Lexmark's DMCA-Abuse Case Coming To An End 431
Adama writes "Lexmark is dead in the water with their hopes to use the DMCA to force their customers to buy their over-priced toner. Their request for another hearing has been denied. Ars has
an especially great write-up on this." (See this earlier story for more background on Lexmark's lock-in attempt.)
Hopefully... (Score:4, Insightful)
I know, I know, downloading music isn't quite like manufacturing your own cartridge for another company's printer, but at least this proves that the DMCA can't shield everything.
You can thank the EFF for this one (Score:5, Informative)
This is a perfect example of what the EFF has been trying to do on our behalf: and by "our" I especially mean the
The relevent text from the page:
Species: Static Control Components remanufactured Lexmark toner cartridge
Genus: Printer toner cartridge
Threat averted: Overreaching claims under the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA).
What it is: A printer toner cartridge refurbished by Static Control Components, sold more cheaply than new Lexmark-branded cartridges.
What it lets you do: Toner cartridges are among the most expensive consumables of a laser printer. Lexmark's cartridges include chips with little bits of code that report back to the printer about toner-fill level -- but they also reveal whether or not the cartridge is "Lexmark authorized." The printer will refuse to print if the cartridge isn't "authorized," so Static Control replaced the chips so its refilled cartridges would work in Lexmark printers and report themselves "full of ink."
Why it was endangered: Lexmark wasn't very happy about competing with Static Control for cartridge sales. It sued, claiming that the cartridge-printer "handshake" was a mechanism protecting a copyrighted work, so circumventing the mechanism violated the DMCA. The copyrighted work in question? The "toner loader program" in the cartridge chip.
How EFF helped save it: EFF filed a friend-of-the-court brief supporting Static Control Components. We argued that the software was no more than a lock-out code, and that the DMCA explicitly permits the creation of interoperable software. The Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals agreed.
Have *you* joined yet?
.
Re:Hopefully... (Score:3, Informative)
(IANAL)
now, to try and get tech favor again (Score:4, Insightful)
bet I'm not the only one.
DMCA = no fans.
unfortunately.... (Score:5, Interesting)
Unfortunately it seems that this thinking is flawed. Customers these days are so used to having their rights, privacy, whatever abused that they expect to be ripped off by the Lexmarks, Microsofts etc of the world.
What happened to the old days when the customer was king and great customer service was the way to do business.
Re:unfortunately.... (Score:3, Funny)
Outsourced to India, with everything else.
the razor blade game (Score:5, Insightful)
I'm quite relieved that the DMCA has not proven to assist them in their consumer-lock-in attempts.
Re:the razor blade game (Score:3, Insightful)
I suspect a lot of people use Lexmark printers because they came for "free" with their computer systems, and they feel obligated to use it instead of going out and buying a competitor's printer. That's the real loss-leader there, I think...
EricJavaScript is NOT Java [ericgiguere.com]
Re:the razor blade game (Score:4, Informative)
Re:unfortunately.... (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:unfortunately.... (Score:5, Informative)
Re:unfortunately.... (Score:5, Insightful)
People are too cheap to *pay* for customer service.
But don't think Lexmark is unique. Back in the typewriter days it was common place to offer low price typewriters but only supply carbon ribbons and charge an arm and a leg for them rather than the fabric ribbons that lasted longer and could be reinked.
Re:unfortunately.... (Score:3, Interesting)
After lexmark shitted on me, through high prices and poor quality, I have now a Brother laser printer. I also got one for my mother. I wont ever buy Lexmark again. (I still don't buy gas from Shell nor drink Coke due to apartheid)
Many consumers do not forget. And as a sort of Tech leader to the people I know, they will be loosing more than 1 customer.
