Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

North Carolina Fights Back Against Lexmark

Posted by simoniker on from the state-poking-at-dmca? dept.

ngrier writes "Seems that at least some aren't sitting idly by, while printer manufacturers try to assert total control. The North Carolina legislature just approved a measure which guarantees the consumer's right to refill ink cartridges. For history of the Lexmark DMCA-related story, involving the company placing copyright-protected code in their printer cartridges in order to prevent competitors from producing compatible cartridges, there are previous Slashdot posts about it here(1), here(2), and here(3)."

37 of 412 comments (clear)

  1. I like this by l810c · · Score: 5, Interesting
    It's nice to see some common sense come out of a legislature. I like Rep. Joe Hackney's analogy:

    I think if Ford Motor Company tried to completely control the aftermarket by trying to control the tire you put on your car by some device, I think this Legislature would act.

    There are many areas of the market place that this should be applied.

    The price of printers may go up, but we will still have Choice when it comes to ink. Ink is by far the higher cost in the long run.

    1. Re:I like this by Melibeus · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I threw my Lexmark in the bin after the ink ran out when I found there were no Linux drivers for it except a partially working (B&W only)reverse engineered one. Nor do Lexmark seem to care much. See their scorecard here. "Useless"

    2. Re:I like this by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Ah, yes. The proof that laissez faire capitalism doesn't work is . . . a depression caused by the Frederal Reserve Bank and Bank of England mis-manipulation of the money supply to maintain artificially low interest rates in 1926-1930, taxes raised to pay off national debts (especially in France and Germany) left over from World War I, and an international move away from free trade towards protectionist/mercantilist economics.

      Yep, that is convincing. A depression caused by the actions of governments proves laissez faire capitalism doesn't work, because it proves government cannot be trusted to not stick its hand in in an effort to "improve" things.

    3. Re:I like this by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

      "Capitalists" and corporations don't have to believe in laissez-faire. They try and get priveleges from the government because they can.

      Libertarians do because they believe it's in the overall best interest of everyone.

      Corporations shouldn't be given special priveleges and tax/liability treatment. Just as individuals shouldn't be able to use the government to try and control the market with price controls, rent controls, wage controls, etc.

      THAT is just and right.

    4. Re:I like this by jrockway · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Salvage it for parts. There must be something good in there.

      And if $35 buys a black ink cartridge, and $35 buys a color ink cartridge, a black ink cartridge, AND a printer, electronic parts now have a negative cost when salvaged from a lexmark printer. Radio Shack should sue :)

      --
      My other car is first.
  2. Open Letter to Inkjet Printer Manufacturers by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Are you an employee of a company that manufacturers inkjet printers? Are you an inkjet owner? Have you been thinking of buying an inkjet printer? If so, listen up.

    Now, don't get me wrong. Everyone owning their own printing press is an important leap for free speech, and thus democracy,
    but there's one tidbit the printer manufacturers have neglected...

    The loss leader model in the printing technology business is a failure.

    Sure money is pouring in now, but sooner or later your customers will reel from the pain caused by you ramming their asses.
    Let's face it-- previous inkjet owners would rather print at Kinkos than buy a new inkjet printer. If you put yourself in your customers' shoes, it's not hard to see why:

    1. Ink cartridges are too expensive. Boy, are they too expensive!
    2. The cartridges have a short shelf life before they dry up and jam the print heads.
    3. Printing regularly (or otherwise wasting ink) is the only way to combat the ink drying problem.
    4. Consumers are reluctant to print anything unless absolutely necessary thanks to the artificially high price of ink.
    Thus, inkjet printers are rarely excercised enough to maintain them and rarely work right when they are needed.

    Ink cartridges have a short shelf life and no printer manufacturer has been able to solve that problem. Because of that, Gillette's give-away-the-razor-sell-the-blades-at-a-primium model does not adapt well to the printing consumables industry. In
    the meantime, raping consumers on ink is a business model that will soon die, because consumers will find that inkjet printers are just not worth it. Joe Sixpack will learn soon enough that the printer bundled "free" with his PC is nothing but a money pit.

