Slashdot Mirror
U.S. Court: Lexmark Can Tie Rebates To Refills
SteveOU writes "Lexmark won a favorable judgement in its attempt to prevent competitors from refilling its cartridges. The judgement, issued by Judge Saundra Brown Armstrong of the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California, was a big loss for 'the rest of us,' reading in part "Because of its patents, Lexmark has the right to impose conditions on the sale of its patented product. It may restrict a purchaser's ability to repair it, which is what in essence the single-use condition does." What now? Will GM prohibit unauthorized repairs of its patented car components?"
Another victory for the DMCA, Gimme a hell yeah!
(Not that ours has)
(aside from the awful build quality and (at least in the past, if not still) unhelpful attitude w.r.t. Free printer drivers.
"'I pass the test,' she said. 'I will diminish, and go into the West, and remain Galadriel.'"
- JRR Tolkien.
What now? Will GM prohibit unauthorized repairs of its patented car components?
:\
Won't be long. Remember Gammas: Less stitches means more riches.
The market has a solution for this. Buy Canon printers instead of Lexmarks. Canon lets you refill their cartridges, and they let other people sell compatible cartridges. Consequently, even genuine Canon cartridges are cheap.
Everyone always says that the printers are sold at a subsidized price so the company can get the money back on cartridges, but my Canon i320 only cost me $40 at MicroCenter. I can buy black replacement cartridges for $6.50 at Wal-Mart. That's cool because Wal-Mart is open 24/7 - if I run out of ink at 2am, I can buy more, and buy it for a very reasonable price.
Lexmark's behavior would be a serious problem if we didn't have any options. But we do, and instead of trying to litigate them into submission, it probably makes more sense to encourage people to check out the prices of cartridges and to examine the policies on cartridges from various manufacturers, and to buy from the good guys (i.e., from Canon).
I'm always amazed that magazines don't talk about cartridge costs in their printer reviews, but I think that if everyone just got in the habit of including operating costs in any discussion of printers, the problem would go away on its own. For me personally, operating costs are more significant than print speed or even print quality. It's a huge aspect of printing that many reviews ignore completely. And stores have a vested interest in pushing the machines that are expensive to refill - they get a taste of that money as well.
My i320 was very cheap, although it's not super fast, the output does look very good. So I didn't have to trade off quality. The speed, I think, was sacrificed for the $40 printer cost and not for the low cartridge cost. I'm sure if I had spent more, I would have gotten a faster Canon that would allow me to use cheap ink.
The market really does tend to solve many of these problems. I'm not sure that litigation is necessary. Just remember, when you go to buy a printer, that Lexmark went to court for the ability to screw you on refill prices. Don't be a sucker, buy from somone else.
From the original article:
The rebate program by the Lexington, Ky.-based company offers an upfront discount to consumers who agree to return used cartridges only to Lexmark for refilling or recycling.
This doesn't change anyone's ability to refill their own cartridges, and ties the rebate to the promise to use only Lexmark authorized supplies. HP has sensors in its newer printers that can tell if you use their supplies or others, which affects your warranty, similar. This is not as big of a deal as it is played out to be here, since you can always choose to not buy Lexmark. They don't have an monopoly, after all.
This said, its still a crappy ruling, and it IS being appealed. Unfortunately, here in the States, most cases like this are finally settled on appeal, seldom at the first trial. Case in point is the recent attempt to put off the California recall. Our legal system may have plenty of flaws, but eventually it works (most of the time).
Tequila: It's not just for breakfast anymore!
..yes, lets not allow people to recycle ink cartridges. Crazy..
"You lied to me! There is a Swansea!"
Beacuse nobody on /. uses lexmark rubbish?
"Because of its patents, Lexmark has the right to impose the sale of its patented product"
untill the judge rules in this manner we seem to still have one option open to us.
verdict, she says 'Gobble, gobble'.
As the fortune so prophetically mentioned.
There are places where the networks are not touching,and there are places where they are-Boeing's Lori Gunter
Its common practice to just swap out the defective part with a replacement these days anyway.
"What now? Will GM prohibit unauthorized repairs of its patented car components?"
Shhhh! Don't give them any ideas!
On a completely unrelated, offtopic note I have an historic event to report: I was reading up on the HL2 sourcecode leak, and found this news article. It just might be the first time in history the two words "informed" and "slashdot" are mentioned in the same sentence.
SIG: TAKE OFF EVERY 'CAPTAIN'!!
Well, I suppose it's partly preaching to the choir here, but let me break out the Bible and thump it for a bit.
We can easily trace the increasing power of patents back to a presise historical moment and even a figurehead --Ronald Reagan. The Repblican Revolution of the 1980s brang a whole new court called the Court of Appeals of the Federal Circuit whose sole jurisdiction was patent law.
This was a reversal of the anti-patent holder legal system that was in existance since the reforms of the 1930s. The Republicans promised that by strenthening patents, we'd bring the whole country into a new era where Americans would all attain greater personal wealth across the board as the rest of the world looked to America for innovation.
Well, here we are almost thirty years later. Hoping that trickle down economics would work, we cut taxes on the wealthiest corporations and individuals from over seventy percent to less than thirty percent and we've brought patents and intellectual property of all kinds to historical heights of legal protection.
The question is, has this experiment been an advantage to the people of the United States? Obviously, I say no and cases like this and the RIAA's shenanigans all seem to point in the same direction. It's time to change.
Yup
Same with my John Deer lawnmower
Same goes for the little screws that hold the legs on my Webber Grill.
Oh, and I guess I can forget about using them 3rd party vacuum cleaner bags on my Hoover.
Hmmm
But let's get real here. Does this mean I can't use some indescript spool of thread repair the patented stitching on my ThinkGeek shirt?
Kidding aside. It almost sounds like this judgement essentially says I'm either 'leasing' or 'licensing' the daggone Lexmark printer. In which case, I'll just buy something else.
--- have you healed your church website?
As I read it (and IANAL), it seemed all the summary judgement needed to address was if Lexmark could continue its Prebate program, and if the lockout chip could continue to be used/incorporated into the cartridges. Now again, IANAL, but it seems to me that the way that Lexmark sells the cartridges under the Prebate program makes this fall more under contract law than patent law. You're agreeing to sell only return the cartridge to them in exchange for a cheaper price. If you don't do so, then you've violated the contract, and (while I really hate to see Lexmark win), it definitely seems justifiable for them to put the lock-out chips in the Prebate cartridges. Again though, the judge went beyond just the question of the Prebate program and lock-out chips, or at least that's how I read it.
That being said, I would think that if they are including those lock-out chips in the non-Prebate cartridges, then that should have been challenged, not the Prebate program.
For the record, I won't use Lexmark inkjets because of their lawsuits (and because I've been totally unimpressed with them in the past as well). I have an Epson printer, and am quite delighted at how cheap I can get generic cartridges for it.
Shall we start a voting pool on exactly how long it'll take the inkjet printer makers to figure out that practically giving away hardware and trying to make money on just the cartridges isn't a viable business plan? Thanks to our lovely economy, I've been working at a Wal-mart for the past year *grumble* (Anyone need a linux sysadmin? :), and have been in the electronics department much of that time. I can't tell you how many people I've talked to who just toss their printers and buy a new one each time they run out of ink. They've all figured out it's cheaper to do that. If they don't do that, they buy the refill kits. While I don't have access to actual numbers, I wouldn't be surprised if our store alone ends up selling more Lexmark printers than new cartridges (Lexmark's prices also tend to be higher for a combined black/color set for whatever reason, I figure it's just greed).
Is there more to this? Is my sleep-deprived brain missing something? Or do I seem to be on target? Does anyone else feel that individual rights will have to be patented in the future or we'll lose them? :P
-Maestro
- Beacuse nobody on
/. uses lexmark rubbish?
But of course we do, mine makes an excellent paper weight for all the stacked files in the floor, and when the neighborhood dogs get too rowdy/noisy it doubles as a very useful item to throw at them to scare them off. After all, it's not like anyone cares if it's damaged. Oh wait, nevermind, it was damaged when it was designed, my mistake.At least for BMW's Mini car here in Spain. If you buy a Mini and try to repair it outside an official BMW/Mini repair shop or install anything that is not officially sanctioned by BMW, your guarantee will be void.
So with that information, either you buy the car or you don't, but you can't hardly complain if they explain this to you when you buy the car. It's their way or the highway, with another car.
So, like with the Lexmark (if they also warn the potential buyer), the choice is in the consumer hands.
j.
Looks like the EFF will have to update their Unintended Consequences: Five Years under the DMCA document.