Re:unfortunately.... (Score:5, Insightful)
I believe that there are a number of interlocking and paradoxical reasons that customer service has turned to crap. In many cases customers now have tremendous choices of what to spend their money on, but have lost any real choice of where to spend their money. At one time people bought their goods at a huge variety of mom and pop grocery stores, bakeries, pharmacies, deli's, appliance stores, radio & TV stores, office supply stores, hardware stores, book stores, newsstands, restaurants, lumber yards, clothing stores, dry goods stores, gas stations, and so on. The owners and management of these mom and pop stores were close to their customers and the loss of a relatively small number of customers could cause financial hardship for the store. Now, most stores are huge operations that sell a very broad range of goods and there is a smaller choice of stores in a given trading area. Home improvement stores have put hardware stores, paint stores, and lumber yards out of business. Discount stores and supermarkets have put many other stores out of business. The sheer size of these mega store corporations cushions the effects of unhappy customers. This cushioning effect caused by the huge size of these corporations and the fact that the dissatisfaction results in customer churn between the available stores, not the net loss of customers. If things get too bad, stores can be hurt (Kmart) and manufacturers can get into trouble (Chrysler). These large, sophisticated , legally savvy stores and manufacturers (or whatever they are, they don't actually make anything anymore) have the ability to declare bankruptcy, close a few stores or warehouses, lay off employees, get new financing; and keep abusing customers. If a mom and pop owned store or factory declared bankruptcy, mom and pop went out of business and lost their livelihood; the desire to survive was a great incentive to satisfy and retain customers. When stores and manufacturers no longer have an incentive to satisfy customers and investors demand that the maximum short term profit be squeezed out of the operation, customers may as well just bend over and smile.
Re:unfortunately.... (Score:3, Insightful)
The same thing that happened to the days when politicians who sold out to big business would get thrown out in shame. And the days when people would be out rioting in the streets and staging labor walk outs over some bastard piece of legislation like the Patriot Act. And the days if an employer tried to tell people what they could and couldn't do on their own time it would be met with a giant
Re:unfortunately.... (Score:3, Insightful)
They're both selling us down the river. We need to toss both groups out and elect some of the other parties.
Between them they've got the people so convinced that thier only choices are tweedle dee and tweedle dum that thier quite happy to share despite the show of partisian politics they put on every few years, and even then it's only the elected officials and those in the public spotlight who pretend anymore.
Mycroft
Re:unfortunately.... (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:unfortunately.... (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:unfortunately.... (Score:3, Insightful)
Second off, look into that 'warrenty' a little closer. What it actually is, is an insurance policy (by law in many states, and is regulated as such) and is seldom worth the paper it's printed on. The ONLY time an 'extended warrenty' is worth buying is when it's a 'no fault' policy. Meaning they can't refuse to fix/replace for ANY reason durring the covered period.
Generally speaking they ARE an attempt to 'wrench mone
Re:now, to try and get tech favor again (Score:5, Insightful)
1. Loss of potential future revenue because competitors will now be able to sell replacement cartridges
2. The cost of paying the lawyers for the case, or
3. Loss of revenue because of the many people recommending against Lexmark printers ever since the lawsuit began (regardless of outcome).
I'm betting #3, and that the effect will persist for years from now. I, like you, will not buy Lexmark printers anymore, and have not for several years. I recommend against them when ever people ask, and I explain to them why. Yes, other printer companies gouge you for printer supplies too, but Lexmark has achieved unusual lows by attempting to apply the DCMA to sustain their anti-competitive desires.
It's #1 because idiots buy "cheap" Lexmarks (Score:5, Insightful)
Sorry, but it's #1.
(*) Especially since the average
Re:now, to try and get tech favor again (Score:3, Interesting)
I'm just mentioning it because your statement sounds like Lexmark at least delivers. If there is one thing I'm annoyed about this millennium it's the X75 branch trying to cooperate with Win2000/XP. It's almost like a random generator is trying to determine which USB port is good today or if it wants to talk to the printer at all. Sometimes I'm wondering why plain ol
Re:now, to try and get tech favor again (Score:3, Informative)
Someone started the sale the day before a rebate offer expired.
Mycroft
Re:now, to try and get tech favor again (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:now, to try and get tech favor again (Score:5, Insightful)
Sadly, I don't think the average Joe cares about being screwed over. They have been brain-washed to look for rock-bottom prices. If Lexmark can find a way to sell a similar printer to the competitors for $2 - $5 less, most US drone-shoppers will eat it up.
Re:now, to try and get tech favor again (Score:2, Interesting)
Really though (Score:3, Insightful)
I was with you 'till the end (Score:3, Insightful)
Common people: 1, Fritz Hollings: nill. (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:Common people: 1, Fritz Hollings: nill. (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Common people: 1, Fritz Hollings: nill. (Score:3, Funny)
Lexmark is not doing well (Score:5, Interesting)
Not sure if it relates back directly to their frivolous use of the DMCA, but it seems like they are being hit from all sides right now.