    Because printers are sold cheaply (presumably at a loss), it's not surprising that printer reliability has gone down the shitter. Manufacturers are cutting corners when producing printers. Inkjet printers today are made out of cheap plastic where metal should be used, resulting in a fragile product likely to jam paper.

    Let's face it, until printer manufacturers change their business model, inkjet printers are just not worth the hassle.

    1. Re:Open Letter to Inkjet Printer Manufacturers by Victa · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Sorry, but I have to disagree with some of your post...

      > 3. Printing regularly (or otherwise wasting ink) is the only way to combat the ink drying problem.
      > 4. Consumers are reluctant to print anything unless absolutely necessary thanks to the artificially high price of ink.
      > Thus, inkjet printers are rarely excercised enough to maintain them and rarely work right when they are needed.

      BULLSHIT!!!

      I have and Epson Stylus Colour 800. It is approximately 5 years old. I purchased it when I worked for an Epson service center. It barely gets used (maybe once 6 months), and I have NEVER had any problems with the ink drying out, if the printer is designed and used correctly ink drying in the head should NOT be a problem.

      > Ink cartridges have a short shelf life and no printer manufacturer has been able to solve that problem.

      BULLSHIT!!!

      I have a BOX full of ink cartridges (genuine Epson) that I got at the same time as the printer, and just the other day I had to put a new black one in the printer, it worked fin, and it was OVER 2 YEARS OUT OF DATE!!!
      Once again, if they are left sealed, and stored correctly there should be no issues.

      On the subject of non-genuine and refilled ink cartridges... They DO FSCK PRINTERS!!! When I worked fixing these things EVERY printer that came in with non genuine or refilled cartridges had print quiality issues. Sometimes the customer was lucky and a set of genuine cartridges fixed the problem, but usually a new print head was required (several hundred $AU).
      I have also seen many cases of non-genuine (and refilled) inks simply draining into the bottom of the printer overnight... Or coming out of the packet dry, whilst still IN DATE!!! Try explaining to a customer why the ink they bought thismorning, and put in an hour ago is empty out of the box...

      Once upon a time I too thought non-genuine and refilled ink was OK... Then I spent a couple of years seeing the damage that these inks cause. And after that I will never use non genuine inks, nor would I perform warranty service on a printer with non genuine inks in it.

    2. Re:Open Letter to Inkjet Printer Manufacturers by SeanTobin · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Heh.. how about this. I have a HP laserjet IIP that has gone over 400,000 pages. The thing is a beast! Bought it in '87 with the 1meg memory upgrade. I love the fact that they set the internal page counter to max out at 100k. Not too many products these days that you can roll the odometers on anymore.

      Try getting that from an inkjet :) Or even one of the newer hp lasers (which I still think are great printers... just not the beasts they once were)

      --
      Karma: SELECT `karma` FROM `users` WHERE `userid`=138474;
  3. Any effect? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Well consumers have that right already - they are perfectly free to refill their cartridges; of course, it doesn't do them any good, because the chip ignores the new ink. Is this a ban on putting the chips in?

  4. Does this therefore apply to the whole USA? by 16K+Ram+Pack · · Score: 3, Interesting
    Not being an American, but presumably this means that people can mail order cartridges from North Carolina to their home address?

    Is there a lot of this in the USA? States which have allowed things that are banned in other states gaining additional 'export' markets? I can think of people travelling to Vegas for one.

    1. Re:Does this therefore apply to the whole USA? by generic-man · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Is there a lot of this in the USA? States which have allowed things that are banned in other states gaining additional 'export' markets?

      Yes. Look at all the border stores that sell fireworks -- it's illegal to take them back home, but the store owners don't care because their state's laws apply.