I certainly hope not. Take a look at some of their patents here. Whole transmissions and other subsystems would have to be completely replaced!!
I'd be more than willing to spend slightly more money for a printer that is actually built to be used more than 6 months before either falling apart (cannon,lexmark), or being superceded by the same printer under a different model number that uses totally different replacement cartridges (HP).
Look at the crap that printer manufacturers are pawning off on people nowdays. You got your printer selling at like $70US, and refills selling at $50US. It just makes no sense. If you're like me and only print when absolutely necessary, then by the time your ink runs out you might just as well buy a whole new printer and forget about the new cartridges altogether.
The judgement seems to only really deal with the situation where the original cartridge is bought under the prebate program and I don't think (IANAL) it applies to a cartridge bought sans the prebate.
Now, if Lexmark only sells cartridges under that program, then we're screwed. But if not, just pay the extra $30 and your fine.
(Not the greatest of options I guess, but the alternative seems worse)
If a pion (n-) collides with a proton in the woods & noone is there to hear it, does lamdba decay into the source pa
If you also know this is very bad:
BAN LEXMARK!!!
This will make it much easier to restrict modification of anything. BIOS's could be sold under the agreement that you dont install a non MS OS on the system (it will burn a flag in PROM if it doesnt get a special Microsoft key and you wont be able to trade it in)
It might also clear up the legality of mobile phone locking in the favour of the networks.
Can we get some Open Source Hardware now?
This comment does not represent the views or opinions of the user.
how nothing good ever comes out of a courtroom in Kalifornia?
Oh the quandry! Big Linux Supporter IBM, and restrictive patent scumbags Printer Division of IBM called "Lexmark"! What shall we do!
This is nonsense. The original poster obviously didn't read the ruling. "The rebate program by the Lexington, Ky.-based company offers an upfront discount to consumers who agree to return used cartridges only to Lexmark for refilling or recycling." What's wrong with that? The court is just upholding the company's right to offer an incentive to customers. No DMCA challenge implied, gang. Read the ruling before you post, huh?
-- Ed Carp, N7EKG erc@pobox.com PGP KeyID: 0x0BD32C9B What I'm up to: http://intuitives.mine.nu
That's pretty scary.
"Oh, you're *Jewish*? Then you can't buy my patented product. You're *black*? Forget it."
Towards the Singularity.
So, this will prevent me from ever purchasing one of their products again. I bought one of their printers a long time ago and it was fairly decent, but there are plenty of other choices in the market today. Let's help them lower their number of units sold and likewise the number of replacement cartridges.
Lexmark free in 2003
"The rebate program by the Lexington, Ky.-based company offers an upfront discount to consumers who agree to return used cartridges only to Lexmark for refilling or recycling. The Arizona Cartridge Remanufacturers Association Inc. (ACRA) had charged in a lawsuit filed in September 2001 that the program, formerly known as Prebat,e was illegal under California law because it constituted unfair and deceptive business practices as well as deceptive advertising."
Right. You tell me where in there it says that one cannot refill their own cartridges and I'll mail you a $100 dollar bill. All this says is that you can get some rebates and crap. It doesn't "restrict" anything, as the slashdot post would like you to believe. Next time, read something before creating a fuss about it. (Who runs this place, a 5yr old kid?)
""Because of its patents, Lexmark has the right to impose the sale of its patented product""
Imagine a future Palm EBook device that, thanks to a deal with the publisher, only lets you read Random House/etc (Time Warner) tomes on it.
Someone already mentioned GM. How about the GM car that only takes Chevron gasoline?
Don't blame Durga. I voted for Centauri.
I just replaced my old Canon with a new i550 two weeks ago. The deciding factor was ink cost. Despite good reviews on both HPs and Lexmarks (along with the Canons), throwing in the cost of refills priced everything else out of the market. And not only is Canon ink cheap, the printers make very economical use of it. HPs and Lexmarks are real guzzlers by comparison.
Until their inks become affordable, I won't even consider other brands.
Lee Kaiwen, Taiwan
"But yes, I'm sure a lot of employees owe their earnings, in part at least, to money raised via the licensing of patented technologies."
As long as it employs people, hey is it is OK, right?
RIAA pays a lot of paychecks now from its new industry of harassing children in the interest of censoring music exchange.
There are thousands of attorneys bringing home the bacon filing frivolous lawsuits like the one where someone someone spilled hot McDonald's coffee on herself. It's an honest living: never mind that they have to lie in the courtroom.
A new analysis of the Holocaust is necessary: it wasn't so bad, it gave Germans good jobs as camp guards.
Phone-spam (telemarketer harassment) isn't so bad: thanks to this industry, thousands can pay their phone bills.
And, by golly, there's SCO too!
Lets hope Europe puts a punishing environmental tax on these hoods. Recycling is a euthanism for destroying/crushing - rather than packing them off to some buyer who refills them to an ISO standard. So far , I have never seen an 'HP' recycled cartridge from HP. 100% crush rate = 0% recycling.
Some cartridges contain a substance to destroy the cartridge as its ink level drops - calculated sabotage.
By installing a minature IV, and an ink 'caddy' on a new cartridge, one can have a never ending cartridge.
DCMA needs ammending to explicitly rotect those that repair of refurbish goods that would otherwise become landfill
Ink prices should be regulated by government like gasoline.
Lets stop this Ink-price gouging conspiracy!
Honey, this is the one who was refilling my cartriges !
These days, printer cost should be measured almost solely by the price of it's consumables. For a little more accuracy, you may optionally add the initial price of the printer.
Isn't Lexmark's total cost of ownership (TCO) of consumer-class products way more than it's higher-quality competitors? Then why do people buy them? Because the REAL costs are purposely hidden by Lexmark (and some others in the industry).
Yeah yeay - "Buyer Beware". Bullshit. A company the size of Lexmark should be more respectable - but clearly it has become OK to screw customers if you can trick them. To hell with making higher-quality, lower-cost products - an idea once called "competition" by those old-shcool capitalists. Instead, let's just screw our customers.
Nice long-term vision, eh?
And do whatever you like with it.
Lexmark is also willing to let you trade that freedom (something none of us have any business telling you not to do) for a significant discount.
That's business folks.. and reasonably straightforward business at that. We understand that under this scheme, they make their mone off the print cartridges, not off the printer... we also understand we are free to buy a printer at full price and do what we want with it. To buy it, claim the discount, then ask the courts to say it shoudln't count is dishonest and greedy.
Don't ever buy a Lexmark printer.
In all the comparative tests I've seen, the price-per-page of Lexmark prints (proper real-life tests, not the phony type) has been the highest by a clear margin. Much higher than Epson, Canon, HP etc.
In one test, as I recall, a Lexmark colour A4 print averaged a price of just short of 3 bucks in consumables.
Hilarious, considering that printer advertisements always show REAMS of full colour A4 photos flying out of the printer...
The whole printer/inks market is a rotten crooked scam - and sadly the bad manners have spilled over from the consumer to the pro market segment.
Now is the winter of our disco tent
I have boycotted Lexmark for some time due to their gouging on refills. I am also proud author of an expose on how to use Samsung cartridges in a Lexmark E210 printer, at 2/3 the cost.
I wonder if use of a Philips screwdriver violates the DMCA? The modification involves removing a tab in the printer that matches a slot in the cartridge casting. I suppose this could be considered a digital rights management device.
Sorry for my blatant and incompetent and lacking statement ---
BUT IS USA & ITS JURISDICTION SIMPLY GONE FUCKING STUPID? ARE THEY ALL ON THE "YOU ONLY LICENSED OUR PRODUCT"-TRIP?
Next thing you know is that you must pay compensation because you crashed your car and ruined those patented parts inside.
see the page at
http://www.greasemonkey.net/NewCarWarranty.asp
for a long explanation that boils down to the consumer doesn't have to use the dealership.
every day http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Random
O.J. Simpson...
Thank god they let him go free! now my fantasies for a naked gun sequel may become reality.
I recently (yesterday) helped my mother in law buy a new printer. The store had a very basic Lexmark for under $35 that would perfectly suit her needs. Next up was an HP that was about 7 dollars more. This is a for woman who gets extremely upset because her gas bill is two dollars more than she thinks it should be. On my advice (because of their shady actions), she went with the HP (who are no paragons of virtue, but in the printer biz are far superior in both quality and business practices to Lexmark).
this is getting old and so are you
blog
for ONLY 25 Euro a nice Lexmark color printer is available here in Germany. I buy it and when the ink is empty I throw the whole printer away and buy the next one. I found that "using" printers this way is by far more economic (in money) than wasting money for refills or new cartridges.
