U.S. Court: Lexmark Can Tie Rebates To Refills 365
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?"
Woo! (Score:3, Funny)
So, America... (Score:5, Insightful)
(Not that ours has)
Re:So, America... (Score:4, Insightful)
Lexmark needs stickers. (Score:2, Funny)
Re:So, America... (Score:4, Interesting)
Cheap inkjet printers that are nice do exist, just make sure you keep a few things in mind:
- If you can hold out until mid to late November, you'll see all kinds of holiday and discontinued model sales, through the end of the year.
- Assuming you get a color inkjet, you probably will want to look for a model with multiple ink cartridges, so you don't have to waste other colors when one color goes.
- Also, when you get it, make sure that in whatever operating system you use (be very careful you're not buying a "winprinter" if you need it for *NIX, unless you can get an emulation package) you set the driver to print in greyscale by default - most drivers set to color by default, and "black" is not black, but is a blend of the other inks...
When I bought my HP, it was for $50 from CompUSA, down from $99 - and that was in 1999. Later, I bought a Canon at a lesser discount from Fry's, in 2001, because it uses cartidges that are more expensive to replace all at once, but less expensive overall because I only refill the empty colors. I gave my sister the HP, which is still very nice (and in fact I miss the dedicated envelope slot). HP is so popular that the third party manufacturer prices are probably half the HP price. Canon alternatives, on the other hand, are around two thirds. I have to say, at $10 or $12 total per cartridge, the premium for Canon's name and warranty seems worth it.
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... which is another reason not to use Lexmark!
Re:So, America... (Score:4, Interesting)
The only possible positive impact from patents is when more inventions are created because of the additional incentives. This is true to some extent in many industries. But it should be patently obvious that it's not the case for Lexmark. While you might be mislead by extremely low prices of new printers, benefits to consumers are not very clear, because of just as extremely high prices for cartriges. The price of one colour print is simply too great. This is an indicator that certain printer manufacturers do not turn the limited monopoly granted to them into public good. That can only mean one thing - the monopoly should be revoked, not strengthened by rulings such as this one.
Re:So, America... (Score:3, Interesting)
Please don't take offense, but this is entirely false. Economic arguments on Slashdot often treat the economy as a zero sum game of balance sheets, but it is quite the opposite. The "zero sum game" (if there is one, and I would argue there isn't) is in the money supply. Allow me to illustrate:
Corporation AB produces two prod
Unfortunately, you also miss the economic impact (Score:3, Interesting)
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 styl
Hot coffee (Score:5, Interesting)
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).
Re:Hot coffee (Score:3, Informative)
The reason why most other companies did not use the higher temperature was that it was well known that those few degrees made the difference between painfully hot and wound-causing hot.
McDonalds bean-counters calculated that th
180 degree coffee is NOT insane (Score:3, Interesting)
If you really want to complain about fast food drinks, check out the condition of the soda fountain sp
Brave new world (Score:2)
Won't be long. Remember Gammas: Less stitches means more riches.
Re:Brave new world (Score:2)
Market can solve this, buy Canon (Score:5, Insightful)
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.
Re:Market can solve this, buy Canon (Score:5, Insightful)
In general, I still think it is good if the legislature makes some rules as to how businesses are allowed to conduct themselves. One cannot propagate free trade but then allow companies to keep markets seperate by DVD region encoding, or by forcing exclusive agreements on dealers.
The EU has recently ruled against Volkswagen who priced their cars differently in different european countries and then made sure the italian dealers would not sell to german customers.
So hey, i'm all for free trade, but make sure it applies to all. Let me re-import Nike shoes from China if I want to, let me buy my DVDs where I like, give the consumers the transparency the corporate players demand from their suppliers.
Re:Market can solve this, buy Canon (Score:4, Insightful)
An enlightened capitalist (assuming there are any still living in the U.S.) would recognize that, at the core, laws and policies which are anti-consumer are also anti-business. There's X amount of income to be spent on products: if one company pigs a larger share of the goodies by questionable or illegal tactics then others in the same market will suffer. If they all do it then the consumer suffers, and other unrelated businesses will suffer. That's what is meant by a "level playing field" and is why we have laws governing such things. The buying public is supposed to decide which products deserve success and which fall by the wayside: companies abusing the DMCA to damage legitimate competition are trying to insulate themselves from the normal risks of doing business. My response to that is: TOUGH. If you can't stand the heat get the hell out of my kitchen.