The Razor Principle all over (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:The Razor Principle all over (Score:3, Insightful)
Ink though, is basically water with pigments. They sell you half filled tanks (seriously, i've opened a few Epson and Lexmark ones) for outrageous prices, and actually try to stop the sale of third party ink cartigades, which in my experience wor
Re:The Razor Principle all over (Score:4, Insightful)
Well, I guess that depends entirely on wether or not someone can legally make plugin-compatible razor blades that can be used in the Gillette handles.
If someone can legally make a razor blade that works with a Gillette razor and you can buy them, then your analogy falls apart very quickly.
If, however, Gillette has used a copyright law to prevent people from making razor blades which will work in a Gillette razor, then your analogy is good.
Which is correct? I honestly don't know, I don't recall checking for generic blades to go into a Gillette razor. But like I said, unless they've barred someone from making a compatible blade, saying the razor industry has done this exact thing may not be accurate.
Cheers
Re:The Razor Principle all over (Score:3, Informative)
Cheap Generic Blades (Score:3, Informative)
In the inkjet printer industry, both the genuine brand name cartridges AND the cheap generics (when and if available) all suck in the value area, they just simply cost way too much per page.
I dearly miss my old beloved original solid-metal Atra razo
Most paper is grown on tree farms (Score:5, Interesting)
tree farms (Score:5, Funny)
I for one, only use paper from free-range rainforests.
Re:The Razor Principle all over (Score:2)
Re:The Razor Principle all over (Score:2)
At work we print a lot, but I can't really recall the last time when we printed something that's not connected with the @#$%^&* bureaucracy.
Thus yes, boycotting printers is not that bad an idea.
Re:The Razor Principle all over (Score:2)
How do you do that? Make them shave with a rusty razor?
Re:The Razor Principle all over (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:The Razor Principle all over (Score:4, Insightful)
we gearheads KNOW how printer companies help you print less. their freakin' chunkajunks break down
so, way I see it, lexmark is now advertising printers that don't work
spread the word
Re:The Razor Principle all over (Score:2, Insightful)
Check out what happened on Easter Island [primitivism.com], with their "we'll cut back on consumption next year" attitude...
Re:The Razor Principle all over (Score:4, Insightful)
I have personally lost faith in humanity because the majority of the world is made up of media-propaganda-shaped idiots like you who fail to realize the effects we have had on the earth since the beginning of the industrial revolution a mere three hundred years ago HAVE ALREADY caused damages with after-effects who will cause a great number of disasters throughout this century.
Basically.. it's too late. Two hundred thousand years with the same years and we manage to fuck it up in three hundred. Thanks for yet again proving I am right in my foresights.
I mean what I say about printers: encourage yourself and friends to consume of any product then your footprint on the earth, the damage you leave behind for your children and your children children, will obviously be less. The less you print, the less damage you do. The more you consume, the more you damage the future of your children. It is very simple. Read this again if you still do not understand.
Re:The Razor Principle all over (Score:3, Interesting)
Yes, damn those modern creations like penicillin and indoor plumbing. If only we could live in harmony with nature like our ancestors, it would be a paradise. Aside from most of us dying by 40 from diseases or bear attacks, of course.
The more you consume, the more you damage the future of your children.
That is far from clear. Consumption has increased substantially over the last few centuries, and personally I'
Re:The Razor Principle all over (Score:3, Interesting)
I don't do paper. No printer. No paper. No ink.
You want an invoice? Go this this url and click print sir. I'm not wasting an envelope and stamp just to get some ink onto paper on your desk.
I buy a 3x3 stack of notepaper every xmas and that's my years supply of paper.
I went paper-free in 94. The web is my printer.
It did take me a couple of years to get used to it, but it's worth the effot IMO and once you are used to it printing anything is just inconceivable.
I can send and recive faxes fro
Gameboy (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:Gameboy (Score:4, Interesting)
Re:Gameboy (Score:2)
I know its silly (Score:3, Interesting)
I know its plausible to look at both lawyers and execs as bottom feeding scum, but in the entire case is there no one to say this was misguided and a bad use of the legal system ?
Ripoff Pricing.... (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Ripoff Pricing.... (Score:3, Funny)
First Lexmark, Then HP (Score:4, Interesting)
How can I be so sure?
Next time that you visit your local electronics store, walk on over to the section selling computer printers. Find the print cartridges. You will notice that print cartridges from Canon are now about 1/3 the cost of a print cartridge from either Lexmark or HP. No. I am not in error. The Canon cartridges are now super cheap and are as low as $8.
