HP Launches Ink Patent Violation Manhunt

BlueCup writes to tell us that Hewlett-Packard has deployed a large team consisting of many scientists and many more lawyers looking for possible ink patent infringement. With more than 4,000 patents on their ink formulations and cartridge design and a market share of more than 50 percent in the US HP depends heavily on the sale of ink to make profit after sometimes selling their printers at a loss in order to lock in the ink resale.

Comments

Hewlett-Packard of Palo Alto

[Tackhead]

> Hewlett-Packard has deployed a large team consisting of many scientists and many more lawyers looking for possible ink patent infringement. With more than 4,000 patents on their ink formulations and cartridge design and a market share of more than 50 percent in the US HP depends heavily on the sale of ink to make profit after sometimes selling their printers at a loss in order to lock in the ink resale.

I met a traveller from a silicon land
Who said: Two life-sized cutouts of cardboard
Stand near Palo Alto. Near it, at 367 Addison Avenue,
Half sunk, a shatter'd garage lies, whose frown
And wrinkled lip and sneer of cold command
Tell that its sculptor well those passions read
Which yet survive, stamp'd on these lifeless things,
The hand that mock'd them and the heart that fed.
And on a pedestal in Cupertino these words appear:
"My name is Carly Fiorina, queen of queens:
Look on my works, Bill and David, and despair!"
Nothing beside remains: round the decay
Of that colossal wreck, outsourced and bare,
The stock options stretch far out of the money.

Re:Disposable Razor IS bad

[AKAImBatman]

Why can't they just charge more for the printer?

They *do*. (Or at least, they did.) I bought an HP printer for home a few years ago because I wanted quality, not some POS Lexmark. It cost quite a bit more than the Lexmark, but I was certain it was worth it.

Guess what happened?

Yep, it fell apart. Within six months, too. The printer was in a completely unfixable state as the head no longer moved on the track. I tried to find the problem, but eventually just gave up and threw it away. I then bought a cheap Lexmark that has been working ever since. (And God do I wish I could get rid of printers altogether. I use it so rarely that I get maybe 50 pages out of a $40 cartridge! %#@$# ink "lifetime" timers.)

Basically, HP cashed in on their reliability reputation, and is now paying the price.

Re:Disposable Razor IS bad

[pixelpusher220]

Um, buy a laser?

I won't be buying another ink-jet printer....ever*. I wouldn't even get 50 pages out of the inks before it clogged and reported problems, or 'empty'.

I have a solid Samsung Laser (1610 maybe?) I bought 5 *years* ago. Still going strong. only B & W but hey, I don't need color all that often (that's what work is for...ha).

My next purchase will be a laser 'all in one' that will be B & W too. Mostly because I'm not ready to shell out $500-700 for the all in one color monsters for my own small needs.

*Unless you need to do uber-quality photo prints, ink-jets are relics.

Re:it's come to this for HP

[Rich0]

Couldn't agree more regarding inkjets in general. I was getting sick of spending $100/yr in ink easily (only expected to increase as kids advance in school), constant head cleaning operations (using more ink!), and calls from home while at work over printer issues.

I resigned to buying a laser - even at the loss of color. Then I discovered that color lasers are now affordable - I was shocked to be able to buy a Dell color laser for $300 shipped (no tax). Toner should last about as long as the printer at the rate we print - we have photos printed at walmart since it is generally cheaper and quality is superior. Only a few cents per page even in color.

Inkjets don't make sense any more - sometimes you have to spend money to save it - and you don't need to spend all that much...

Re:Perhaps..

[Ucklak]

My $99 Samsung ML-1710 uses $40 of toner per year (that's $80 every two years)