;-)
BTW... producing printer trash in high amounts can change the market too
Speaking with my brother, a mechanic, on this subject just recently, I learned the following. It is getting close to impossible to work on cars these days without first using computer diagnostics. Each of these systems is specific to the automobile's make. Moreover, diagnostic systems are proprietary.
Gone are the days when you could work on your own car. A friend of my brother -- who my brother says is an excellent amateur mechanic -- tried to fix his own car and ended up making it worse. The reason? He lacked the diagnostic equipment, and there is just no way to begin without first using it.
Even independent shops are being hurt by this, since they must purchase the equipment for each manufacturer whose cars they wish to service, and the manufacturers change their systems every few years. Obviously, the "authorized" repair shops at the individual dealers have an advantage.
It's well known that the profit margin on automobiles is growing more narrow. Companies are looking to make money by offering financing and through parts and repairs. They have an incentive to get you to deal with them exclusively.
They haven't gotten to prohibiting "unauthorized" repairs directly; but they are getting more and more successful at a de facto prohibition.
If only Linus would go into car manufacturing!
quiquid id est, timeo puellas et oscula dantes.
I actually don't have much of a problem with the whole Prebate concept. To me, I liken it to a beer bottle deposit; "If you promise to return these cartridges to us, we won't charge you with a bottle deposit" (i.e. give you a prebate).
What is scary, though, is the judge saying that this is a right because of Patent law. That seems to set a bad precedent of "licensing agreements" at the time of purchase.
McDonald's knew their coffee was hot enough to cause third-degree burns within a few seconds' contact, but said they did not intend on lowering the temperature, because as one juror put it "[McDonald's has a] callous disregard for the safety of the people."
Oh, and by the way, the lady initially asked for compensation for her medical bills but was offered a minuscule amount that wouldn't cover the bills. The jury awarded $2.7 punitive and $160,000 in compensatory damages (the latter reduced from $200,000 because she was partially responsible), but the judge reduced the punitive to $480,000. McDonald's then settled for something much less (sealed to prevent curious eyes from seeing).
Yeah, right.
Why the hell anyone would lock themselves into a proprietary solution where the cartridges / printer heads are small or half filled, chipped and cost $60 a pop is beyond me.
All I can say is Canon kicks ass and Lexmark and the others suck! I would be extremely wary of buying anything from HP, Lexmark or Epson given their track record. Let's hope the EU puts an end to it.
I came from the Inquirer to this /. debate tonight...
What a nice company Lexmark is!
...I bought an Epson. I bought the Epson C82 as it was one of the highest rated at Linuxprinting in it's class, as it is fully supported in Linux.
Before I had some POS Lexmark that was free with an ISP account; moral - you get what you pay for.
CB
free ipod and free gmail!
If you try to refill your own cart, it just won't work. You can't rechip it, and the companies who can are now prohibited from doing it due to the patent angle.
Consumers have been focussed on low up-front costs for years, the high cost of ink and paper are well-known but rarely figure in buying decisions.
It's not even as if people are kept in the dark, this has been common knowledge for as long as ink jet printers have been around.
And yet people choose cheap printers from HP and Lexmark ignoring the long term ink and paper costs... when companies like Xerox and Canon offer much cheaper ink, but slightly more expensive printers.
It's a classic choice facing consumers: low-upfront plus high maintenance, or high upfront and low maintenance. There are many examples:
- low-energy light bulbs (do you buy these?)
- better insulation in your home
- fuel-efficient cars
- season tickets for transport
- freezing food in the summer when it's cheap
- etc.
The fact is that people value choice, very highly. And when it comes to printers, many people prefer to pay more for ink if they can get away with lower upfront costs.
The manufacturers have generally responded by subsiding printers with ink, and their cartridges are designed to support this business model. You don't have to like it, and we apparently still have choices, but it's a valid business model and people who complain are just being fanciful. Ink is cheap, yes, but printer technology is not: someone has to pay, and it's either in the form of $199 printers and $5 ink, or $45 printers and $25 ink.
If my car only cost $995 new, I'd be very happy to accept restrictions on the spare parts I can use. Fact is, cars and printers are not sold on the same basis.
Ceci n'est pas une signature
verdict, she says 'Gobble, gobble'.
Huh? Was JLo the Judge?
Market works wonders in the long term (at least it probably would for cartriges, although it didn't for razor blades). But the change is slow and in the short term (5 years or so) it sometimes needs a helping hand, otherwise we become aggravated by the slow changes. We, humans, tend to not notice gradual changes and are simply too hasty. In 2010 our present problems with RIAA, Lexmark and DMCA will be forgotten, because the solution would be found (unless, of course, it wouldn't be found and the US would turn into a fascist police state) and everyone will be happy. Meanwhile we are angry because the market is too slow - we can either patiently wait or try various things to do market's work ourselves.
Future Wiki -- If you don't think about the future, you cannot have one.
buy something else. I have a HP820cse I bought back in 95 and it still works perfectly. Compared to the other printers I've used since 89. Epson sucked and lots of paper feed problems. Lexmark did suck, and never tried it again. NeXT has some sweet printers when they were in business. Apple laserjet printers were nice. HP is still my favorite printer.
As far as installing anything that's not officially sanctioned by BMW, I have a sneaking suspicion that the poster is talking about performance modifications i.e. alterations to the engine, suspension, etc. Many manufacturers will not provide warranty service with these sorts of mods installed.
3000+ comments meta-modded. 0 mod points awarded.
Lesson for other meta-suckers: Don't believe the hype!
I am a lawyer, but not a patent lawyer, after reading the order I found this:
The judge explicitly ruled that 1. customers were on notice of the single use restriction, 2. customers had the opportunity to reject the restriction (i.e. they sold the same cartridge at 2 prices, the lower price required that you couldn't reuse them, the higher price placed no restriction.) 3. because there was a reduced price in exchange for the restriction, it was a valid bargain between customer and lexmark. The reason patent law was involved is because the reservation of rights was tied to a price difference, if you want more rights, you pay more.
Why we let the computer industry get away with the same crap is beyond me.
every 3 months.
No. But who visits this place are a bunch of folks who take everything to the extreme squared.
"Judge rules company X can incorporate methods to combat theft."
SD FOLKS: "Christ! These facist right-wing companies and the politicians in their pockets are soon going to keep air and water from us! It's 1984 I tell you!"
Karma means nothing to me, so suck it...
...but you can still call the "dealer" line.
3 50 ,MTkyfDE=,00.html
3 50 ,NTl8MQ==,00.html
Just tell them what you think...
http://www.lexmark.com/US/contact_us_detail/0,1
Contact Us
Call Us
Ordering parts and supplies
1-800-LEXMARK or 1-800-539-6275
Monday - Friday 9 a.m. - 8 p.m. EST
Closed weekends
Questions before you buy
1-800-LEXMARK or 1-800-539-6275
Monday - Friday 9 a.m. - 8 p.m. EST
Closed weekends
http://www.lexmark.com/US/contact_us_detail/0,1
Contact Us
Authorized Lexmark Dealers
Support Lines
Single point of contact for new products & information, including: Presales, Ordering, & the Technical Support Center.
Phone: for Inkjet Printers
1-800-332-4120
Phone: for Laser Printers
1-800-LEXMARK (1-800-539-6275)
Technical Support
Dealer can call the Technical Support Center to get help on resolving technical issues involving Lexmark printers.
LexFax For Dealers (Fax on Demand System)
FAQs and Product Information via facsimile.
1-800-4LEXFAX
(1-800-453-9323)
+ Dealer ID
24 hours
7 days/week
Warranty Claims
Warranty reimbursement for Authorized Dealers.
1-800-253-9627
Mon - Fri
8:30am - 7pm EST
Closed Weekends
45 5F E1 04 22 CA 29 C4 93 3F 95 05 2B 79 2A B2
I'm always amazed that magazines don't talk about cartridge costs in their printer reviews, but I think that if everyone just got in the habit of including operating costs in any discussion of printers, the problem would go away on its own.
You're probably familiar with the yellow EnergyGuide stickers that appear on all major appliances. You've doubtless seen the EPA mileage estimates on new car window stickers. Those are both examples of useful government regulations that require informational stickers to assist consumers in making informed purchases.
We need similar requirements levied on printer manufacturers. The manufacturers should have to include a prominent sticker which states the life expectancy of the toner/ink cartridges in pages and the estimated cost per page based on the MSRP of the manufacturer's cartridge. If the manufacturer does not publish an MSRP, then the sticker should be based on the dealer cost plus some fixed markup (representative of typical markup within the industry). The test would be equivalent to an EPA mileage test. It would use standard pages (e.g. X% coverage) and there might be a number for "B&W Text" and another for "Color Graphics" on each printer (with B&W printers having an "N/A" for the "Color Graphics").