      And in Pennsylvania, until recently all liquor stores were closed on Sunday -- currently 10% of them are open Sundays, as a pilot program. Until that happened, people had to drive to neighboring states to buy hard liquor on a Sunday. This happens in plenty of other states too -- and in some states, it happens at the county level.

      And whatever you do, don't ask people in Greenwich, Connecticut what they think about New Yorkers buying Powerball tickets there...

      --
      For more information, click here.
    2. Re:Does this therefore apply to the whole USA? by 1010011010 · · Score: 4, Interesting


      There is a lot of it. The states are sometimes called the "laboritories" for legislation. The U.S. was set up with way -- a relatively weak and powerless federal government that provides for the common defense, currency, bankruptcy, and a few other things in the "enumerated powers." The states were responsible for all other legislation, except in areas reserved exclusively to the people. Things like freedom of speech, religion and assembly, and the right to bear arms are in that category (see 9th and 10th amendments). These days, a lot of federal mandates are achieved through the federal government's power of taxation, rather than more direct (and unconstitutional) means.

      I'm not sure if the U.S. federal government is all that constitutional these days. Before FDR, there was a "presumption of liberty" that favors individuals and the states. Post-FDR, there was a "presumption of constitutionality" which favors congress and the president, and disfavors states and individual citizens. This flies in the face of the 9th and 10th Amendments, which are supposed to be part of the "supreme law of the land" that places limitations on the power of the federal government.

      --
      Napster-to-go says "Fill and refill your compatible MP3 player", which is a lie. It's not MP3. It's WMA with DRM.
    3. Re:Does this therefore apply to the whole USA? by poptones · · Score: 2, Interesting
      Ever drink california wine? there are wineries all over the country - there is even one near me, here in Mississippi - but because of moronic laws leftover from prohibition the wineries cannot EXPORT their product from the state. I have never seen logic in this, but that's the way it is in many states: they let their citizens make wine (or beer) but prohibit them from selling it across state lines. Stupid.

      California has very liberal marijuana laws and many people exploit this. Alaska has even more liberal laws (there is even a judicial decision in that state that an individual has the right to grow and consume it in their own home) but because it's so isolated from the rest of the US I doubt many people are travelling across state lines to get their fix.

      If you really wanna see a can of worms, look up the abortion laws and the lengths states have gone to worm around Roe v. Wade.

  5. Let's do it with Apple! by axxackall · · Score: 0, Interesting
    There are many areas of the market place that this should be applied.

    First where I'd like to see it is with Apple computers.

    Apple must leave the choice of OS to customers - right now you still have to pay for OSX when you are buying Mac even if you plan to use Mac with Linux or BeOS or BSD.

    And, of course, Apple must let go their firmware, so that Mac clones will be available again.

    --

    Less is more !
    1. Re:Let's do it with Apple! by Fareq · · Score: 2, Interesting

      OK, Apple is both a hardware and a software company, correct?

      Apple hardware counts for what, 3% of the consumer market? I don't know for sure, but its at least 2%-ish and not more than 5%-ish.
      Now. Apple makes Mac computers. Mac computers cost more than PCs per unit of computing power.

      Yes, I will grant, for the sake of argument, that Mac's G4 architecture is superior to that of, say Intel's P4 and P4-Xeon.
      But, for approximately the price of a high-end G4 ~1Ghz, I could easily get a 3.06Ghz P4 system, and likely even a dual 2.4 or 2.8 Xeon system...

      Mac cloning would put downward pressure on the hardware prices. Suddenly Macs would not cost thousands of dollars while PCs cost only hundreds.
      Thus, it is likely that Mac hardware would take a larger chunk of the market, perhaps, say, 10-15% of the total market.

      That means that Apple could sell 3-5 times as many copies of the latest version of OS X. And many more copies of all their other software.
      Thus, Apple could become a real player in the marketplace, instead of the little guy on the side.

      And, correect me if I'm wrong, but it would not be a crime (under the DMCA or any other law) to reverse engineer the core Mac architecture and produce a compatible product.