I'm dead-set against the idea of manufacturers placing arbitrary restrictions on the post-sale uses of their products, with the force of law behind those restrictions. DVD region coding is bad enough, but at least it doesn't affect the average consumer much here in the US (I don't know about Europe.) But blatantly anti-competitive moves like Lexmark's directly hit the consumer's pocketbook. Essentially, this goes to the core of what is considered "property." If an object is your "property" then you control it: you can do with it what you wish. When a vendor tries to force its customers to use products in a certain way (either directly, or indirectly by attacking a third party) then, in effect, that vendor is trying to maintain some level of ownership of that product. I don't buy it, and I won't buy anything from any company that tries to play that game. You want to keep control? Fine, then lease or rent your products, don't sell them.
The parent is right. Time to kick Lexmark squarely in the wallet. I've never bought a Lexmark product (my personal opinion hovers somewhere between "low end" and "cheap junk") and now I probably never will. It would appear that overall poor quality extends to the very top of their corporate ladder. I'll stick with my HP Deskjet for now, thank you very much.
Re:Market can solve this, buy Canon (Score:4, Insightful)
Exactly. I can *only* imagine what Adam Smith would say if he found out about the legalistic games that manufacturers use today to screw over their customers. Of course, people like to hail him as the Objectivist Patron Saint - folks tend to forget that even he conceeded that government intervention is sometimes necessary to prevent monopolies from taking root.
As far as enlightened capitalists, there aren't any left in major US businesses. Why? Two words: Stock Prices. Companies today are concerned with nothing but keeping their stock prices high, and making their money off the stock market. As long as they can lie to investors and make their company appear stronger than it is, they can do whatever they want to the consumers and it doesn't really matter. It takes spectacular, over-the-top abuses to bring a company down. (ever stop to wonder what Enron could have done had they NOT gone down the path of full-blown evil, and had instead limited themselves to less obvious things?)
So I'm sure Lexmark will turn around and issue a bunch of glowing press releases and stock reports speaking of how they just won a major legal battle to protect their endangered intellectual property rights, and profits are expected to rise in Q1 (thanks to the further jacking up of cartridge prices), and people will flock to buy their stock.
Re:Market can solve this, buy Canon (Score:2)
Re:Market can solve this, buy Canon (Score:3, Insightful)
If I were to give you $500 and say, "Go rob that house. I don't care what you do, just get me their goodies," and you turned around and killed the homeowners, I'd be an accessory to murder at least, if not up on First Degree charges myself. Whenever a stock investor buys s
Re:Market can solve this, buy Canon (Score:2)
Correct -- as long as the following doesn't happen.
Lexmark to Canon, Epson, HP, Brother, Xerox, Okidata, Samsung: "Hey, why don't we ALL screw our customers the way I do? This way everybody makes bigger bucks! Together we make more than 90% of the printer market. Nudge, nudge, wink, wink."
It all depends of how many think this is a good idea.
Re:Market can solve this, buy Canon (Score:3, Informative)
That's why I've always used laser printers whenever possible [ok, not always, before lasers were around I used dot matrices]. My big points on a printer are operating costs, speed, and utter dependability. My dear mother had a cow when I told her I spent ~$1500 on a Color LaserJet 4550 ("you spent fifteen hundred on a WHAT?")...but, after realizing how much cheaper it was, she apologized for her fit of rage...
Re:Market can solve this, buy Canon (Score:3, Insightful)
Have to agree with the parent, though - just got a Canon i350 and it's great. The one piece of printer advice I always give people is to avoid Lexmark because of their astronomical running costs.
Re:Market can solve this, buy Canon (Score:3, Informative)
Re:Market can solve this, buy Canon (Score:2)
You can say that again (Score:5, Interesting)
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
Re:You can say that again (Score:2)
Re:You can say that again (Score:2)
The entire Canon printer, with cartridges, was less than replacement cartridges for the Lexmark. So we bought a new Canon printer instead.
Re:You can say that again (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:You can say that again (Score:2)
Ah, yes, thank you -- I'd forgotten. Separate ink tanks were a close second to ink prices in my deliberations. Throwing away half tanks of cyan and yellow just because magenta's out means throwing away money. Beats me why all printer companies don't do this. Oh, yeah. More money to them.
the printer uses a generic body frame with ill fitting parts
Sounds like my first car -- 1980 Chevy Citation. Used a stock engine which would only fit the chasis mounted transversally;
Re:Market can solve this, buy Canon (Score:4, Funny)
Dammit, I forget, is Wal-Mart E-VILLE or not?
It seems
Re:Market can solve this, buy Canon (Score:2)
Look at it this way. Consider Bill Gates (the archetypal
These corporations get some things right and other things wrong. They're run by humans, you know. Even Darl McBride has more than 81% of his DNA in common with us.
Re:Market can solve this, buy Canon (Score:2)
A retailer may be legally entitled to place so many restrictions on returning an item, that most people eventually give up on the attempt. However, their customers would also soon stop buying anything from them as well. Would it be any consolation to a business, as it files for bankruptcy, that it was legally correct?