Armed with that information, a consumer could make an intelligent, informed decision. It would do a lot to discourage deceptive pricing ($40 printers with -- surprise! -- $50 ink refills).
Ok, a long standing principle in invention and patent law is that you can build on someone else's patents. You might have to license the part you build on from them, but you own the patent on the differential. If you cannot modify a patented device, then how the heck are you supposed to extend/innovate? Let's face it, the only thing keeping patent law in place is that the boomers all have their entire retirement savings tied up in the stock market. The stock market believes IP is real and ties stock prices to IP --- tying IP and stock prices at the hip. Boomers want to retire, so the can't afford to allow corporations to stop grabbing IP, even if it is bogus IP.
Coffee this hot is routinely served in the world; The fact that some fat slob with a good lawyer can extort money from corporations just because *shit happens* should make you mad.
I routinely drink coffee at the temperature you claim produces 3rd degree burns. Big friggin' deal. The world isn't fair, nature isn't fair, and that's why its called *an accident*.
People like you are what's wrong with the world. Stop defending nonsense like this, because it marks you as someone who is either an ambulance chaser or an idiot; neither of which is very flattering.
you do thousand of pages
toner and powder are cheap and the speed is phenomenal.
fsckers
You're claiming computers have increased in power and decreased in size because of patent and copyright protection?
HUH?
Do you realize that up until just a few years ago, you couldn't patent software? This is a *new thing* which has been a failure.
ALl the great computer science inventions are royalty free... the path you are championing will make the US a 3rd world power in computing in my lifetime. History is replete with example on how tough IP laws harm the country that enacts them... England with Textiles, Germany with Chemicals...cripes don't you people ever read history?
"Check out the facts of the case rather than regurgitating the company-issued spin."
I've checked out the actual facts, not those presented by lying attorneys. The customers preferred the coffee hot, and had no problems unless they poured it into their crotch.
This is probably the best "simple" explanation of why the recent American practice of attaching "Terms and Conditions" to everything is wrong. The post author does not assert that it is wrong based on some vaguely defined morals or ethics, but that it is wrong based on plain old economic principles.
The preceding comments reflect the author's personal opinion and are public domain, unless explicitly stated otherwise.
Another obvious solution is to buy the non-prebate cartridges. Presumably more upfront, but maybe cheaper in the long run.
I don't print very much, but I'll admit that I have an HP printer. I got it 'free' when I purchased a PC at a retail outlet. When the ink ran out, I just refilled the carts for around $8, and I'll continue to do that until the print quality suffers, then I'll discard the whole unit. Just because a judge says you can't refill a Lexmark printer doesn't mean that it's impossible. Judges also say you can't use Windows or use DirectTV without paying for it, but how many of you have pirated software or satellite? This truely only effects the uninformed, those who buy products without researching or those who buy brand names out of some misguided sense of loyalty.
As one of those who bought the razor and has had home laser since about '91, I can be counted on to say I don't see the problem. Sure, any anti-consumer legislation that corporate lawyers might ape to other uses is bad. But here's an "opportunity" to be proactive. Home consumers seek the advice of Slashdot types all the time. Just tell them to avoid Lexmark like the plague. That would be a _consumer_ precedent to match their legal precedent. Problem solved.
No Lexmark, ever!
-- I am. Therefore, I think!
I bought a Z23 recently because 1) it was cheap and 2) because the labeling very specifically indicated Linux support. It even specifically referred to my distro (at that time RH 7.2). After four frustrating days of trying to make it work I finally just returned it and got my money back. IMO Lexmark misrepresents their Linux support. The excellent LinuxPrinting.org site lists the Z23 as a "Paperweight", and IMO that evaluation is spot-on. Hey Lexmark: I'll never purchase your products again, so you can take your cartridges and stuff 'em yourself !
I bought one fo their networked laser printers at a computer swap show about 6 months ago for $80, and its worked great. It even came with a full cartridge. It was pretty dusty, but an hour with a damp, soapy cloth made it look like brand new! It had about 35K pages on it when I got it, and it looks as if it would last about 3 times as long pretty easily.
Cost per page so far has been less than a penny!
So, Lexmark really does provide value!
You were mistaken. Which is odd, since memory shouldn't be a problem for you
Most consumers don't know about what Lexmark is doing. A person needs to be educated in order to be a customer who makes decisions, not a mindless consumer of goods. To this end I propose those who wish to educate others should get a supply of printable address lables. On these lables should be printed a consumer warning. Be creative. Be funny or serious, but make it simple enough for anyone to understand -- use no technical terms. These printed stickers can then be clandestinely placed on Lexmark printers in the retail store.
Here is one idea:
"Lexmark prohibits you from buying less costly third-party ink cartridges. You may not refill your ink cartridges in order to save money. You Must buy Lexmark brand ink. You Must Obey."
maybe i am not following what you specifically are speaking of, but you can buy diagnostic code readers for most any car right now. they have been available for years. any Pep Boys, or auto parts place will sell those.
I suppose this means the auto makers could lock down the ability to read those codes (DMCA protected code?) and then only lease their readers to dealership run repair shops or sell them to everyone else for $900,000........ if they are FORCED to sell them at all.....
in the same way i guess they could make their own magic bolts and screws and patent their magical "parts holding on apparatus". i know plenty of cars and motorcycles require special tools, i suppose they could make it so only they sell those tools for, say ten years or till they don't care, and then let the patent loosen up. they could sell these magic tools for $99,000 or lease them to their dealership shops for $5 a year.
does this happen now? why not? not that i want to screw us all, but does this not happen because the law would not support it, or the public won't have it or are the auto makers just not interested in such control? would people just buy another vehicle? i have had to buy a few special tools for my motorcycles over the years, but in a 20+ year old bike i can't imagine Old Man Suzuki worries too much about control sales that valve tool. i know for a fact that car dealers make most of their money from the repair shop. hence the push for bumper to bumper coverage, they don't care if you pay them or the parent company, either way it keeps them working.
If you haven't noticed, the complexity and integrated-ness of modern equipment makes its pretty hard for one to do repairs without OEM parts.. In most *any* industry.
When was the last time you *repaired* a formatter board, or a rear axle, or an electric motor... Bet most of you haven't ever done it.. few even know how.
Sure you can often replace the part, but its most likely either a new OEM part, or a 3rd party refurb of an original part..
This legal wrangling only helps solidifies things, but its heading that way regardless..
Yes its sad you aren't allowed to do what you want with YOUR stuff, but soon there wont be much you can do.. except watch it slowly die due to planned obsolescence..
---- Booth was a patriot ----
This is not even about ink cartridges, only toner...
Also, you can still buy a non prebate cartridge that you can refill all you want.
Every time they post about this subject, no one seems to notice this.
jimbeam
This support will bring more problems than the jundge can imagine in her silly and slanted brain. Lexmark could not have found a more closed minded and sympathetic jugde. She described the "lock out chip" as an "innovation" worthy of protecting but all of ARCO's assertions were "claims" to be rejected. All sorts of idiots who run companies will now direct their lawyers to patent obvious devices who's sole purpose is to impose use restrictions on thier products and any attempt to disable such silly restrictions will be defeated by law. This case must be apealed and shown up for what it is.
Friends don't help friends install M$ junk.
as much as microsoft does - i.e. yes they will start to restrict rights. The recent judgement against a garage door opening firm (that siad competitors were free to creat interoperable and add-on components) was a blip in history. It will be overturned, or defeated by simple encryption. If competitors reverse engineer the equipment they will have to circumvent and thus will be criminally liable.
The trend (unmistakable) is towards less innovation and competition. The DMCA has enshrined mediocrity: any piece of crap tool (but one with half-assed encryption) can establish a non-competitive monopoly and be protected under law. Ther used to be laws *AGAINST* this.
America is less capitalist and less free market then people think - and the DMCA is the most draconian and totalitarian anti-free market legislation yet devised. The US is more like Britain during the period when its empire began to decline: still the big cheese but soon to be blown out of the water!
Start up tech firms can look to Russian, India, and China as massive markets that are gaining on the US.
Oh, that's easy. Doctrine of first sale. If you really sold it to me, I can do what I want. If you are leasing it to me, that's another story because you and I agreed that you own the thing. If you don't care that I throw the thing in the trash all your other conditions are bogus.