      On the other hand, it would be a violation of the DMCA to reverse engineer the print cartridges in the same manner because the DMCA protects the copyright protected code.

      Oh, and another thing. If you've ever read the text of the DMCA, you will find that it does not prohibit the circumventing of access control mechanisms, but only the circumvention of EFFECTIVE access control mechanisms. (by my reading, IANAL)
      If you can prove that the Lexmark mechanism is ineffective (as stands) then you should be home free as far as circumvention is concerned...
      but the courts have yet to define "effective" here

    2. Re:Let's do it with Apple! by banzai51 · · Score: 2, Interesting
      How will this benefit Apple?

      Ever hear of a little company called Microsoft? They only sell the OS. Wait, check that, they only lease the OS. By leaving the hardware to clones, you sell more computers. Soon the profit from selling the OS will far, far eclipse the profit from hardware. In short, Apple would radically expand it's marketshare and make more money.

      How will it benefit consumers?

      Lower cost Macs with the same quality. You got a problem with that?

  6. Consumers do have *some* power. by Corvaith · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I always buy my printers based on how much it'll run me to replace the ink afterwards. Not necessarily comparing *just* that, granted, but it's a big factor. These days, my favored brand is generally Epson, and my still-relatively-new Stylus C62 has been good to me. And replacement ink doesn't break the bank.

    If people would *think* before they purchase and realize that Lexmark may have decent printer prices but their ink is absolutely ridiculous, such legislation would be largley unnecessary.

  7. No effect! by www.sorehands.com · · Score: 2, Interesting

    IANAL. But, I tend to doubt that local law can overide Federal Copyright Law.

    --
    Fight Spammers!
  8. The Supremacy Clause by David+Hume · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Supercedes federal copyright law in North Carolina?

    I doubt it, although Lexmark would be a fool to push it.


    Good point. Consider the application of Article VI of the Constitution, the Supremacy Clause:

    Article VI

    All debts contracted and engagements entered into, before the adoption of this Constitution, shall be as valid against the United States under this Constitution, as under the Confederation.

    This Constitution, and the laws of the United States which shall be made in pursuance thereof; and all treaties made, or which shall be made, under the authority of the United States, shall be the supreme law of the land; and the judges in every state shall be bound thereby, anything in the Constitution or laws of any State to the contrary notwithstanding.

    The Senators and Representatives before mentioned, and the members of the several state legislatures, and all executive and judicial officers, both of the United States and of the several states, shall be bound by oath or affirmation, to support this Constitution; but no religious test shall ever be required as a qualification to any office or public trust under the United States.


    See:

    http://www.law.cornell.edu/constitution/constitu ti on.articlevi.html

    http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/data/constitution/ article06/

    As FindLaw explains:

    The Operation of the Supremacy Clause

    When Congress legislates pursuant to its delegated powers, conflicting state law and policy must yield.7 Although the preemptive effect of federal legislation is best known in areas governed by the commerce clause, the same effect is present, of course, whenever Congress legislates constitutionally. And the operation of the supremacy clause may be seen as well when the authority of Congress is not express but implied.

    [Footnote 7] Gibbons v. Ogden, 22 U.S. (9 Wheat.) 1, 210 -211 (1824). See, e.g., Cipollone v. Liggett Group, Inc., 112 S.Ct. 2608 (1992); Morales v. TWA, 112 S.Ct. 2031 (1992); Maryland v. Lousiana, 451 U.S. 725, 746 (1981); Jones v. Rath Packing Co., 430 U.S. 519, 525 (1977).


