one cup be used once.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Hacked in 3...2...1...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Hacked in 3...2...1...
So did I. If it doesn't scan until after it punches the top that adds even another layer of annoyance (and cost) to the consumer:
"Oops!. You've inserted a non-approved pod. As an added bonus we've fucked up the seal on your non-approved pod to make sure your non-approved product goes stale as soon as possible. Have a nice day!"
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Hacked in 3...2...1...
you're not using the lid as a lid, just as a mask.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Really? You don't understand why companies do this kind of thing?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Really? You don't understand why companies do this kind of thing?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Then it turns into a cat and mouse game. Keurig changes their wavelength, paying customers are forced to upgrade (USB? Network? Buy a new one?), coffee "pirates" spend a week finding the new wavelength. Repeat.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Nothing beats the Aeropress
K-cups (or any similar system) don't even come close.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Nothing beats the Aeropress
That said, I won't buy a DRM one. If they get rid of the non-DRM one, we'll move on to something else when this one breaks.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Nothing beats the Aeropress
Then she's doing it wrong. Probably using the wrong grind.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Nothing beats the Aeropress
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Nothing beats the Aeropress
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
That's what makes me nervous. That the existence of copyrighted content in cellphones allows the misapplication of the DMCA to the cellphones means that it could be misapplied anywhere else, too. (It's a misapplication because the DMCA is being used to prevent activities that don't lead to copyright violations, such as unlocking your cellphone). After all, name a product that doesn't include copyrighted works. Even the coffee cups contain copyrighted elements.
However, that Lexmark lost in court does give some measure of comfort.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Ink is Analog
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Ink is Analog
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Now that the patents have expired, and everyone can get in on the action (i.e. innovate and provide real consumer choice) - we find the incumbents grasping at straws to hold onto their market share rather than actually improve anything.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Unless you are arguing that the market is some magical force that just works automatically without people communicating with each other.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
http://www.oracle.com/technetwork/java/index-jsp-141752.html
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
ummmmm
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: ummmmm
Time will tell if that's true or not.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: ummmmm
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Sounds familiar
No, the absence of a correctly-formatted chip causes on-screen warning messages... kind of like the VHS FBI warning... that you're not using genuine manufacturer-branded cartridges, available for a mere 200% premium. Effectively disables operation. DRM rules, baby!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
DRM
Anyhow, if Keurig goes through with this, I won't be buying one of their new machines, ever. And this is from someone who has bought countless K-cups since the original Keurig machines came out... I've had a Keurig since back when they gave away (for free) the re-usable and refillable plastic insert because k-cups were impossible to find and could only be ordered online.
Between my wife and I, we've probably convinced 20 friends and family members to buy a Keurig machine. We won't have any problem convincing those family members to *not* buy a new Keurig in the future when theirs breaks. (and don't get me started on how the quality of the physical machines has fallen over the years.... The new ones seem to break MUCH faster than the old ones... The original machines sounded like tanks rolling across the counter-top, but they were much more reliable over time than the new ones which seem to break after two years. I digress...)
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: DRM
No Circus great or small can compete with the acrobatics going on there!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: DRM
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: DRM
Yes. The anti-circumvention clause is not predicated on exactly what form the access control takes. It can be purely mechanical and still count.
However, as commenters above corrected me about, it does apply only to bypassing controls to works protected by copyright. Here are excerpts from the law itself (I've omitted parts that describe exceptions and other things of limited relevance -- check out the full text here: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/17/1201
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: DRM
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: DRM
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: DRM
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: DRM
If they stamped a work covered by copyright onto the top of the K-Cups, their machine could reject cups that did not have the work stamped on the top of it - meaning cups made from other manufacturers would not work and it would violate their copyright to produce cups with the work on them without a license.
In addition, they could have the machine display a copyright-covered work while it was making coffee - in which case manipulating the machine in a way that allowed it to display the work (and thus make coffee) would be a DMCA circumvention.
Of course, it's all stupid - we just want a damn cup of coffee.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Lexmark tried this same crap with their ink cartridges.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Lexmark tried this same crap with their ink cartridges.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Lexmark tried this same crap with their ink cartridges.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Lexmark tried this same crap with their ink cartridges.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Market, Market, Market...
I suspect there will be a number of sellers who will keep making old-Keurig compatible cartridges for cheap; I've already found some which were paper-filter bottomed rather than plastic cups; I wonder if this was to get around the patents?
the article was not clear about the form factor issue. Is Keurig going to try the L-Cassette or DVD-A route? "Your new machine takes a different shape of coffee cartridge"? or are they going to annoy the heck out of everyone with identical cartridges that don't work on some machines? When you start seeing second-party cartridges for sale on the store shelves with a sign "will no work in new Keurigs" that's a guarantee that they will be scaring off new customers, encouraging them to explore alternative coffee makers that don't exhibit this problem. trying to introduce a new form-factor same as all the rest, into a pretty much mature market is a dangerous move (Sony Memory Sticks, anyone?)
