Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Copyright officials rule against Lexmark
The Globe and Mail ^ | Oct. 29, 2003 | JACK KAPICA

Posted on 10/29/2003 2:11:13 PM PST by antiRepublicrat

The United States Copyright Office has ruled in favour of Static Control Components, of Sanford, N.C., saying that its microchips do not contravene the Digital Millennium Copyright Act.

Lexmark International, the world's second-largest printer maker, had charged that SCC violated the act by making components for use in remanufactured laser printer toner cartridges. Among the components is a chip that mimics the behaviour of one made by Lexmark.

The ruling says that section 1201 of the DMCA allows aftermarket companies to develop software for the purpose of remanufacturing toner cartridges and printers.

SCC argued that Lexmark was trying to shield itself from competition by installing a chip on its toner cartridges to make it difficult for third-party manufacturers to make generic cartridges.

The decision says that SCC is entitled to sell replacement chips for use in used Lexmark toner cartridges.

The DMCA, passed in 1998, allows for review of new types of works that require an exemption for being able to circumvent a technology measure that would control access to a copyrighted work.

Lexmark filed its suit against SCC in December, 2002, saying the DMCA shields itself from competition from the remanufacturing industry.

SCC manufactures components for recovering empty printer cartridges, refurbishing the cartridges and reselling them.

In August, the North Carolina Legislature approved a measure that made the Lexmark Return Program, formerly called the Prebate program, unenforceable in North Carolina.

"We are examining the documents and devoting a large amount of time with our economists and attorneys to calculate the damages that we feel we are entitled to from Lexmark because of their serious misdeeds," SCC CEO Ed Swartz said about the ruling


TOPICS: Business/Economy; Extended News; Government; News/Current Events; Technical
KEYWORDS: cartridges; copyright; dmca; good; lexmark; printer
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-30 next last
Why this is important to you.

Yes, it does mean you can still get cheap toner cartridges, but it has farther-reaching implications. This was one of several examples of a company trying to use the DMCA to stop free-market competition or to erode various rights of the people. Hopefully judgements like this one will dissuade other companies from using the poorly-written DMCA against our interests yet again.

1 posted on 10/29/2003 2:11:14 PM PST by antiRepublicrat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: antiRepublicrat
YES!!!!
2 posted on 10/29/2003 2:12:24 PM PST by stands2reason
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: isthisnickcool
Again, DMCA has a limited reach. And the hystericals among us are going to have to get a grip...
3 posted on 10/29/2003 2:16:00 PM PST by Bush2000
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: antiRepublicrat; Dominic Harr; chance33_98; rdb3; ShadowAce; HAL9000; NormsRevenge; Timesink; ...
An important ruling on the reach of the DMCA. A great victory for consumers. What is your take on this major decision?

FR Tech Bump List

4 posted on 10/29/2003 2:18:37 PM PST by Fractal Trader (Free Republic Energized - - The power of Intelligence on the Internet! Checked by Correkt Spel (TM))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: antiRepublicrat
It has been really clear for some time that Lexmark along with others is running a type of scam. Sellig the printers at cost or maybe even less than cost then making you pay through the nose for ink.

It may not be legally the same as "bait and switch" but morally it is.

Right now Walmart is selling a printer for $28 which includes an ink cartridge, the cartridge by itself sells for more than that.

5 posted on 10/29/2003 2:21:26 PM PST by yarddog
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Bush2000
Again, DMCA has a limited reach.

Pretty much unlimited into our pocketbooks. Luckily SCC had the money to defend themselves, although I'm sure it's going to hit their profit margins. Most of the rest of us can't afford a DMCA suit for doing something as simple as, say, watching a Region 2 DVD that we bought or skipping the commercials on a DVD.

6 posted on 10/29/2003 2:22:16 PM PST by antiRepublicrat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: yarddog
Sellig the printers at cost or maybe even less than cost then making you pay through the nose for ink.

It's simply the business model that they chose. What is unsupportable is that when they found out their business model couldn't survive the free market, they used the DMCA cudgel to try to support it with.

7 posted on 10/29/2003 2:24:27 PM PST by antiRepublicrat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: yarddog
"Right now Walmart is selling a printer for $28 which includes an ink cartridge, the cartridge by itself sells for more than that."

The rub CAN be that the cart in the printer when you buy it might not be FULL. Some here have reported this scheme.