By the end of the year, you will notice a downward motion on HP stock.
Eh? (Score:4, Informative)
This isn't the case, AFAIK. The reason the Canon cartridges are cheaper is because they are not entire cartridge assemblies like the HP and Lexmark ones are. Canon printers have you replace only the ink tank, rather than the ink tank and entire print head.
HP is already lowering prices. (Score:3, Informative)
In fact, the 56 black cartridge only costs around $20 now, versus the $35 that the older black cartridge cost. The 94 black costs $20 also, and the high yield (+90% more ink) 96 black that's compatible is around $30. These are using pretty generic prices from
Re:First Lexmark, Then HP (Score:4, Informative)
HP is mostly a printer company plus some side interests that barely earn any money.
According to the HP's quarterly report [hp.com], it had quarterly revenue of $21.5 billion and earnings (profit) of $1.1 billion.
The Imaging and Printer division produced $6.1 billion in revenue. The other $15 billion came from what you call the "side interests", personal computers, storage and servers, software, services and financing.
The printer division is by far the most profitable, contributing about 70% of the profit. But the other divisions contributed about a half a billion dollars for the quarter, which is a long way from barely any money.
HP claims [hp.com] to be #1 globally in inkjet, all-in-one and single-function printers, mono and color laser printers, large format printing, scanners, print servers, and ink and laser supplies
However, its "side interests" make it
Remember when printers were really expensive? (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Remember when printers were really expensive? (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Remember when printers were really expensive? (Score:2)
cost of PrintING hasn't really changed (Score:3, Insightful)
I'm not interested in just owning a printer. I'm interested in printing. The printer itself is just a tool towards that end. So I don't want it "both ways". I don't care about the price of the printer - I care about the c
Re:Remember when printers were really expensive? (Score:2)
Actually, it doesn't require a black and a color cartridge, it only requires two cartridges. One of their troubleshooting techniques is to swap the cartridges. If the same cartridge (black or color) is having trouble, it's the cartridge itself. If the other one is having trouble, it's farther up the chain, either in the printer or on the computer. In other words, you can put a black cartridge in it if that's cheaper.
I finally gave up on my Lexmark 5700 and made my dad buy a laser printer after it cough
Re:Remember when printers were really expensive? (Score:3, Funny)
Good, this levels the playing field (Score:4, Insightful)
It's better for the manufacturers too, because their competition won't be doing it either. They no longer need to "keep up with the Joneses" and engage in shady pricing.
Re:Good, this levels the playing field (Score:3, Insightful)
My prediction: things will stay the same. This isn't about maximizing profit - at least not to the extent that Lexmark would have you believe. It's about control. Big business would love to have ultimate control over its products. That's why you see the RIAA et al. trying to crush P2P when signs point to the fact that P2P actually increases their business. There seems to be a fallacy that control=profit.
Real simple.. (Score:4, Interesting)
And for some uses, I can see why a 3'rd party ink is worse in certain printers..
I still like the 5 cartridge cheap-o-ink Epson's. The reps actually encourage by saying "We dont do Lexmarks Scheme of lockins".
Re:Real simple.. (Score:4, Insightful)
Does this mean (Score:5, Interesting)
From the article... (Score:5, Insightful)
Does anyone know what the status of the DeCSS lawsuits are, and whether this applies? I would also love to see this applied to other things.
But wouldn't this have other implications as well? The notion that a work that is designed merely as a means to function is not copyrightable may have implications for the GPL, would it not? How much code is copyrighted and protected under the GPL that was designed only with function in mind, and nothing else?
What about the code that SCO claims ownership of? Even if it existed, could they in fact have copyright over it, given this ruling?
Re:From the article... (Score:3, Informative)
It does not apply. Indeed, DVD-CCA cannot sue for copyright violation, since they did not write DeCSS.
DVD-CCA are suing under the auspices of trade secret law, not copyright law. In other words, DVD-CCA's pleading is that DeCSS incorporates technologies that were obtained through "improper reverse-engineering" in violation of the so-called software "license," which claims trade secret rights over the software. As su
Re:From the article... (Score:2)
If software copyright went away, we wouldn't have (much of) a problem because all that illegal Windows source code floating around would suddenly be up for grabs too...