I bought my Keurig because I never need carafe-sized brewing, it's all single-cup sized. I never made coffee at home because the hassle of dealing with grounds for 1 cup was not worth it. I pay 75 cents to a dollar a cup for the convenience of handling. I suspect high-volume users are unlikely to want to pay 5 times the regular price for the convenience of a carafe cartridge over ground coffee in a filter, so the profit margin for carafe cartridges will be a lot less, the places carrying these will be much fewer, and the machines that accommodate carafe filters will sell in much smaller numbers.
Besides, in what way is "type of paint/ink" a DRM under DCMA? If the pattern is specific, that could be copyright (much as Apple inserts a copyright code in its computers' BIOS, and the Apple OS checks for it). But just the ink? Heck, how about an ink that reflects multiple wavelengths? Can you really patent an invisible color?
The main point is that this extra tech - light, sensor, electronics - costs money. Does this make the new equipment more expensive? You'll be competing with knock-offs or brands that will use Keurig cartridges (or others) without the extra crap. If all it takes is a yes/no signal, hacks will be available to make it work (i.e. peel the lid off a used cop, glue it inside your coffee-maker?) My Keurig can get messy - is the sensor vulnerable to coffee splatter blocking the sensor? Will users be thrilled to find their coffee-maker is fine, except the sensor refuses to see valid cartridges after a year?
DRM is generally more hassle than it's worth.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Market, Market, Market...
That's crazy expensive, especially for Starbucks. I'd say that the price of K-cups is already through the roof.
"I suspect there will be a number of sellers who will keep making old-Keurig compatible cartridges for cheap"
The old cups don't work in the new machines.
"I never made coffee at home because the hassle of dealing with grounds for 1 cup was not worth it."
If it's convenience for single-cup brewing that you're after, there are much better (and cheaper) solutions than the Keurig machines.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Market, Market, Market...
Less then a dollar a cup for Starbucks coffee? Sounds inexpensive to me, but I don't drink coffee so I don't know.
"The old cups don't work in the new machines."
That's part of Anon's point. People won't buy the new machines so they'll still need the older style cartridge.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Market, Market, Market...
However, for coffee you're brewing at home, $1/cup is really expensive. If you want to go as high-end, best quality as possible, you'd be paying about 50 cents a cup.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Market, Market, Market...
I don't find that particularly expensive. McGregor's was selling boxes of coffee cups that fit in Keurig in a 4-pack. Cost $1 for 4 = .25 ea. Last time I bought McGregor's it was a 12 pack for $5
You pay for the convenience when you need a coffee asap, but I refuse to buy at the cost Keurig wants for the size K-cup. Whatever is on sale at a good price, unless the coffee really sucks (found some brands that are just baaad).
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Market, Market, Market...
Really, this whole k-cup thing is ridiculously wasteful - get yourself a my k-cup and fill it yourself with the same grounds for cheap and less trash
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
"I'm sorry, Dave. I'm afraid I can't brew that."
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
I can explain it in one word: investors. Monopolies are money-printing machines. Competition just means squeezed margins.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Here's what is likely to happen....
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
puts a dollar under the sensor
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Ink wavelength...LOL
Pesonally I think I'd get annoyed at having to stick the top of a ligit coffee pod on to my "gerneric" coffee pod to make it work all the time.
But I think there is too much B.S. in the statements by the company. Wavelength of reflected light off the ink....ROFL
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
This is correct up to a certain point (I don't know where it lies, but I know it exists). Manufacturers frequently put language into their warranty terms that use of third-party, (or non-oem, or after-market, or however else they phrase it) parts will automatically void the warranty in question.
I'm buggered if I can remember where/when I've seen it, but I seem to recall seeing something about this. Under federal law - the Magnusson-Moss Warranty act would be a good place to start, but I think there's also court decisions about this. T
he manufacturer has to prove that a 3-rd party part was directly responsible for damage claimed under warranty. And that, from what I understand, is a pretty steep hill to climb. For example, your car manufacturer can say that if you use lubricants from some manufacturer other than what they recommend, the warranty on your engine is null and void. But, if they try it, and you produce even a suggestion that you were taking reasonable care of your car, and following maintenance and use recommendations, the car maker will soon find themselves footing the bill for the covered repairs, and (depending on what you have to do to force them to that point) maybe some legal fees and costs as well.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
I'm gone.
Bought a Bunn.
It uses a different system and works better.
Vote with your feet.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
This is why I hate DRM
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: This is why I hate DRM
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: This is why I hate DRM
Under the [DMCA], circumvention of a technological measure that effectively controls access to a work is illegal if done with the primary intent of violating the rights of copyright holders.
So what kind of hardware is described as a work on your planet? Because none are on mine.
As for what Wikipedia says about the EU Copyright Directive:
In 2014, the Court of Justice of the European Union ruled that circumventing DRM on game devices may be legal under some circumstances, limiting the legal protection to only cover technological measures intended to prevent or eliminate unauthorised acts of reproduction, communication, public offer or distribution.
Here, the law clearly states that DRM should only be used to prevent illegal acts, not competition. No wonder people call it Digital Restrictions Malware.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Much ado about nothing.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Plenty of machines coming
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]