Your "prebate", which is essentialy fair market value for your outrageously patented printer cartrige is a farce as well. The root problem here is that Lexmark can get patents on their toner cartridges that effectively keeps anyone else in the world from making them. The most "innovative" thing the company has done is add a lock out chip. By charging an outrageous amount for normal new cartidges that no one else may make and convincing purchasers that they don't really own the cartidge, Lexmark seeks to suck as much money from their users as possible by keeping them from doing what most normal people would do: put tonner into a perfectly usable part.
I will never buy or recomend a Lexmark printer. They have always been the worst on the market. I suspect it's because the company has such poor morals. The whole thing is dishonest and no on should do business with dishonest people.
Friends don't help friends install M$ junk.
come back, come back and read!
Quill office supply offers recycled carts for the HP4100 lj, and others. They sell a 10k rated (8k in reality) cart for $100. Quality as good as any HP branded.
Quill refilled ink carts suck, don't buy them. Instead, OfficeMax sells their branded for 1/4 price, same quality. Got a 1220C HP tabloid inkjet to do photographic posters, quality great, use OM carts, but its a PITA on the network, it shuts down at random times if it isn't hooked directly to the MotherPC.
"Will GM prohibit unauthorized repairs of its patented car components?"
and if it does and you don't like it, DON'T BUY GM! need i say more?
fact: microsoft > linux
Well, that smells a lot like your typical EULA. If that's your attitude, shame on you! Prepare to be sued by the BSA (not to mention the RIAA).
Yep. Who didn't know this?
Never buy lexmark printer... err...I think that means problem solved
Business is Business and Business must grow, Regardless of crummies in tummies you know... -Onceler
That's fine with me, as long as their printers are labeled "uses one time use ink cartridges only". Then I won't be fooled into buying a Lexmark. Of course most people will still only see the initial low purchase price and ignore the operating cost.
http://www.supportability.org
Seems like this is what consumers should eventually start demanding of the products that they use.
I've had the same coated fluorescent bulb in the light in my room for 3 years now. I leave it on far more than is necessary, too.
What we call folk wisdom is often no more than a kind of expedient stupidity.-Edward Abbey
All it would take is for a couple of manufacturers to design a snazzy logo and put it on the front of all of their printers, very prominently. It would also include all pertinent refill information. Again - very prominently.
At this point, people might begin to wonder why Lexmark doesn't have these shiny new logos. And despite the relatively lax "truth in advertising" laws in the US, if Lexmark lies, they have to go up against the other printer companies - not just the consumers.
Last post!
"Grow up and look around, responsibility flows BOTH ways and the corporate world has abdicated ANY SORT OF RESPONSIBILITY"
I agree with responsibility. However, it means you must be responsible only for what you did. Blaming corporations for something they had nothing to do, like an oaf spilling hot coffee in her lap, has nothing to do with responsibility.
The only flow of responsibility in this totally frivolous case was the flow of coffee when that lady spilled it on herself.
"180 degree coffee is insane, was insane and MickyD's KNEW IT, and still refused to do anything"
It is not insane: it is the way the customers preferred it. "Cold coffee" complaints went up after McDonald's lowered their temperature in response to the frivolous lawsuit.
Of course they refused to do anything: they had no good reason to.
All it would take is for a couple of manufacturers to design a snazzy logo and put it on the front of all of their printers, very prominently. It would also include all pertinent refill information. Again - very prominently.
Then why hasn't it happened? The anti-government types always say that the free market will fix everything. Well it won't. The problem we're discussing has been with us for years and no two printer manufacturers have yet gotten together to "design a snazzy logo and put it on the front of all of their printers." Even if they did, Lexmark and its ilk would just design a competing logo to put on their printers that deceptively claimed a low cost of ownership.
Do you want to see what happens when the private sector is allowed to "self-regulate"? Just look at USB. USB 2.0 used to mean 480Mbps. Then they redefined USB 2.0 to include peripherals that were really USB 1.1 with 12Mbps transfer rate. They came up with "USB 2.0 High Speed" and "USB 2.0 Full Speed". They didn't do this to help consumers make informed choices. They did it to confuse and deceive consumers.
This needs to be done by a third party -- the government. If the private sector did it, there would be some committee that would get mired down in corporate in-fighting. Manufacturer X would push for the graphics to include more black because his black cartridge is larger than the competitors'. Manufacturer Y would want a test that ran all of the colors dry simultaneously because his printers use a single cartridge for all three colors. Manufacturer Z would want to use photo paper because it takes less ink from his printer. The committee would charge a membership fee and the test would be rigged to help those on the committee.
Private sector did not come up with MPG stickers. They fought against appliance energy efficiency stickers. I don't see the printer/cartridge mess being straightened out without government regulation.
"Without diverging too far into politics or being partisan, those vehicles would have such numbers if: 1. The oil industry didn't have so much influence in Washington."
It's not the oil industry. It's the auto industry. To conform to these standards, they'd either have to make the cars cost twice as much, or make them all the more flimsy, light, and dangerous. They'd rather serve the demands of the customers rather than meddling Washington bureacrats.
Its not like you could easily ship a car back to the plant.
It's just this simple, DON'T BUY LEXMARK PRODUCTS! End of story. Lexmark has the right to do what they're doing, you have a right to not buy their products, and they have the right to then go out of business. Good luck to them.
As other posters have stated, you wouldn't buy a car that restricted your ability to work on it yourself or take it to the mechanic of your choosing. Fuck Lexmark.
Why don't you join me in taking your Lexmark crap-printer out back, beating it to death with a baseball bat a la office space fax machine and then boxing it up and sending it to the attention of Mr. Paul Curlander (CEO) with a brief letter enclosed:
Mr. Curlander:
I am completely and totally dissatisfied with your printer. I am completely and totally disgusted with your ink and toner pricing and restrictions. I will not:
* Buy another Lexmark product
* Recommend another Lexmark product (I am ________ in a company of __________, and control purchasing of over _____ printers).
You will find the remains of the _____ printer I purchased ____ months ago. It was cheaper to buy a new printer than purchase more ink. The printer wasn't printing well before the incident that destroyed it: it jammed often and was generally fuzzy. The printer was destroyed by me in a fit of rage after it used the last of the cyan ink in a cleaning cycle -- which you have to run if the #@$$ printer has't printed in the last two hours!
Good riddance to you lousy printer.
-- $G
You can view the columns aligned if you view the html source in your browser. (Apologies for the awkward formatting here, couldn't figure out how to present any better given /.'s lameness filter, lack of mono font, nonsupport of PRE or TABLE, etc.)
INKJET PRINTER RATINGS
Legend:
- Columns in order are: PRICE, TEXT QUALITY, TEXT SPEED (PPM), TEXT COST PER PG. (CENTS), COLOR PHOTOS QUALITY, COLOR PHOTOS TIME PER PG. (MIN.), COLOR PHOTOS COST PER PG. ($), COLOR GRAPHICS QUALITY, WEB PAGE QUALITY
- E,V,G,F,P = Excellent, Very good, Good, Fair, Poor
REGULAR MODELS (from best to worst)- Canon Photo Printer S530D $150.00 E 8.6 3.3 V 2 0.8 E G
- Hewlett Packard DeskJet 995c $385.00 E 5.4 4.0 V 8 0.8 E G
- Canon Photo Printer i850 $150.00 E 9.5 3.3 V 6 0.8 G F
- HP DeskJet 5550 $130.00 E 4.5 6.2 E 18 1.1 E G
- HP PhotoSmart 7150 and 7350 $150.00 E 4.5 6.2 E 18 1.1 E G
- HP PhotoSmart 7550 $300.00 E 4.5 6.2 E 18 1.1 E G
- HP DeskJet 3820 $100.00 E 4.9 5.9 E 15 0.8 E G
- HP DeskJet 6127 and 6122 $250.00 V 6.9 4.0 E 11 0.8 E G
- Canon BubbleJet i450,PPi470D $150.00 E 8.2 5.2 V 7 0.8 E G
- Canon Color Bubble Jet S330 $80.00 E 8.0 5.2 G 3 0.8 G G
- Epson Stylus Photo 825 $150.00 V 2.5 5.8 E 10 1.0 E F
- Epson Stylus C62 $70.00 V 8.5 4.5 E 9 0.8 E F
- Epson Stylus Photo 900 $200.00 V 2.4 5.8 E 11 1.0 E F
- Epson Stylus Photo 960 $350.00 V 2.6 3.2 E 12 0.9 E F
- Epson Stylus Photo 820 $100.00 V 2.4 6.4 E 18 1.1 V G
- Epson Stylus C82,C82N,C82WN $100.00 V 8.3 3.4 G 10 0.8 E G
MULTIFUNCTION MODELS (from best to worst)- Canon MultiPASS F30 $300.00 E 6.7 3.3 E 4 0.8 E G
- HP PSC 1210 all-in-one $100.00 E 5.5 6.2 V 10 0.9 E V
- Dell All-In-One Printer A940 $140.00 V 8.1 9.7 V 8 0.9 V F
- HP PSC 2210 and 2110 $300.00 E 4.6 6.2 E 18 1.1 E F
- Lexmark X5150 All-In-One $150.00 V 8.1 9.1 V 8 0.9 V F
- Canon MultiPASS F80 and F60 $350.00 E 9.2 3.3 G 2 0.8 G F
- Brother MFC-5200c $250.00 G 6.4 3.3 V 5 0.8 G F
Differences between very good and excellent print quality are subtle but could matter to a critical eye. Some users might settle for very good print quality to get faster speed or lower per-copy costs.For a fine all-around choice combining quality, speed, and low supply costs, consider the Canon Photo Printer S530D. Its pluses include borderless pictures and a memory-card reader.