    See http://supreme.lp.findlaw.com/constitution/article 06/02.html#4

    --
    Only Women Bleed (Sex, Sharia remix)
  9. Why not? by unixwin · · Score: 5, Interesting

    If Lexmark (or HP or whoever) makes a product and they say that for warranty purposes you have to use their own crappy ink/toner -- all this upfront, I don't see a big deal why it is a consumer victory as touted. I surely agree that a refill helps in cost cutting, but I have also seen tons of printers (both inkjet and laser) with ink/toner spilt all over their innards just because ppl didn't want use a decent cartridge / toner. This is when they bring their product in for warranty "replacement" since their ink/toner is "smudging", "not printing right" , "sucks" or something of that nature.

    As long as they let the consumer know this in advance and you have a choice not to buy this product no one is in trouble are they?

    Ofcourse you may not have much choice for buying from someone besides Lexmark & Canon & HP but then thats a DIFFERENT problem .....

    --
    -- everyones not everybody and neither is everybody like everyone.
  10. I wonder... by singularity · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I wonder how many consumers get to the point where they realize that buying a new printer each time is about as effective as trying to buy OEM ink cartridges.

    I was in Best Buy yesterday, and they had an inkjet printer on sale for $39. It has been a while since I bought an inkjet cartridge (company supplied laser printer), but I believe it was almost that expensive.

    That is the problem with a highly competitive razor/razor-blade model - as soon as the razors get really cheap due to competition, you get the the point where you start competing with the blades in price.

    I wonder how long before you see "intro" ink cartridges (with only like 25% filled) being supplied with the original printer?

    --
    - (c) 2018 Hank Zimmerman
  11. abusing copyright for restraint of trade by Eric+Smith · · Score: 5, Interesting
    What Lexmark is doing seems similar to what Sega did with later versions of their Genesis game console. The Genesis refused to run cartridges that didn't contain the trademarked word "SEGA" at a particular address. Sega apparently even has a patent on that security system (TMSS). When Accolade made cartridges containing that work, Sega sued. The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that this violated the Lanham act, because Sega deliberately designed the Genesis to require that trademark to be present regardless of the actual manufacturer of the cartridge. Thus Sega was to blame for the abuse of their own trademark.

    The Lexmark inkjet cartridge problem is based on abusing copyright rather than trademark, but it seems quite possible that a court would find that because Lexmark has unnecessarily forced their competitors to use their copyright in order to make a compatible cartridge, they are to blame for the resulting copyright infringement.

  12. Politics is finally always local - NC and Static by leoaugust · · Score: 2, Interesting

    It had to happen in North Carolina, because politics is ultimately about local issues. Static Control Components of Sanford, (close to Raleigh) employs 1200, and might even more if business grows. The Company had enough pull in the State to get the law passed.

    And I think this should be a lesson for other issues too ... Abstractions have to come down to one or few test cases where the rubber hits the road .... guess RIAA's thousands points of lawsuits will also meet such a fate from the localities where the lawsuits draw first blood.

    I would be foolish enough to say to RIAA "Bring 'em on" but I think that they should expect the unexpected when the finally go for it.

    --
    To see a world in a grain of sand, and then to step back and see the beach where the sand lies ...
  13. Re:HP's combo cartridges by MsGeek · · Score: 3, Interesting

    There are people who sell remanufactured HP cartridges. I would never rely on a remanufactured HP color cartridge (they tend to have cross-contaminated ink, where the yellow might be greenish because some cyan leaked in, for example) but I use remanufactured black cartridges happily. They are all over the place. Even Wal*Mart has 'em, from NCR.

    --
    Knowledge is power. Knowledge shared is power multiplied.
  14. Just a thought by wozster · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Last time I checked Canon doesn't sue 3rd party competitors
    & uses a seperate tank for each color (less waste)
    & doesn't throw around the DMCA
    & tells you to check your ink level by LOOKING AT THE CARTRIDGE (as it should be).

    Please correct me if I'm wrong, but from my recent research I found Canon to be the most reasonable (yes, I hated them as much as everyone else 5 years ago).