Canon printers are extremely good (Score:4, Insightful)
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.
Why litigation is necessary (Score:2)
Re:Market can solve this, buy Canon (Score:2)
Comment removed (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:A little government regulation would help. (Score:3, Funny)
Then, when you come up with a nifty new printer, you can't sell it until you send it to the Bureau and they test it for a year to measure the usage. Or alternatively, you can put the sticker on after your own certification, and if they get around to checking, you pay a fine. Of course, being a bureaucracy,
Re:Market can solve this, buy Canon (Score:2)
Lexmark deserves to be boycotted forever. I threw my Lexmark out about 6 months ago when they failed to reply to a complaint I filed regarding refills.
I now use online services exclusively for printing photos (it is *much* cheaper). I guess they must be allowed to use refills.
Even though we have options, though, it still unsettles me that the court ruled in Lexmark's favour. I don't know what judges are smoking today - $50
Re:Market can solve this, buy Canon (Score:2)
That's not the point. (Score:2)
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"
Yea but. (Score:5, Insightful)
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).
Re:Yea but. (Score:2, Informative)
Is this not exactly the same thing?
Good for the environment too.. (Score:2)
Never argue with a man who buys ink by the barrel. (Score:2)
Shhhhhh! (Score:2, Offtopic)
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 [beyondhalflife.com]. It just might be the first time in history the two words "informed" and "slashdot" are mentioned in the same sentence.
Because of patents. (Score:2)
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.
Re:Because of patents. (Score:2)
I'm posting this reply from a five-pound computer with more power than a thousand computers from 1980, running on batteries and able to communicate with nearly any location in the world as long as it's within a couple of hundred feet of my house.
So yeah, obviously this experiment has been a total failure. Bring back 1980! I can't wait to get back to working on my Apple II.
Re:Because of patents. (Score:2)
They didn't share the GUI, the mouse and all that because they were kind hearted capitalists, they did it because they felt they had no choice.
Re:Because of patents. (Score:2)
Re:Because of patents. (Score:2)
Does it not bother you that even with all these protective measures for all these industries the world is still progressing on. While the government in the ol' USA is prohibiting it's people in favor of corporations we have countries such as China who are
Re:Because of patents. (Score:2)
That made the computer far more 'open' then it otherwise would of been. That opened up the market to clones, which drove down the price of computers, made it so the average home could consider getting one and opened up a competitive market. Something a draconian patent system wll not let happen.
other patented items I won't be repairing (Score:3, Insightful)
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 [slashdot.org] 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.
BMW does it (Score:3, Informative)
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.
Re:BMW does it (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:BMW does it (Score:2)
The correct analogy would be if they gave you the mini at a EUR 1000 discount if you signed a paper saying you would only get it repaired (and refueled) at BMW garages. In addition they would put a chip in their car that would make it stop if you bought fuel from a non-authorized dealer...
If you buy a product it's yours, and you should be able to do with it whatever
Re:BMW does it (Score:2)
Which is, basically, not necessarily a bad idea. If you install, say, brakes of inferior quality, and you have an accident - people get killed and BMW is not really responsible for it (assuming, of course, that the brakes are the reason for the accident, and not a drunken driver). With parts for cars you basically get what you pay for.
Ink, on the other hand, is not much different whether it is expensive or cheap. And
Re:BMW does it (Score:4, Informative)
You can have your car serviced anywhere you like, or do it yourself, and it doesn't void your guaruntee.
This is not to say it won't effect your guaruntee. If you put full race cams and a cheap turbo on your car and blow the engine up that isn't due to faulty design or manufacturing. Buy a new engine.
But if you have your oil changed at Jiffy-Lube and a con rod fractures that's a defect and they can't get out of it by saying they didn't service the car.
This doesn't mean that there aren't unscrupulous dealers who will claim otherwise, but that's why they're unscrupulous.
That's what makes this particular rule somewhat puzzling. It flies in the face of decades of case law and centuries of American legal and cultural tradition.
Most puzzling about it is the way it overreaches the actual issue at law.
Ah well. That's why God invented Appellate Courts I suppose.
KFG
Re:BMW does it (Score:5, Informative)
Re:BMW does it (Score:2)
Re:BMW does it (Score:3, Informative)
KFG
Sigh. (Score:2)
Looks like the EFF will have to update their Unintended Consequences: Five Years under the DMCA [slashdot.org] document.
I certainly hope not. Take a look at some of their patents here [uspto.gov]. Whole transmissions and other subsystems would have to be completely replaced!!
A Decent Printer (Score:5, Interesting)
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.
Re:A Decent Printer (Score:2)
I'd reccomend the HP Deskjet 6122 [amazon.com], although I beleive its been discontinued (although it is still in a few retail stores). The quality is excellent, its fast, and it comes with a duplexor. Not only that, but it uses their older catridges that are filled with more ink.