For excellent (though not fast) photos, take a look at the Hewlett Packard DeskJet 5550, $130; Hewlett Packard PhotoSmart 7150, $150; Hewlett Packard DeskJet 3820, $100; and Epson Stylus C62, $70. The HP 5550 and 7150 use extra photo inks and can print borderless photos; the latter has a built-in tray for 4x6-inch paper. The HP 3820 and the Epson are faster and cheaper, but the 3820 has only a 90-day warranty, and the Epson is noisier than most. All the HP inkjets have a lower profile than the other inkjets tested and need less vertical clearance.
If you want more than printing, we recommend the Hewlett Packard PSC 1210 all-in-one, $100, for printing, scanning, and copying at a low price. The Hewlett Packard PSC 2210, $300; Canon MultiPASS F80, $350; and Brother MFC-5200c, $250, add fax modems but are pricey. We'd instead buy a standalone fax machine for that function.
That's pretty close to pasteurization temperature. I don't know about you, but if I'm desperate enough to get my coffee from an assembly line that creates it in close proximity to beef, fish, poultry, and dairy products, and holds it in a pot that probably doesn't get clean very often (try their iced tea someday - it's often from the same pot, and tastes like it), I want it as close to sterile as possible.
If you really want to complain about fast food drinks, check out the condition of the soda fountain spout covers. I didn't even know they existed until one very dirty one fell in my drink at an AMC theater. Yuck!
Get off my launchpad!
DON'T PURCHASE THEIR PRODUCTS!!
You can't send a stronger message than that.
I have a Lexmark z52 printer on the shelf behind me. It is in working order and I can get refiller kits for the cartridges and I used to be able to get economical replacement cartridges for it. But, since Lexmark began this new anti-consumer policy I will never use it again. Further, I will tell everyone who asks my opinion about what printer to buy, and even though I am a retired consultant there are still many who do, to STAY AWAY FROM LEXMARK PRODUCTS!! Not just the printers. If they's start this stuff with the printers their other products will soon follow.
Maybe, just maybe, they'll get the message or get driven out of business.
It appears that the monies spent by the The Law and Economics Center , and other similar organizations, to wine and dine judges while giving them lessons on how to circumvent the plain meaning of the various laws designed to protect consumers rights is paying big dividends. http://www.tripsforjudges.org It should also come as no suprise that three of the judges: Cynthia Hall, Alex Kozinski and Diarmuid F. Scannlain, (One judge, A. Wallace Tashima, sponsored by the ABA, attended 19 TIMES in a 3 year period!), who were envolved in the DOJ vs Microsoft appeal, attended the LEC institute and the goal was how to get around the Sherman-Clayton Anti-trust Act.
With congressmen salting legislation in return for 'campaign donations' (which they can personally keep) and now judges being bribed to circumvent the consumer protection laws the whole system seems corrupt, from top to bottom.
Running with Linux for over 20 years!
These idiots don't seem to realize when you purchase something from you you no longer own that item and have no say in what you as a private citizen does with it. It't time we knock the hell out of these fucktards and slap some common sense into them.
I told the service writer, who told the woman who owned the car she needed a new engine after only about 60,000 miles. Of course she was irate and, when confronted, the service writer said "that engine looks like it's never had the oil changed" - at which point she produced documentation that she HAD, in fact, followed the minimum suggested service intervals in the owner's manual. She had had the oil changed twice in the time she had the car, and she had it changed at the dealership.
Service writer called Ford, and Ford shipped out a new engine on a crate.
BTW most car dealerships now charge about the same for changing oil as the drive-through shops. Some offer specials and are even cheaper than the average drive-thru. They also have "techs" whose job it is to do nothing but prep cars and do oil changes all day long so as to ensure speedy (ie 20 minute) service. The idea is to get the owner used to coming to the dealership so when something else goes wrong they don't immediately think of taking it to "the kid at the local service station" who usually does the oil changes and tune-ups. Every time a car comes into a dealership is another chance to sell service and parts, so oil changes have become the prime in the pump - the loss leader.
So, in that case at least, the industry solved the problem itself: once they were "forced" by the courts into this realization, they still came out ahead by competing. Not many service stations can afford to keep a man on payroll all day just to do oil changes and wash cars, but dealerships already had that guy (usually a kid just out of high school) - they just expanded his job function.
Makes one wonder what the world of printers might look like if a couple of these big players would standardize their consumables and use the increased production quantity (ie lower mean unit cost) to leverage competition on "features" like quality and innovation.
Seriously. Just go laser. The Brother HL1440 can be had for under $150 new. Sure it's more expensive than inkjet, but only for the first year!
"Lawyers are for sucks."
- Doug McKenzie
Well, the boss went one weekend to Staples or Office max or somewhere and bought 4 $80 Epson C82 printers. Granted, they printed fast, have the 4 cartige system and refills are about $10 per cartige. Well, with the amount of printing they are doing, they go through about 3 black ink cartiges a week and usually at least one color. You tell me how long its going to take before TCO of the laser would have been a better choice. We decided it would be best to "part ways" especially after my paychecked bounced and I he was blue collar, no college educated fool that has tried running 4 other businesses and they have all failed. He was selling an cool product circa 2000, but his market was quickly evaporating as WiFI becomes more prevelant.
Another one of my clients, against my recomendation, went ahead a bought one of those "all in one" fax/scanners/copiers/printers and it also uses ink jet cartiges, which according to the employes they are replacing at least once a week because they run out that fast.
Now for home use, its a different story. I still have an HP 710C from when I started college. I went through about one black ink thingy every semester and 1 tri-color cart. every year. The problem I had was I would always run out of one color, like blue, before any of the others, but still would have to fork over the $40 for the tri-color.
Also, some of my mom and pop shops maybe print off 10 copies of something a week and some color pictures for "specials" every once in a while and in their cases, they can get buy with an inkjet printer.
"The problem with socialism is eventually you run out of other people's money" - Thatcher.
You probably were not seeing 'dirt', but a natural accumulation of syrup.
Fountain drinks are made by taking filtered water and injecting carbon dioxide into it, and then spraying the carbonated water into a jet of thick, sugary syrup concentrate from a nozzle. The spout covers directs the carbonated water and syrup so the mixture doesn't spray all over the room.
It doesn't take long (a few hours) for these covers to experience a significant build up of syrup, which can look 'dirty'. However, this build up will not effect the quality of the drink being served. It is almost a rule that fountain drinks taste like shit, anyway. And it certainly won't kill you.
If you actually saw bits of dirt or hair, well, that's a whole 'nother story.
While it is important that people think they are making a worthwhile conservation effort I think it is important that those efforts are spent where they will do the most good.
Is there something you know about printer cartridges that I don't know? Are there are some aspect of printer cartridges that makes them particularly toxic waste?
I know that lexmark and HP embed electronics into the cartridge -- one factor that makes their cartridges more expensive. Epson cartridges have no embedded electronics.
Electronics are considered toxic waste. Is that why you Yes, recycling is important. " Reduce, re-use, recycle. " If possible it is better to reduce than re-use. If you can print 2-up, or in draft mode, that is better than re-using. Actually, returning the cartridges to be re-filled would be re-use -- not recycling.
However, what did you do with your old stereo, TV, computer, monitor, used batteries? The reason why monitors are so heavy is that the tube is made from leaded glass. And lead is considered quite toxic. Solder is considered quite toxic. Going to extremes to return your cartridges for recycling doesn't make sense if you just ditch these even more toxic items.
