After Months Of Incompetence, 'Smart' Pet Feeder Company PetNet Falls Apart, Blames COVID-19
from the dumb-tech-is-smart-tech dept
Back in February, $130 "smart" pet feeders from a company named PetNet simply stopped working. When customers reached out to the company to complain, they hit a complete and total brick wall in terms of functioning customer service. Customers say emails and phone calls weren't returned (or wound up undeliverable), and the company simply refused to answer annoyed customer inquiries on Twitter or Facebook.
Fast forward to late March and April and PetNet customers once again complained to outlets like Ars Technica that the company's products didn't work and its customer support was still nowhere to be found. Customers who complained were now being shoveled to a third party contractor with 16 followers on Twitter which, like the company that employed it, didn't appear capable of offering any help:
"Users looking for support received messages directing them to a third-party site called Tier One Success. Tier One bills itself as "simplified customer support to help meet your Smart Home needs," but it appears to have almost no online presence outside of the link sent to Petnet device owners. Its only external communication is a Twitter account with 16 followers. The last time any message was posted to that account, in July 2019, Tier One indicated that it exclusively supported Petnet products and had not yet expanded to customer support for any other smart home device."
Cool. Once the pandemic hit, Petnet apparently saw its exit, and is now informing its customers that the end is nigh. In one email, it lauds the fact that the company shuttered its brick and mortar offices as a result of COVID-19:
We have furloughed 100% of our remaining staff We have ceased all future product development, including bug fixes We have turned off all non-infrastructure related expenses We have terminated our office lease and are working remotely We have applied for all available CARES stimulus funding
But some readers noted that the company's office had been empty and available to lease since at least last October.
Meanwhile, none of the "smart" features of the company's pet feeders appear to be working on either version of the company's top models, and getting anything resembling customer support is still impossible for many. Given 20 seconds of effort and a $1 metal bowl would work just as well as Petnet's current offerings, it's yet another example of how in the "smart" device era the smarter choice is quite often dumber, older technology.
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: blame, covid-19, failures, iot, smart appliances, smart pet feeder
Companies: petnet
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
Hi, I'm Chucky, do you want to play?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
SARS-CoV-2 will be the scapegoat for unrelated failures for years to come. If there was a stock ticker I could invest in for "things SARS-CoV-2 had nothing to do with but was blamed for anyway" this would be the time to go long.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Shit, I figured it might be like a week before you were proven right. Nope. 2 days:
They haven't announced a shutdown, but come on, a free service cutting people off if they don't pay within a week? "You will never sell anything to any of those people ever again."
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
If it won't work without access to a server that you can't host yourself, it won't work for long.
Gamers have known this for well over a decade. We've watched our sports game multiplayer servers get shuttered in favor of next year's version long before EA gained its reputation. We've watched our MMOs and MOBAs go dark -- sometimes with decent third-party replacement servers, like with Myst Online; but far more commonly with nothing at all. And I shouldn't even get started on apps and app-like Facebook games... But all of that is purely digital. A lot of it can reasonably be called "access to services".
But if there is a physical product, if the product's primary function requires the use of a server, and if it doesn't reasonably allow the use of third-party-hosted servers... in my opinion, that should be considered planned obsolescence of the product, and a form of consumer fraud.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
As long as they can continue to convince people to pay a subscription for continued product functionality they slither under the fraud bar.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Their real business is rental of the server services. Along with that business model goes proprietary interfaces, and use of copyright to protect their monopoly on providing the service.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Hallelujah,
Pass the buck..
Wow, someone that knows the old tech problems..SAME thing different format.
Even in the last 20 years, its the same over and over, and its like THEY DIDNT NOTICE it the last time..or understand the Main problem, you need online 24/7 servers that will work forever...if the game/product is any good.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
I agree that companies should provide the third party server capability once the official version is no longer available, but no game that depends on external services will run indefinitely.
"We've watched our MMOs and MOBAs go dark"
With MMOs you're paying for monthly access to servers, and any related updates to the client software to continue to be developed. They're going to go dark when the amount they get from subscriptions is significantly lower than the cost of running the servers and providing updates. You're hopelessly naive if you expect them to run forever, double so if it's a free to play title.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
That's some mighty fine whine there...
You can practically taste the sours grapes.
'We're shutting down not because our product was crap and our customers service was even worse but because of the pandemic! Had nothing to do with us, nothing at all!'
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: That's some mighty fine whine there...
Fun part..
Its probably 1 little thing in hardware..1 simple wire. and they cant or wont look for it.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
One thing I'd like to point out. If the product was designed with libre software (that is libre/free software as defined by the free software foundation) customers could either provide the support themselves, or they could hire somebody to do it for them.
Or a startup could fill that role (all of which is effectively value-add to the OEM).
I've rarely seen anyone point this out despite Techdirt covering "theft" of property like this.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
I have. Right here just because you haven't seen the suggestion, doesn't mean it hasn't happened.
I admittedly don't remember if Techdirt has thrown up that flag specifically before. But it is the natural answer of how to build a internet enabled device without lock-in. Its also a natural extension of the [protocols not platforms solution(https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20190825/21540442853/protocols-not-platforms-technologica l-approach-to-free-speech.shtml) Mike has been suggestiong for social media. Heck, several years ago Techdirt did an article on the way cloud storage failed to live up to its premise where Mike explicitly argues that cloud storage should have been about individually opwned cloud buckets linking into interoperable cloud services rather than proprietary services.
I think you just aren't reading. Techdirt may never have suggested it for this specific situation, but its a clean extension of everything they argue for.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
Hmmm. Did you perhaps link to the wrong comment/article? The comment I see when I follow that link does not directly call out libre software, the FSF or anything directly related.
