Slashdot Mirror
Lexmark DMCA Case Winds On
The EFF filed a brief (brief, press release) in the ongoing case over Lexmark incorporating copyright-protected code in their printer cartridges in order to prevent competitors from producing compatible cartridges for their printers. The BBC notes some of the harmful effects of lack of competition in the industry.
...don't buy Lexmark printers? I mean, seriously, as long as Canon and HP et al aren't pulling these type of stunts, won't the market take care of this itself?
Do not read this sig.
Last time I checked there was no monopoly in the printer market. If Lexmark wants to keep it's design proprietary so be it. If Joe Consumer doesn't like it, buy another brand.
Well there is competition between printer manufacturers, and I imagine that if ink was priced at the cost of production tomorrow (considering perfect competition) then their printer prices would go up. Sure it's expensive, but look at the printers...you can buy a printer that would have cost $1000 ten years ago for $80 now. Anyway, since when has the law cared anything about competition? I mean, if it did, then the lawsuits against file sharers would be tossed out instantly. File sharing is the only other means of distribution for most of these songs...
You say that as if the lawmakers don't want the rich to get richer and the poor to get poorer. Rich people = campaign contributions.
These people look deep into my soul and assign me a number based on the order I joined.
The height of absurdity to me is the infamous HP example. On more than one occasion, I've walked into a store and learned that replacing my HP printer altogether was cheaper than buying ink cartridge refills. Compare, $25 for a B&W cartridge + $35 for a color cartridge = $60 total. Cost of that HP DeskJet on sale at Office Depot? $50, and you get an entirely new printer!
No, this is completely wrong. Standards must be developed. Good, compatible knock-offs must be designed. While there is competition for printers themselves, there is no competition for the ink cartridges. Once a company ropes a customer into their printer, they'll milk them for all its worth.
They should be required to label these printers. Otherwise people will continue to buy them without realizing that they will never be able to buy a third party cartrige.
DeviantArt Page
NSFWNice troll! It would be super if we gave every major company a total monopoly, and we all had to pay extremely high costs to insure that we don't harm ourselves by buying an "inferior" product. Heavens, consumers *might* even start making their own purchasing decisions! Oh no!!!
I hope you're a troll, and the person who wrote this comment sees how absurd it is.
Moderation: Put your hand inside the puppet head!
My guess is that the average user is lazy, and would rather spend twice as much on the ink instead of being bothered to educate themselves.
Thank you very much. You just revealed the deep, dark secret of the Western Economy. All the work "they" have done to keep it secret and you went and blew the cover.
Most people are dumb, and want to stay dumb. If you make it easy for them to stay dumb, they will pay you money for it.
This has the benefit of making sure they never have enough money to move out of the middle class.
"Live Free or Die." Don't like it? Then keep out of the USA
So many off-topic comments about inkjets. This case is all about TONER cartridges. Toner is used in laser printers--the kind at your office. Ink is used in inkjets--the kind that came with your Walmart PC. There are no chips in Lexmark's inkjet cartridges. What is at issue here are $200 toner cartridges for $3000 printers, not $40 inkjet cartridges for $40 printers. RTFA.
Personally, I reckon the cheap laser printers (hp laserjet 1000, samsung izzy etc) are the best option unless you absolutely have to have colour. The initial cost is about the same, the print quality is better and the cost per page is lower.
You can even pick up an old HP laserjet 4L of ebay for like £20. Give the paper rollers a clean and those things go on for ever.
> However, to make it happen, all manufacturers will
> have to charge more for printers and less for
> cartridges. If even one player sticks with the old
> model, that player will see all the gains.
Unfortunatley, that's not how the US economy works. The only way to fix this sort problem is to let things get so bad that the companies involved go bankrupt, letting better run companies take thier place.
Which, incidentialy, is why Lexmark is doing this stunt, to prevent going bankrupt. The profit margin has been cut so low by underselling printers that they can't afford to let people use generic brand cartridges. Even if the population that knows generic brands even exist is one or two percent of the total, that's a significant amount of money the company will lose.
I think the "reform" will eventually happen naturally, the business model works well for cheap stuff like razorblades but for more expensive items the system is flawed.
It could be hastened by government regulation, but I'm not sure getting the government involved is neccessarily a good idea.
That this would just make people buy those blasted ink-refill kits a lot more often than buying a generic cart...
What's next, prosecuting with the DMCA for sticking a needle into the cart.. "Circumvention"
Lexmark Exec: We need titanium casings
Manufacturer: No problem, anything else?
Lexmark Exec: How about special paper with DRM on it that the printer recognizes and only prints to?
Manufacturer: Done
Excuse me, I don't mean to impose, but I am the ocean
institute the Gillete sales model
...
Good point, I just paid $8 for 4 razor blades 2 days ago and they're pushing the "extra lube strip" model for almost $10 for 4. Now back to the topic
I think of the printer biz like the video game console biz. There's zero margin on the printers and fat margins on the ink. They could chose to make $20 on the printer sale and not play the ink game -or- make $0 on the printer and $20 every 3 months on ink sales. The ink biz is where it's at, and if they can ensure a monopoly on ink for their hardware using the DMCA, it's not surprising that they would want to. My problem is not with the "sell the ink" approach, it's in trying to impose a monopoly on hardware you and I paid for and own.
Good people do not need laws to tell them to act responsibly, while bad people will find a way around the laws-Plato
Excuse me if this is a stupid question. I couldn't find the answer anywhere...
How does Lexmark know that Static Control made its interoperable chip thru legal means? Static Control could have just cracked the chip open, stuck it under a microscope and ripped-off the entire design.
Obviously, a clean-room reverse engineer is legal. There is tons of precedent to that effect. Even the DMCA has exemptions for it.
Perhaps Lexmark has some reason to believe Static Control illegally copied their chip?
There are plenty of parts available for hondas that are not produced by honda. If the auto industry was like the printer market, we'd pay $3000 for a new car, but have to pay $500 every 4,800 KM for Chrysler/Honda/Ford/Insert auto manufacturer here/ brand oil, and your auto manufacturers oil would only work in their cars, and no one else is legally allowed to produce competing oil for your car. Same for brakes, tires, etc.
This doesn't sound like a good deal to me.
I used to recommend Canon for precisely the reasons you stated until I learned that Canon does not make its printer hardware interfaces available to developers of printer drivers for Free operating systems.
So?
My Canon Injet actually works better in Linux than it does in Windows.
Palm (AFAIK) doesn't OSS it's drivesr, but it still works with Free OSes.