I do plan to re-fill my epson cartridges. There are self-serve kits to allow you refill your own cartridges. But if I didn't refill an epson cartridge, gram for gram, would throwing it out have more impact on the environment than throwing out a plastic bag, or styrofoam packing material?
Amazingly enough, bar associations have actually paid money to pollsters to answer questions like that.
However, there is one lawyer who need never do this again. Saundra Brown Armstrong can just look in the mirror for her answer.
I think the marketplace will do Lexmark in.
The problem of a legal "justice" system whose decisions automatically favor the side with the most political power is one of the answers to the question "What the hell happened to America?" as US technological dominance and political power disappear over the next decade.
Tech Public Policy stuff
It's not the oil industry.
Yes, it is. They oppose anything that encourages consumers to buy more fuel-efficient vehicles.
To conform to these standards, they'd either have to make the cars cost twice as much, or make them all the more flimsy, light, and dangerous.
How would it make vehicles cost more or make them flimsy and dangerous to require that there be a sticker in the window showing the fuel consumption? Hummers cost about $80K (or so). Are you saying that the cost to print fuel economy on a window sticker would be another $80K? That's a leap of logic that I just can't fathom.
By the way, I drive a VW Golf TDI. It costs well under $20K new. It's diesel engine gets 49MPG highway and well over 40MPG in heavy traffic commuting to work. It weighs 2,976 pounds and got 5-star ratings from NHTSA for driver and passenger crash safety. Compare that to a Ford Focus, a similarly priced car which weighs about 400lbs. less, gets far worse fuel economy, and scores lower in the NHTSA crash ratings. High fuel economy doesn't require cars to be lightweight, unsafe, or expensive.
Actually, it's almost 20 degrees F higher than high-temperature, short-time "flash" pasteurization, and more than 30 degrees F higher than normal pasteurization. More info can be found here
The economic impact depends on what AB does with the extra 1% profit from Product I and what the licensor does with the 1% patent license fee for product II.
Like the zero-sum argument, that focuses on the minutae of the match and misses the bonfire.
The situation is actually more like this:
Company A has an invention. The invention reduces the cost both of making a widget and of operating it once it's made. Widgets are a very popular and useful. Several companies make different brands, models, and styles of them for different applications (and the companies specialize in different sytlyes and applications rather than all making all sorts and competing in all widget submarkets). Before the rollout of the invention the market is in equilibrium.
Company A can apply the invention to its new model of widget. The cost savings of the invention on manufacturing of the widget can be applied to increasing the profit margin and/or lowering the price and increasing the market share - both by gaining customers from competitors and from pricing widgets within reach of additional customers. The cost savings of operation accure to the customers - though the reduced cost can be used as a reason to raise the price of the widget somewhat.
But all these pricing strategies simply redistribute the economic benefits of the invention among various parties. The total economic benefit to the overall economy is the cost-saving per widget times the number of widgets, plus the cost savings of using a widget versus NOT using a widget times the number of additional widgets being used due to the price reduction.
So the more invention-enabled widgets in use, and the more widgets in use generally, the more the benefits to the economy.
Company A's widgets have 20% of the widget market, mostly in the widget-in-a-boat application. Company A COULD hold the invention closely, only letting it be used with ITS widgets, and try to take over more of the market - like by going into competition with B's widget-in-a-truck product. A has to invest a lot of money in this and will not capture a significant fraction of the widget-in-a-truck market before the technology moves on or the patent expires. The benefits to the overall economy is just that from the improvements to A's widgets and the extra widgets A sells.
Alternatively, A can go to B and say: "Look at this neat patent. I'll license it to you for use in trucks, cars, and vans. You pay me this fee that splits the manufacturing benefits 50/50 between us and price it any way you like for your customers."
A is happy: They get half the cost-savings from B's new improved widget plant.
B is happy: They get the other half of the benefits, and sell a lot more extra-cost-option widgets. And they don't have A getting into the car-truck-and-van business and snatching their customers.
B's customers are happy: They get cars, trucks, and vans with the new improved widget, which costs less to run and does a better job.
And the benefit to the total economy is the sum of the per-unit benefits of the improved widget times a MUCH larger number of widgets.
The patent license fee didn't do anything to the overall economic benefit - it just transferred part of the benefit of the use of the invention in manufacturing from B to A - in trade for letting A build improved widgets. But the LICENSING ITSELF enabled a MUCH LARGER number of widgets to go into service, much faster and in more applications. THAT is what created the additional benefit to the general economy.
Bantam Dominique roosters crow a four-note song. Once you've heard it as "Happy BIRTHday" you can't NOT hear it that way
Cruise over to your favorite auction site, and buy a used HP LaserJet 5 or earlier, usually for less than a hundred dollars. Then, if necessary, buy a $30 self-repair kit to replace the paper pick-up rollers, which have probably rotted away at this point. Buy a new toner cartridge at Staples for $40, and you will never even have to THINK about your printer again.
The old HPs are built like tanks: given occasional replacement of the very few degradable bits, and as long as someone keeps making toner carts for them, I'm expecting my LJ IIIp to last well into the next decade.
News for Nerds. Stuff that Matters? Like hell.
The market has a solution for this. Buy Canon printers instead of Lexmarks. Canon lets you refill their cartridges, and they let other people sell compatible cartridges. Consequently, even genuine Canon cartridges are cheap.
Does anyone know how Epson printers compare to Cannon as an alternative to Lexmark?
(I don't think this is really off-topic since we've segued into tactics for making the invisible hand swat Lexmark. B-) )
Bantam Dominique roosters crow a four-note song. Once you've heard it as "Happy BIRTHday" you can't NOT hear it that way
This message thread comes at a time when I have been scanning, touching up and inkjet printing old wedding photos onto matt 'photo' paper for a 40th anniversary party. Several things have become apparent:
Ink prices are outrageous--I got through 2 tri-colour cartridges to print 40 mostly monochrome pictures on an HP 3420. The cartridges cost 18UKP each!
Despite the photos being saved and printed as 8-bit greyscales, the printer/software (Corel Draw 10) insisted on using the tri-colour cartridge to mix the shades--the black cartridge was hardly touched.
The printer will work with only the black cartridge in place, but if 'forced' to use it, the picture quality was ambysmal--ie: I had to mix CMY to get a decent picture.
I take note of all the other comments hereabouts--my next inkjet will be a Canon!
AT&ROFLMAO
Dell resell lexmark printers. Maybe even DELL put Lexmark up to this, because dell's whole 'refills online' business model relies on you not being able to drive down to a local store, buy a refill pack and fill it up.
I don't think any of the other printer manufacturers like the refill business either, but none of them are daft enough to sue to prevent it.
I don't know how much it costs to make printers.... but we should buy them out if they cost more to make than they sell them for.
How can we find this information?
Please use [ informative / summarizing ] SUBJECT LINES
Flame me here
They used the DMCA to take down web pages which disclosed prices at their stores. Of course prices are copyrighted and the information was gathered legally. From now on I expect to see a EULA at the entrace to Wal-Marts: by entering this store you agree to the terms at http://walmart.gov/store-eula.html
which may (and will) change at any time.
If we could only get SCO to ask Wal-Mart to offer indemnification on their enter-the-store license I think we would be set.
Personally, I'd rather go out into the big wide world as a responsible adult, not as some mindless moron that has no perception of temperatures.
People that sue corporations for these huge amounts are the most selfish, gutless people there are. All they end up doing is handing more of their responsibility over to government and the corporations and it's usually these same people that moan about us being in an Orwellian society.
What these idiots don't realise is that the cost of all these lawsuits and fraudulent insurance claims come straight back at the rest of us in higher priced goods and insurance premiums.
Gentoo Linux - another day, another USE flag.
(your journal link is to an archived, and thus comment-proof, entry.)
Don't get me wrong - McDonald's are the biggest scum-sucking corporation there is with what they're doing to world farming and agriculture - not to mention the pollution from all that crap packaging of their equally crap products - but they ARE are business and are entitled to make money. In my case, I NEVER buy their products even though I enjoy a burger and fries regularly (same goes for Burger King, KFC, etc.) - if more people voted with their wallets, they wouldn't get away with it...
Gentoo Linux - another day, another USE flag.
Damn good point.
Patents run out. Yeah, I know... it takes a long time, but it's not nearly as long as copyright. For something like printers, the technology will still be useful. I mean, paper will still be paper in 2030, or whenever the patent runs out.
Also, the patent should disclose enough details to make the thing. Although the manufacturing processes probably involve trade secrets, they are probably not too difficult to figure out.
Some of the early inkjet technologies must be getting reasonably close to losing patent protection by now. Who will step forward and commoditize this technology for us? How hard would that be to do? Don't tell me there's no money in it either. Just ask anybody who is involved with making generic drugs.
For all intensive purposes, "whom" is no longer a word. That begs the question, "who cares"?
Ah... a story about Lexmark printers, and then I see an ad for an HP printer. Interesting. Can someone please start a printer company that guarantees lowest cost ink cartridges? You'll make millions instantly! Just imagine the marketing potential. I believe that once technology as far as resolution maxes out on inkjets, this will be the only way to go to stay competitive.
I am going to E-mail the whole office and tell them to not to buy Lexmark printers. Hopefully, they will forward it to everyone on their address book and the knowledge will spread faster than Klez.h.
1f u c4n r34d th1s u r34lly n33d t0 g37 l41d
...is paved with good intentions.
The above phrase describes the process by which bad decisions are made by those of us who most desire to do good. You may have an excellent moral compass, you may honestly want to do the right thing. BUT, if you don't have the capacity to see beyond the obvious, if you cannot determine what is truly right in a given situation (right, in this context, is defined as doing the least harm to the fewest people) you will make bad decisions and you will hurt others. Morality, by itself, is not a sufficient guide in a world as complex as ours. The right decision often involves a judgment as to which of multiple outcomes is the least "evil". Our leaders are often truly well-meaning, may even be fine, upstanding moral citizens, but they frequently lack the analytical ability to make sound decisions. And the remainder of the population is also becoming less and less able to behave rationally. Morality, in and of itself, is simply insufficient to guarantee sound judgment.
The higher the technology, the sharper that two-edged sword.
I was browsing the Internet for a substitute for my Lexmark e210 printer toner and I found something very interesting. The Samsung 1210 laser toners are the almost exact same as the Lexmark e210 toners. While Lexmark prohibits refills of their toner cartridges, Samsung does not. It turned out that a clip inside the Lexmark laser printer has to be removed inorder for the Samsung toner to fit. Checkout this site here http://mmrc.caltech.edu/colin/other/misc/20030315/ and it will show the modification to the Lexmark laser. Bottom line, you 'can' use Samsung laser toners inside Lexmark lasers using and also using refill kits. This will save a Lexmark owner countless dollars on toners.
She wasn't stupid. She was mean and greedy. Getting other people's money through the ill-gotten gain of frivolous lawsuits can be a "smart" way to make money, even though it is unethical as hell.
"Your 'stupid woman' remark does not explain why the award of punitive damages stood (albeit lowered to 'just' $400K) in the court of appeals."
You are right. The problem here is stupid jury ignoring the facts (the most obvious being, you should not have to pay for something that is someone else's fault)
Recharger Magazine says that Lexmark stated in court that only 50% of cartridges are returned, and that Lexmark remanufactured and sold over 500,000 cartridges themselves in 2002.
I'm sorry if I'm redundant here, but there are 300 posts and I'm sleepy. ;)
I have a Brother HL-1440 laser printer. Right now, they're in the $170 range. I bought one two years ago. I've used it quite a bit and I'm still on the original toner cartridge. I'm *very* happy with. I bought my dad one, he loves it. I've seen a number of people here on Slashdot say the same thing.
If you're worried about ink prices, just get a laser printer. If you're printing photos, well I can't help you there, but for everything else it's great.
This is a case where you should speak with your wallets, folks. If Laser printers go this way down the road, then I'd seriously look into going paperless. PocketPC's, Tablet PCs, and Palm Pilots are extremely useful in alleviating the need for printing. Heck, there's always Kinko's.
"Derp de derp."
Ever seen this error "32 Unsupported Cartridge"?
I work for a consulting firm that had an optra run out of toner. We purchased a prebate cartridge from CDW. Got the 32 Unsupported Cartridge error. Ordered a brand new cartridge from CDW, and still got an error. So, the only answer was to purchase a whole new laser printer since tech support at Lexmark refuses to acknowledge this error even exists. Because of this, I'll never, ever tell someone to buy lexmark. Stick with HP for high end, or use Brother for low end stuff.
Exactly. The Magnusson-Moss Warranty Act of 1974 actually prevents an auto mfg from stipulating which aftermarket parts must be used.
;-)
For example... if you purchase a car from GM and they say "you must use Quaker State oil or else it will void your warranty" that would be in violation of the Magnusson-Moss Warranty Act of 1974.
Now if they could prove that the vehicle would not function properly without the use of Quaker State oil, then they are legally allowed to stipulate the type of oil (or whatever aftermarket product you are discussing). But again they must be able to prove that by not using this specific aftermarket product the vehicle would cease to properly function.
In my opinion, the same exact logic should apply to this situation. After all it would be nice to have some consistancy in the laws around here!
Vote libertarian (www.lp.org) and buy Amsoil (www.MTOil.com)
Libertas in infinitum
And don't forget, no matter what brand of printer you eventually get, some office supply stores will give you free reams of paper or a small store credit for each empty cartridge you return, because most of these cartridges are specifically designed to be recycled and reused, to the point where the stores bank on making a profit returning these. PLEASE do this, not just for the free paper, but because of the environmental impact...
I tried, but they wouldn't take them. I reused my cartridges till they wouldn't print anymore. (8-12 refills). They don't want to recycle the materials, they want to reuse the working cartridge. Don't be fooled. It has nothing to do with landfill. When they don't work, they still go to the landfill. Why else wouldn't they recycle my old HP cartridges?
The truth shall set you free!
Epson ink is proprietary, and refills generally clog the print head over time. Then you're screwed.
But Epson's print quality is better than Canon's ("Better" is a subjective opinion, of course). In fact, it rocks. If you want photo-quality, go on, pay for the Epson ink, because it's worth it. If you just want colour for a letterhead, you don't need an Epson.
I sell Canon and Epson, and supposedly Lexmark, but the last only if the customer absolutely demands it. As a side note, I hardly make anything on Lexmark ink because the wholesale cost is huge. Strangely enough, Lexmark makes decent laser printers. An entirely different division, perhaps, but they're still tainted by association...
I bought an OkiData B4200 printer. The refill cartridges are so cheap that nobody bothers to even compete with Oki on the refills. A toner cartridge good for 5000 pages is about $35. You can't beat that with a stick, so even with good laser paper, my TCO is only about 7 cents per page.
My Oki color laser is just as good, at just about 35 cents per color page. The carts are slightly more expensive, and there are 4 of them, but they last a LONG time. Oki charges more for their printers, but the consumables are much cheaper. I think they've caught on that the older business model is much better, not just for their customers, but for their business as well.
Hahaha made me think of a cartoon... Background: God seated at the throne of judgement. Foreground, a man talking to his lawyer. Bubble says, "Can I appeal?"
-l
Help cure AIDS, cancer, and more. Donate your unused computer time to worldcommunitygrid.org. Join Team Slashdot!
Use epson printers, and buy your carts off of ebay.
$1-$2 black, $3-$4 for color.
Just can't beat it, especially when you can find an epson printer in a thrift store for $5.
I patented screwing your mom. But it got revoked for "prior art."
Sigh,do you always generalize and make up stuff on the fly to suit your needs ? you should try politics...Crushed by law suits from people like me ?? you don't know me, I seriously doubt your reasoning ability based on your assinine assumptions and circular logic.
:)
As to who the HELL I am to tell you anything, just where did I tell you anything, I pointed out the supporting facts which seem to be irrelavant to you, and you cursed me and then proceeded to prove your mental prowess by making assumptions not in evidence. Maybe JUST MAYBE if the corporations stopped trying to dispense with any sort of responsibilty for anything, people would try some personal responsibility as well....NAH it would never work. In the meantime I hope you enjoy that really bad, burned coffee
errr....umm...*whooosh* *whoosh* Is this thing on ?
2nd and 3rd degree burns should not be a normal response from spilling coffee on yourself. I agree on the responsibility issue but even employees of that Micky D's remarked that the coffee was way too hot to drink, and that there was somthing wrong with the pot...That is why the PUNITIVE damages were so high...not that the dumb lady deserved money for being an idiot but the corporation ignored a known potential, and the ONLY language corps speak is $$$$, and the ONLY way to hit them is to take money away...and in sums large enough to hurt them... Chevron is a prime examlpe, they have been illegally venting gasses on the weekends, getting fined like 10,000 per case, and saving nearly 1,000,000 in proper disposal fees, in the corporate mindset that is a successful disposal plan. Until they are fined more than they are saving, or someone is held personally responsible, nothing is gonna change there...
errr....umm...*whooosh* *whoosh* Is this thing on ?