Re:From the article... (Score:2)
Except that the Windows code would likely be a trade secret type of thing. That falls under another branch of the Intellectual Property Tree.
Buy a laser printer (Score:5, Informative)
Sure, it's expensive to start out, but you can find pretty good cheap used ones on ebay, especially if you only need black and white. And its cheaper than inkjet over the long run. More reliable too.
Personally I think apple needs to re-enter the printer market. They used to make great laser printers.
Color Laser is Not Cheap! (Score:3, Informative)
Re:Those things are HUGE! (Score:3, Funny)
Dude, you were in the wrong store. What you were looking at was a "car". Laser printers are in aisle six.
Just get a cheap laser printer (Score:5, Insightful)
The scary part is that I tell people about this, how all they have to do is sacrifice color and they can go at least 1 school year without paying $20-$30 per cartridge. For my HL-1440, not exactly a high end piece of equipment, a new toner cart costs only $70.00. Even if it were $100.00 it would still be worth the cost. What does it say about America that these college kids, many of whom do in fact have to pay for their own supplies can't be bothered to put down $140-$200 now for a new laser printer so that they can save 3-5x that in at least 1 fulltime school year of printing?
Having had this now for going on 2 years and it still works well, I just don't understand why people who don't NEED color printers opt for the much more expensive inkjet. Most printing is black and white and you can save hundreds of dollars, enough to buy your laser printer several times over, if you get the right model because the toner cartridge it comes with can do at least a few thousand pages. I know I got at around 4,000-5,000 pages out of my first toner cartridge.
Re:Just get a cheap laser printer (Score:2)
Lexmark is BAD (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:-1 free mac mini (Score:2)
So, how does this compare to car trouble codes? (Score:5, Interesting)
Just this past weekend, I had a check-engine light in my 2000 VW Golf diagnosed by a fellow VW club member via the use of a scanner made by ROSS-Tech Inc (which is also working on generic OBDII and BMW scanners) via the use of reverse engineering, similar to the way the BIOS of the original IBM PC was reverse-engineered.
As discussed in the article Wired News: Drivers Want Code to Their Cars [wired.com], automakers don't release all of the diagnostic codes to vehicles, claiming that releasing the codes "would allow independent parts manufacturers to copy components that cost millions of dollars to develop".
However, the way I read the Lexmark article is that doing exactly that is legitimate -- by purchasing the car/printer, the consumer is granted access to the proprietary software inside the item that allows it to function, and can use third-party equipment to service it and keep it in a workable condition.
Perhaps a third-party manufacturer of automotive parts needs to sue an automaker to force release of the diagnostic codes. Or, maybe even the maker of the scanner that was used to reveal why my check-engine light triggered. But even if not, I don't think VW would, say, be able to bring a case against the scanner maker under the DMCA.
(The code was "fuel mixture too lean" and turned out to have been caused by a snapped vacuum hose; fixed in five minutes at no cost by pulling another hose off a soon-to-be-junked parts car.)
Oh... and the Ars Technica guy was right: the DMCA DOES need to go away.
Re:So, how does this compare to car trouble codes? (Score:2)
I believe such lawsuits are ongoing right now, as are legislative efforts to specifically require full disclosure.
Side story of IP Ridiculosity (Score:5, Interesting)
There is a small company that makes a template for routers -- the woodworking kind, not the networking kind -- for cutting dovetail joints. It's basically a piece of plastic that you clamp onto a piece of wood to guide the router. If you wanted to, you could use the template to make an identical template out of another piece of plastic. To guard against this possibility the manufacturer encloses a license agreement with the template, stating that the customer is specifically not allowed to do this. It further says you are authorized to use the template for personal woodworking projects only, not for business use.
This may be a silly example (although true), but I think there's a clear and present danger that the whacked logic of the IP world could spread like a fungus into the real world, and we could indeed wake up one day to find it illegal to use a Stanley hammer on non-Stanley nails. Frightening -- unless you are Mr. Stanley or his IP lawyer.
One more reason to find out who your representatives are [house.gov] and write them a short note periodically, once is good but once a month is better, urging them to consider the adverse impacts of IP issues on the public domain.
Re:Side story of IP Ridiculosity (Score:4, Informative)
I've got serious objections to folks who try to "license" me physical objects. If I purchase it through retail channels, it's a "sale." I have certain ownership rights at that point. If I choose to give the object to my slacker brother-in-law, the manufacturer is SOL to do anything about the transfer. If you have a patent on the object, you have legal recourse to pursue me if I make a duplicate item. However, you still can't prevent me from giving the original to someone else.