    1. Re:Just a thought by EnglishTim · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I have a Canon S500, and it has a system that detects when the ink is about to run out and when the ink has run out. I'm always surprised at how many prints I get between it telling me the ink is low and when it refuses to print any more, but it does give you some time to get around to getting some new cartridges. When the cartridge has expired, There doesn't seem to be very much ink left, although it is a bit difficult to tell - the cartridges are full of a cotton wool-like substance, presumably to stop the ink sloshing about. I've never had any bad prints as result of ink running out, so it seems they leave enough ink in to ensure that your last print will always be good, which can be a good or a bad thing, depending on what you want.

      I've not tried refilling the cartridges yet.

  15. I worked for a printer manufacturer by wift · · Score: 2, Interesting

    The company I worked for had to pull out of the consumer market(both ink and toner based) because they couldn't keep losing money on lost revenue due to generic cartridges. So now there is less choice in the toner and ink jet printers.

    My last ink jet screwed up because of the damn refillable cartridges. My current ink jet works great with name-brand cartridges.

    --
    ....... Thus ends my attempt at wit or whatever
  16. razor blades? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

    What keeps some other company from making cheap razor blades compatible with my Mach 3 razor?

  17. Do what was advocated with copy-protected CDs by whatch+durrin · · Score: 4, Interesting
    For a while, people advocated returning copy-protected CDs to the retailer. The same should be done with inkjet printers.

    Get one at Wal-Mart and when the ink runs out - return it and get a new one, complete with a new ink cartridge. Wal-mart employees could care less. Just give some lame-ass excuse.

    If manufacturers want to play this game, let's play! HP & Lexmark will have a new definition for "loss leader."

    --
    ***
    Radio Shack. You've got questions...we've got blank stares(TM).
  18. Getting around supremacy by yerricde · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Seems like North Carolina forgot about a little thing in the Constitution called the Supremacy Clause.

    In general, states can't nullify federal laws, but they can make federal laws much harder to enforce. For example, the City of Arcata banned compliance with the "optional" suggestions of the USAPATRIOT act.

    Federal law, 17 USC 1201: "No person shall manufacture, import, offer to the public, provide, or otherwise traffic in any technology, product, service, device, component, or part thereof, that is primarily designed or produced for the purpose of circumventing a technological measure that effectively controls access to a work protected under this title." That is, you can't sell devices that defeat DRM.

    Hypothetical state law: "No person shall manufacture, import, offer to the public, provide, or otherwise traffic in any technology, product, service, device, component, or part thereof, that contains one or more technological measures that effectively control access to a work, as defined in Title 17, United States Code, section 1201, if the device's packaging does not carry a conspicuous label that discloses the restrictions enforced by such measures." That is, you can't sell DRM that isn't labeled.

    I don't see a supremacy problem here. The federal law bans black boxes; the state law merely requires labeling.

    --
    Will I retire or break 10K?
  19. One problem with Canon: interoperability by yerricde · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Because of the practical design of Canon's print systems (replaceable print heads with reasonably-priced separate ink cartridges), I strongly recommend Canon inkjet printers to anybody who uses Windows and wants an inkjet printer. However, I've read that Canon has given no help in publishing enough documentation to let Microsoft's competitors develop drivers to make recent Canon inkjet printers work on operating systems other than Windows.

    --
    Will I retire or break 10K?
  20. unlawful undercutting, DRM, DMCA, etc by gad_zuki! · · Score: 5, Interesting

    > Or you could just not buy a lexmark printer. Let the market descide, don't legislate to death.

    A take a couple issues with your statement:

    1. Most, if not all, inkjet vendors practice this. In fact an inkjet vendor that didn't practice this would be cut out of the market because he would have to charge the real cost of the printer. Thus, everyone is undercutting each other and passing the cost in another form. This is arguably anti-competitve behavior and undercutting to drive someone out of business in many situations has been ruled to be anti-competitive.

    2. The consumer may or may not know what ink really costs. Its important to know the mark-up and using ignorance to overcharge on such a level is ethically dubious. Worse, there is nothing the consumer can do except move onto other technologies like laser printers. Now, imagine if the $20 laser printer came out except toner was $150 and it had some BS DRM attached to it. Now what do you do? Move to a copy machine?

    This is simply bad business and even in the US this can be seen as illegal undercutting.

    3. Legislation like the DMCA gives DRM protected ink a ridiculous amount of legislative protections. In other words the law is part of the problem and claiming "dont change the laws" is silly when a law like the DMCA exists.

  21. Problem with the old beasts by frovingslosh · · Score: 2, Interesting
    Try getting that from an inkjet :) Or even one of the newer hp lasers

    The problem with these old beasts is that they stayed powered up and hot to be able to print quickly at any time. OK if you are in an air conditioned office and really doing a lot of printing. However, if you have one one your home system you might not even print every day, but the electricity the thing will cost you to run day in and day out (not counting extra A/C costs) will be a lot more than the cost of a newer lower power printer. The old beasts just were not very "green". Consider the number like yours still in use, and it's a lot of wasted fule and associated polution just to have a printer ideling so that it can print quickly if someone wants to print. And many people (like me) may not have printed anything all day.

    --
    I'm an American. I love this country and the freedoms that we used to have.
  22. important info about copyright law by frovingslosh · · Score: 3, Interesting
    So state law ....Supercedes federal copyright law in North Carolina?

    The thing is, it doesn't have to. Copyright law clearly has an exception for useful articles or things that provide a utilitarian function, so exactly the thing that Lexmark is trying to protect under a claim of copyright is likely voided by this exception. See more details of this here.

    Note also that this same exception might well exclude the "copyrighted" code that Microsoft claims is a copyright violation in X-box mod chips. Copyright was never intended for this sort of thing, and the exception makes it pretty clear that the writers of the law didn't want copyright to be abused this way.

    --
    I'm an American. I love this country and the freedoms that we used to have.
  23. Re:So state law... by WCMI92 · · Score: 2, Interesting

    "Supercedes federal copyright law in North Carolina?

    I doubt it, although Lexmark would be a fool to push it."

    Yes they would.

    The Feds only have the right to regulate INTERSTATE commerce. (much abused, BTW) Not INTRA-state.

    So NC could make it completely legal to produce knock off inkjet carts and sell them *IN* NC.

    I don't really see how the DMCA even protects Lexmark in this case. It DOES have a (weak) "interoperability" clause that would seem to make selling refills and compatible carts legal.

    CONSUMABLE items should be exempt from copyright. They are hardly creative works. I suppose patent may apply, but considering that HP invented the inkjet, would Lexmark have any credible claim to patenting an inkjet cart?

    --
    Corporatism != Free Market
  24. despite all the negative comments... by MemeRot · · Score: 2, Interesting

    This worked well in germany with toy manufacturers. They were required to pick up the tab for any packaging that ended up in the municipal waste stream. Within weeks the companies were selling just the Barbie doll and not the giant cardboard box and plastic. What, was the Barbie doll going to spoil sitting there?

    What many people don't realize is that a lot of our environmental problems are caused by regulatory environments that allow companies to shove costs off onto the government. When a cost is external, it doesn't affect the company's actions. When the cost is internalized and suddenly it makes economic sense to recycle components and use less packaging, then the environmentally correct action flows naturally. You can't impose environmental requirements that add cost, it doesn't work very well. You CAN make a company pay the real cost of disposing of its waste, and being motivated by profit, get companies to make the right decisions for economic reasons.

  25. Re:so what is a good one... by dissy · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Just to share my experence, I purchased a used HP 4mv used for almost $400 about 6 years ago (That was a good price 6 years ago) and a brand new toner cart which was $100 or so.
    Gave it to one of my parents who has never once changed the toner cart on it, and it prints off roughly 200 pages a month every month for her billings, plus a few random pages here and there.
    Text still comes out crisp and black, and it shows no signs of needing new toner anytime soon.
    The things are built like tanks.