Panasonic starts locking out third-party batteries with new firmware

Kodak's already taken some steps to cut down on counterfeiting of its batteries, and it looks like Panasonic is now taking some fairly drastic measures of it own, which could leave some users of its cameras a tad unhappy. Apparently, the company has determined that some third-party batteries amazingly don't meet its own rigid safety standards, so it's now released a new firmware update that can detect said batteries and prevent them from working. At the moment, that only includes cameras that use DMW-BCF10, DMW-BCG10, or DMW-BLB13 battery packs (some sixteen cameras in all), but it seems safe to assume that this'll soon be standard practice on all Panasonic cameras.

[Via Slashdot]

[Kyle B @ Jun 25th 2009 11:52AM]

Unfortunately they have to make money somehow, the gross profit margin on digital point and shoots is pretty small.

[AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA1 Plumbing @ Jun 25th 2009 12:03PM]

Thats because most P&S cameras are shit.

make a good product and people will buy it.. Just look what Apple did to the MP3 player market. Before we had all sorts of mp3 players that had excellent sound quality and took 1 AAA battery. Now we have sealed in batteries that.... OH WAIT!

[Kyle B @ Jun 25th 2009 12:08PM]

I guess someone's going to be first in the phone book...

[xtole @ Jun 25th 2009 12:10PM]

I have just locked out Panasonic from my purchasing options.

[Jorvay @ Jun 25th 2009 12:54PM]

@xtole
Your loss. Panasonic is arguably making the P&S cameras on the market right now. This battery issue is a pain, but, as AAAAAA1 Plumbing alluded to, at least you can still replace the battery. Or you could buy one of the many Panasonics that use standard AA batteries.

[Scott @ Jun 28th 2009 12:35AM]

Canon owns the compact P&S market. There's no reason to settle for a Panasonic with a locked battery.

[pjtocci @ Jun 25th 2009 11:53AM]

That's fracking awful. I have 3 spare batts for my Canon SD750 that have worked perfectly for almost 2 years, and provide much longer shooting time. Guess I won't be buying a Kodak anytime soon.

[pjtocci @ Jun 25th 2009 11:54AM]

...or Panasonic.

[macserv @ Jun 25th 2009 10:55PM]

If it's anything like what's going on with Panny's new HD camcorders, then it is definitely possible for third parties to make batteries, they just have to partner with Panasonic to make it happen.

IDX, for example, just released an extended battery which "employs secured communication technology and works with specific Panasonic™ camcorders in the AG-HMC150 and AG-HMC70 series." It lasts about 25% longer than Panasonic's biggest OEM battery, and adds a 3-LED push-button charge level indicator.

Who knows what such a partnership entails, but the phrase "locked out" just doesn't apply. I'll definitely accept "restricted entry", though.

[DR House @ Jun 25th 2009 11:54AM]

People who is unhappy about this need to check there brain, those fake batteries can set your home on fire,destroy your expensive camera,doesn't show battery bar or how much left in it, and doesn't last long like the original one

Is it worth saving 20 box for all this?

[pjtocci @ Jun 25th 2009 11:55AM]

yes.

[Jason @ Jun 25th 2009 12:32PM]

Just because you bought a crappy third party battery does mean they are all bad. I've had very good experiences with third party batteries. Having a factory battery does guarantee that it will be free from design flaws and defects, just ask Sony and Dell laptop owners. If Panasonic wants to be dicks fine, I just won't buy from them.

[AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA1 Plumbing @ Jun 25th 2009 12:01PM]

How about make your shitty cameras take AA batteries instead. form factir does not make a difference when your camera is as big as a watermelon.

[Chris @ Jun 25th 2009 12:03PM]

Your inferior car can is more likely to get you killed in a crash, is it really worth it to save some extra $$?

[Agent .25i @ Jun 25th 2009 12:30PM]

Ya, and we all know that OEM batteries *never* explode, catch on fire, etc etc etc.
Check your own head. This is just another way for Panasonic to force consumers into buying a product that only they can manufacture.
Only a matter of time before the 3rd party guys figure this out.

[shibathedog @ Jun 25th 2009 12:46PM]

I think you need to "check your brain" did you ever stop and think that not all unofficial batteries are crap like this? Sure there are the cheap Chinese knockoffs that really only exist to save you money, but there are other batteries which can be of higher quality than the stock battery and even hold more power. Panasonic doesn't care though, they just want a monopoly on this battery market so they can sell whats the most profitable, but not before inflating the price even more. Very Sony-like move Panasonic.

This seems like it will be easy to circumvent though, for both the end user and the battery companies.

[FuzzyCat @ Jun 25th 2009 12:47PM]

I don't mean to be rude but I could only make your comment make sense when I put on a faux Mexican accent, one of the really bad ones.

[Keith @ Jun 25th 2009 1:32PM]

What exactly is a fake battery?

Do keep in mind that OEM batteries are usually made by a third party, too. And, that they leak, explode and burst into flames at least as often as non OEM batteries.

[Loonie @ Jun 25th 2009 11:55AM]

Couldn't they just provide a warning?

[Ignatius @ Jun 25th 2009 12:49PM]

That wouldn't make them money, now would it?

[Dan @ Jun 25th 2009 11:56AM]

Yeah.. it's all about safety... riiiiiiiiight.

[Alex @ Jun 25th 2009 11:56AM]

Wow, that sucks.

I'm a Canon user, and I always get my batteries on eBay for like $1 (instead of the outrageous $40 on Amazon). That'd be bullshit if I had to throw down $80 on two extra batteries, even if they do perform better than the crap eBay batteries.

[Arian @ Jun 25th 2009 11:58AM]

That's crazy! Has this ever happened on a device with removable batteries before?

[tekdroid @ Jun 25th 2009 12:12PM]

I think so.

But have no direct experience (I think Sony has done this on some products).

Printer manufacturers love to chip their cartridges too, which is a bit different to this but the same sort of 'don't-buy-anything-but-our-consumables' thing.

(but again I have no direct experience with a printer like that).

[CtrlBurn @ Jun 25th 2009 12:12PM]

It's happened with cell phones, I think. I know some Verizon phones can detect non-OEM chargers, and refuse to charge. I'm sure the batteries work the same way.

[Ignatius @ Jun 25th 2009 12:55PM]

Can you imagine Sony saying that third-party batteries are unsafe?

That's just comedy gold right there, considering Sony's track record for laptops...

[kal326 @ Jun 25th 2009 1:10PM]

@tekdroid

I am pretty sure Lexmark did this with chips on their toner cartridges. Then they went even further to sue the 3rd party refurbishers/manufacturers for violating the DMCA/copyright laws by using their chips over in refurbished cartridges or producing copies of the chips for use on refurbed toners.

http://news.cnet.com/2100-1023-979791.html

Dick move all around and Lexmark ended up loosing. I doubt Panasonic will go as far to protect their battery reselling margins given the outcome of the Lexmark case.

[WilfordBrimley @ Jun 26th 2009 12:06AM]

kal326, I did not know that about Lexmark.

I heard it was HP who had done this and had won. I guess I now have one less reason to flatly refuse to buy HP products. Too bad there are other reasons and they are still on my Never Again list. As is Lexmark along with Panasonic now.

[John @ Jun 25th 2009 12:01PM]

how are consumers going to react to this?

[tekdroid @ Jun 25th 2009 12:05PM]

"Down With Lumix!" banners?

[Eddie W @ Jun 25th 2009 1:14PM]

unfortunately most users won't notice until they buy the camera.

[enigmafish14 @ Jun 25th 2009 12:00PM]

nice

[Nelson @ Jun 25th 2009 12:08PM]

The last two batteries I got (One for my cell phone and one for my digital camera) I purchased on Ebay for about $5 each (with shipping). Both provide me with better performance than the OEM batteries that came with the device.

[Daniel @ Jun 25th 2009 12:06PM]

Now that they've locked out competition, they are free to jack up the prices on extra batteries.

[megrom @ Jun 25th 2009 12:08PM]

I'm in, i want that new shiny box.

[Nic @ Jun 25th 2009 12:07PM]

The lumix cameras are pretty nice, but damn panasonic thats lame! :p

[Rik Feilden @ Jun 25th 2009 12:13PM]

So, the manufacturers will reverse engineer the batteries and create their own chip that defeats the lock-out...
Then Kodak will summon forth the DMCA...
Closely followed legal beating in court (a la lexmark)

What will the end result be? The 3rd party batteries will end up costing slightly more to cover the cost of breaking the protection.

[Juaquin @ Jun 25th 2009 12:40PM]

Uhhh how do you think the DMCA is going to apply in China? I can go on eBay right now and order a fake iPod Shuffle (or anything else). US companies can't do shit about it.

[ComradeZ @ Jun 25th 2009 4:05PM]

The DMCA has an exemption for interoperability, so it won't stop a determined 3rd party manufacturer who is otherwise working within the law. What will slow them down is having to reverse engineer and work around Panasonic code, which can be at any time modified to keep ahead of the "counterfeiters."

[DWOHIO @ Jun 29th 2009 2:32PM]

I guess I stop buying Panasonic cameras then.

Gee...I am so *wounded* I now only have 3928 other camera options to choose from.

[Rusty @ Jun 25th 2009 12:16PM]

Personally, I just "antie up" and buy the OEM batteries. Considering how much damage can be done by a counterfit, I'd rather have the OEM battery. Easier to get a replacement if something does blow up with an OEM vs a knock off.

[dennis.church @ Jun 25th 2009 12:27PM]

Seems to me it's your property if you paid for it. They are just taking advantage of the computer's ability to change the item that you have in your own possession. Eventually car manufactures will program their cars not to run if you used tires not from their dealers. I'm sure there is some layerize in the ticket when you buy it, but I really hope they get successfully sued over this invasion of property rights.

To DRhouse. Keep practicing the English Bro. "The dogs bark but the caravan moves on"

[Oded Yosef Kassirer @ Jun 25th 2009 12:22PM]

Love will Save the Universe!!!

[windblownmonkey @ Jun 25th 2009 12:22PM]

I would be ANGRY!
I hate things like this. I wouldn't update mine. But if there was a serious safety issue, that would be different.

[JasonD @ Jun 25th 2009 12:23PM]

question....how do you "activate" a comment for the recession posts?

[Forrest @ Jun 25th 2009 12:27PM]

The same way you activated this one :P

[JasonD @ Jun 25th 2009 12:33PM]

yeh but if you post a 2nd comment.......it says make sure you only activate 1.

[Ignatius @ Jun 25th 2009 12:57PM]

That's for if you don't actually put in your username and password.

[Giddygoon @ Jun 25th 2009 12:25PM]

I use two 3rd party batteries as spares for my TZ5, and together cost about $30 less than the price of a single Panny battery. They don't perform as well as the OEM, but there's certainly no way I'd pay the OEM price for a battery that gets me maybe 30 more shots than those cheaper ones.

If they're so worried about safety (which we all know isn't the real reason), then include a spare battery with the cameras.

[jamiezeez @ Jun 25th 2009 4:00PM]

What rev of firmware? LX3 just got 1.3