I've got to say that my experiences with "generic" ink carts hasn't been zackly sterling. I bought two black carts for the same price as one Epson cart. Each cart lasted half as long as the Epson. Perhaps it was the supplier, and that WAS a couple of years back.

Anyone have really good luck with generic carts? Where did you get them?

Michael

8 posted on 10/29/2003 2:28:12 PM PST by Wright is right! (Never get excited about ANYTHING by the way it looks from behind.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: antiRepublicrat
The problem I have with the whole thing is it runs counter to what I perceive as free market.

They are attempting to sell something, "ink" which I suspect costs almost nothing to make at an extreme profit. They attempt to do it, as you say by keeping anyone else from supplying ink for their printers.

It is a simple case of trying to have a mini monopoly.

9 posted on 10/29/2003 2:31:23 PM PST by yarddog
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Wright is right!
I have heard the stories about short-filled ink cartridges too and it makes sense, but I personally have not come across it. I have now accumulated about a dozen printers by purchasing ones such as a Lexmard 605 with two cartridges for much less than the two cartridges sell for separately.

It makes sense although I am accumluating a lot of printers.

10 posted on 10/29/2003 2:35:15 PM PST by yarddog
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: yarddog
It may not be legally the same as "bait and switch" but morally it is.

Totally legal, and the idea is as old as the hills. It's called the "Gillette Model", because they invented it: Sell the razor at cost, at a loss, or even give it away free, because it will guarantee you a permanent customer for your expensive blades.

11 posted on 10/29/2003 2:48:05 PM PST by Timesink
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: yarddog
I have heard the stories about short-filled ink cartridges too and it makes sense, but I personally have not come across it

Just cut open an OEM HP ink jet cartridge and see what is in it, mostly foam.

12 posted on 10/29/2003 2:51:20 PM PST by itsahoot (The lesser of two evils, is evil still...Alan Keyes)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: antiRepublicrat
YES!
13 posted on 10/29/2003 2:52:44 PM PST by Chancellor Palpatine (Dr. Hasslein was the only human character who had any sense in the "Apes" series)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Bush2000
And the hystericals among us are going to have to get a grip...

Bushy, don't count me amount the "hystericals" regarding the DMCA. Or just about anything else for that matter:)

14 posted on 10/29/2003 2:53:24 PM PST by isthisnickcool (Guns!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: yarddog
Right now Walmart is selling a printer for $28 which includes an ink cartridge, the cartridge by itself sells for more than that.

Well not quite, because the ink cartridges that come with the printer are only like 1/4 full.

15 posted on 10/29/2003 2:56:06 PM PST by Rodney King (No, we can't all just get along.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: antiRepublicrat
So is this administrative ruling "it" -- or can Lexmark still sue in Federal court to try to overturn it?
16 posted on 10/29/2003 3:05:13 PM PST by HiTech RedNeck
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: yarddog
The other scam is that the printer uses the color cartridge for some of its black and white work. I have the cheap Lexmark that is also a fax and a copier. On this one, it uses the color cartridge to print regular black text on envelopes. I found this out when the color cartridge emptied out and I couldn't print envelopes even though my B&W cartridge was fine.
17 posted on 10/29/2003 3:06:41 PM PST by Rodney King (No, we can't all just get along.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: HiTech RedNeck
So is this administrative ruling "it" -- or can Lexmark still sue in Federal court to try to overturn it?

I'm not sure. The Copyright Office, along with the Library of Congress, are given a lot of power in interpreting how the DMCA may affect commerce and technology, and to make exceptions. Congress defers quite a bit to them. Lexmark could probably appeal, but I don't think it will go anywhere.

18 posted on 10/29/2003 4:06:42 PM PST by antiRepublicrat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: Bush2000
It's eggzakly what Microsoft is doing with its products: give away the operating system (I bought my XP Pro in Thailand for $3!) and then charge for the upgrades. A perfectly legal business model.
19 posted on 10/29/2003 4:15:15 PM PST by Revolting cat! (Far out, man!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Revolting cat!
"I bought my XP Pro in Thailand for $3!"

You can buy most any software in Thailand for less then $3 per COPY.
I bought plenty of it in Bangkok in late 1999.
They ignore copyright law.
20 posted on 10/29/2003 4:38:08 PM PST by AlexW
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-30 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson