They do have a valid point about protecting their customers from poor quality counterfeits.
No, not really. Not like this. Their anti-counterfeiting technology is unreliable, and sporadically fails even for the Canon-branded batteries that come with the cameras. And it does nothing to deter other companies from building batteries, and does nothing to deter customers from buying them, because even if they have to replace all of their batteries, they would still pay less than they would for Canon-branded batteries. Besides, those batteries are eventually going to fail no matter what. As long as the users don't update their cameras' firmware too frequently, odds are good that they'll be ready for new batteries by the time they have to replace them anyway.
In other words, Canon's approach is completely ineffectual as a measure for preventing people from choosing third-party batteries. These "safety" checks do nothing but piss off Canon's paying customers—people who spent thousands of dollars on Canon camera gear. And why? Because they dared to save a few bucks on a disposable, consumable commodity
The way Canon is playing the game is like Ford deciding to regulating car tire safety by having police officers randomly confiscate non-OEM tires, or legitimate tires if they can't clearly make out the certificate of authenticity printed on the side, leaving the drivers on the side of the road with a non-drivable car. Nobody sane would ever buy a Ford automobile if they did this, and lots of us are actively boycotting several printer manufacturers for such dirty tricks. So why are people so willing to tolerate this abuse from a camera manufacturer?
If Canon actually
cared about protecting customers from poor quality counterfeits, they would simply license access to their platform. License access to their battery protocol and the chips required to support it. License access to their lens protocol. And so on. Mandate compliance checks by Canon prior to first sale as part of the licensing requirements. And make the licensing costs low enough per unit to ensure that third-party manufacturers are universally willing to to "go legit". That way, when Canon's paying customers buy a battery that works, they will have reasonable assurance that Canon actually vetted the product, that is safe, that it will not harm their camera, and that Canon promises not to deliberately break it. That's what competent electronics manufacturers do when they want to ensure product compatibility and reliability. By contrast, deliberately sabotaging people's ability to use their cameras with a particular battery is dirty, it's sleazy, and whatever Canon exec approved it should be thrown out on his or her @$$.