Re:A Decent Printer (Score:2)
So, just avoid the prebate program (Score:2)
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)
oh, this is BS (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:oh, this is BS (Score:2, Insightful)
The problem is the printer will be advertised at it's price after rebate. At the retail outlet the full terms may not be disclosed until after the sale is completed. It is possible the consumer may not understand the full terms until after he or she has used the printer.
Yes, it is the consumer's responsibility to
what's wrong with that? (Score:4, Interesting)
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.
Some musings on this one.... (Score:2)
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?
Regulate Ink Prices (Score:2)
Lets stop this Ink-price gouging conspiracy!
Lexmark Towards Bankrupcy? (Score:2)
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 respecta
Boycott Lexmark (Score:5, Informative)
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.
Re:Boycott Lexmark (Score:2)
Re:Boycott Lexmark (Score:2)
Buy something else (Score:2)
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.
Re:Buy something else (Score:2)
Recently I bought a new HP scanner. (The old one now works with SANE with FreeBSD...too many problem with their drivers). I took it out if the box.
Lexmark good, Lexmark bad... (Score:2, Funny)
I came from the Inquirer to this /. debate tonight...
What a nice company Lexmark is! [theinquirer.net]
this is why... (Score:2)
Before I had some POS Lexmark that was free with an ISP account; moral - you get what you pay for.
CB
It's a consumer-driven problem (Score:4, Interesting)
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.
Re:It's a consumer-driven problem (Score:2)
GM could never do this (Score:2)
Why we let the computer industry get away with the same crap is beyond me.
Too bad it's weekend. (Score:3, Informative)
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
That does it! (Score:2)
Lexmark is my favorite printer! (Score:2)
Cost per page so far has been less than a penny!
So, Lexmark really does provide value!
Moot Point Anyway (Score:2, Insightful)
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
GM has the right to restrict competition (Score:3, Interesting)
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.
Re:why hasn't anyone posted yet (Score:2, Funny)
- 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.Have you ever heard of... (Score:2)
Thank god they let him go free! now my fantasies for a naked gun sequel may become reality.
Re:Will GM prohibit unauthorized repairs ....? (Score:2)
Yes, but it's also common practice to not give the defective part back to the customer.
Scenario: Your car ECU is "diagnosed" defective (in quotes, because you'll never really know) and you get a "new" one (in quotes because it's probably a used, repaired one), pay $1000 and drive off happy. The dealer then returns it to GM, who resolders a cracked solder joint causing the intermittant fault you were having, and sells it again for $1000 to the next person.
Moral: If they replace a "defective" part, get it b
It's even worse than you describe! (Score:5, Interesting)
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!
Re:It's even worse than you describe! (Score:2)
why don't car makers do this? seriously? (Score:2)
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 t
Re:It's even worse than you describe! (Score:5, Informative)
I have a little OBD-II code reader / clear unit in my glove compartment. Plug it in to an OBD-II vehicle (into the government-mandated owner-accessible standard connector), turn on ignition, watch scanner display any codes. Clear codes.
There are proprietary extensions, but the availability of cheap computer diagnostics makes it easier to repair cars than it was 10-15 years ago. You can identify failing components more easily, or determine if the "Check Engine" light was just set by a fluke condition. Yes, the dealers have sophisticated tools; in many cases, a cheap tool has 90% of the functionality.
Back in the '70s-'80s, a home mechanic needed a good timing light, tach/dwell meter, and a circuit-tester or that exotic device, a multimeter. If you want to work on your own vehicle, you're going to need some tools. Your brother has probably only been trained on dealer-level equipment & procedures. A competent home mechanic can do most of the work on their car. I know, because I do. I've troubleshooted overheating transmissions, ignition problems, failing oxygen sensors. You do have to make an effort to understand what you're changing; just as tuning a '60s 4-barrel carb was very different than tuning a 1-barrel.
Re:It's even worse than you describe! (Score:2)
And a good set of wrenches will set you back $15 too. Tools aren't free. What's your point?
Re:It's even worse than you describe! (Score:2)
You can get laptop based s/w, and the interface cable for as little as $80.
A couple of them are even OSS. Whee!
Re:It's even worse than you describe! (Score:2)
Having used the expensive $3k scanners,and the cheaper, laptop based ones...the cheaper ones are better.
Even if you're not a hardcore mechanic...having the OBDII software on your laptop is a good deal. One instance of the Check Engine light, and it can pay for itself.
Re:It's even worse than you describe! (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:A scary precedent (Score:2)
James
Re:Just so you know, Lexmark == IBM (Score:2)
Amen. (Score:2, Interesting)