I also said "rarely." I know it has been mentioned before, both by me and other people (at least one comment does stick out in my mind, calling out LineageOS as a possible phone OS, I suspect you may have even been the author, but I don't happen to have a link to the page to check).
And you say:
And I absolutely agree. However I find it odd that people rarely mention the software ecosystem and the corresponding social movement that espouse natural extensions of the ideas they are pointing forth.
Further more, my entire point is relevant because from what I have seen of Techdirts's audiance, many are unlikely to be aware of the nature of libre software, or the ideology behind it.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
You are right, I drew a wider conclusion then you were making. i was talking about hardware communications protocols, not software. And the Bluetooth standard isn't a free standard. But it is an open one. My point being that since the HRM used an open communications standard, and app-neutral communications existed in the target market, there was no reason the HRM had to fail when a specific vendor stopped offering their app. I was drawing a similar philisophical point, and apologize for conflating it with yours.
Free software has been discussed in these pages before. And again, Mike's protocols not platforms approach covers exactly what you are saying. I know mike has argued for a broader philisophical platform than the focus on software, and I think he has effectively argued for the libre software solution even if he doesn't say the words because he is focused on broader approaches than just fix software. I've gotten the impression that he doesn't like software being under either copyright or patent. And during DMCA anti-circumvention discussions, the way proprietary software prevents you from owning the hardware is at the forefront. He is arguing for libre software, but perhaps not using those words, since they tie to a specific policy proposal. Mike seems to try to avoid specific policy proposals, generally talking in broader questions of goals and the way to move toward them, but let actual policy makers iron out policy. And really, Coming to the comments and saying "hey, you know, if these vendors used libre software it wouldn't matter!" its the most no shit sherlock kind of answer.
Given the Free software foundation has come up a number of times in techdirt hsitory, and the seeming longevity of techdirt's audiance, its not fair to believe people don't know who they are. We defend the concept against trolls on a regular basis as their failure to understand it is a common basis of attack.
Moreover, your original post didn't serve to introduce the concept to the audiance, only to say that the concept exists. You aren't going into either the nature or the ideology. So its a weird hill to die on that nobody is talking about it, since you really aren't either.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re:
I think I agree in principal with what I believe your point is (that open hardware and protocols are equally as important as open software). I apologize if it sounded like I disagreed. However, sadly I don't know of any significant movement/organization pushing for open hardware, and my point was that for the software side of things there already is a major community and ecosystem for that.
I think it would be interesting to see what Mike exact thoughts on that are. You mention software not being covered by copyright or patent. I think the libre/free software movement has actually show a flaw in that (when taken at face value).
In fact I would argue that copyleft copyright licenses are a greater public good/service that if the work was never covered by copyright. The reason for this is that copyleft ensure that people who get the work, and entitled to the ability to recreate it/modify it/create new works from it, thus in line with the constitutional purpose of copyright. In the case of no copyright, there would be no obligation to share the source, which means even though works would be "public domain", in reality they would not because there would be less or even no incentive to release the source code (so people modifying the work would have to reverse engineer it, which can be a real hindrance to creating derived works).
All of that said, I would like to put a thought I had here about changes to copyright (for software only, and some of this logic doesn't apply quite the same for non-software).
I would propose that proprietary software copyright be very much limited, say to five years. I would also argue that this is not the terror some copyright maximalists would have us believe. Largely because in five years time bugs and security vulnerabilities will be found and patched in that software. Of course that patched/updated version would be new, derived works, and their copyright term would expire after the initial works copyright.
For other works I would say that length of copyright for the software should be somewhat proportional to the nature of the copyleft license. This, of course because software people copyleft helps ensure more people are able to create and share more works (again being fully inline with constitutional foundation for the power to create copyright laws). However I would say the length should still max out at something small, maybe 14 years.
If I understand your argument here, it is that the greater portion of Techdirts audience is already familiar with libre software.
My perception of libre software, in the context of Techdirt, is kind of the elephant in the room. I frequently think of it while reading Techdirt, but I rarely see people mention it. In light of the previous addressed comment, I guess I never got the impression most of the community was familiar with the subject, and it that case yeah it was a very stupid thing for me to even mention.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
I'd say it's time to Tier them a new One
because it seems PetNet has slipped away to Tijuana.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Seems like a lot of lies
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Who is the user base?
If you're going away for an extended period of time, yes, maybe this sort of product could be beneficial. If you could trust it, it would keep your pets fed each day while you're not home. There are still other options like boarding, friends or neighbours that you might be able to consider.
But if you're using this sort of product simply because you're too lazy or forget to feed your dog each day... then you should not have a pet in the first place.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Who is the user base?
It would be a bad idea to trust your pet's life to this thing so any responsible pet owner should have someone checking on the pets anyway. At which point there is no purpose to the smart feeder.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Who is the user base?
There's certainly a use case for people who have to go away on short notice and can't use a kennel/cattery or arrange neighbours in time. But, then, there's non-"smart" automatic feeders available at a fraction of the price, and it's fairly cruel to leave a pet unattended for an extended time without someone going over to at least walk them/clean out their litter box or cage anyway.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
They might have a point. The product appears to be a silly novelty product aimed at people with more money than sense. With 30+ million Americans suddenly unemployed, many more furloughed and a general collapse of the economy, even those with zero sense are finding themselves without the money.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
PetNet is coming back online!
To anyone still checking the comments here, PetNet is coming back online. I received an email from petnet stating that my "Gen 1 Feeders" were back online. I restarted my two devices and logged into the app and they both work now without issue.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: PetNet is coming back online!
Cool. For how long?
That's the main issue here, you can't guarantee that it won't happen again, and when it does your purchase isn't worth what you paid for it.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]