Even the First Sale Doctrine [usdoj.gov] in copyright law doesn't apply here. Assuming that you could actually copyright a physical object (i.e. a dovetailing jig,) I've still got the right to transfer ownership under the First Sale Doctrine. You can't take that away from me with some crummy EULA-esque piece of toilet paper jammed in the box.
The crossover of IP into meatspace is a bad thing. IP is not a physical object that I can bash into the curb if I want to. It deserves none of the ownership protections afforded to hardware. That includes patents. (Don't get me started on software patents being a horrible thing, or why I think IP *is* software
Re:Side story of IP Ridiculosity (Score:4, Informative)
Re:Kinda like plants (Score:3, Insightful)
As to breaking the law by propogating patented/copyrighted plants, suing may be fine for commercial farmers and other companies, but enforcement of your average gardener will be as practical as the MPAA/RIAA policing peer-to-peer. A few examples will be made, but if there's demand, people will propogate the plants. Simple as that.
Lxmrk printers are ridiculously cheap and shoddy (Score:5, Informative)
I would know, having worked as a sales rep at an electronics retailer.
There are so many nightmarish stories customers walk into the stores with. Dried up ink, cartridges that run out in a few weeks, broken printers, etc. I never recommended a Lexmark once. Many computer packages were bundled with Lexmark by default, maybe because they're so cheap and there are rebates, but you're better off with other brands.
Oh, and the cartridges. Just as shoddy as the printers. Customers complained of ink drying up after not using the printer for a week. A week. Wee small things too, the ink compartments are. I doubt the ink would last long.
Lexmark will be dead soon even if they had won this lawsuit. Just as well that they lost. People won't have the stupid choice available to them that much sooner.
Lexmark uses low-tech gouging methods, too (Score:5, Informative)
Of course, the Lexmark cartridges cost 50% more.
If anybody still has an E210 and is still shelling out for Lexmark cartridges, please visit How to use a Samsung cartridge in a Lexmark [uwaterloo.ca].
And never buy another Lexmark.
"Opensource" Ink formula (Score:4, Funny)
Then we will be free of these greedy companies. How far have we gone with the opensource BIOS?
Lexmark is good for the environment (Score:2, Funny)
So you see, they were doing all this for the good of the environment, not to lock people into their products.............an
Wow (Score:2, Funny)
It gives me the serious creeps like im being watched or something when I print a document and the robot voice kicks in "Printing has started" or "Failed to communicate with printer".... im waiting for it to say "Don't look behind you".
Toner vs Ink (Score:2)
Implications for companies using similar tactics? (Score:2, Insightful)
But I'm curious about the implications this ruling will have on other company's attempts to do a similar thing.
There was a story a while ago about HP region coding their printers, and just recently about BIOS approved cards only in laptops.
I hope this sets some kind of precedent that stops this harmful tactic!
Printing Costs (Score:4, Interesting)
I did own a HP until the price for the ink was was more than the printer.
I bought a Cannon S600. From the research I could find on the cost per page it was the the best. It also has good enough quality for things I do at home.
When I went to purchase a photo printer I looked first at Cannon. The simple fact is that I could reload all the color and black cartiages on the S600 for ~$35 impressed me so much that never even wanted to consider another product.
Now I have 9 cartiages to change but at I can get all the cartiages at once for about $75 if I catch the sale on the package set for the printer.
The point is why spend more on cartiages then you do the printer? It tells me the real value they put on the printers.
Clearly Lexmark didn't realize... (Score:5, Funny)
War Is Over? (Score:4, Interesting)
So does that mean that DRM schemes in general are not copyrightable? Doesn't that mean that all the standard Slashdot bugbears, like DVD/CSS, the stuff in iTunes/AAC, Macrovision, all of Microsoft and Adobe's stuff - and every closed eBook DRM, and every other copy protection that merely locks in a medium to a mandatory "interoperable" player, is not copyrightable? So they're fair game for reverse engineering and workarounds? I'm pretty happy about all that, but it seems too good to be true.
Thanks, Lexmark (Score:3, Interesting)
Better than Lexmark (Score:5, Informative)
The Federal Circuit basically read into the DMCA an "intent to pirate" requirement - simple circumvention isn't enough to violate the DMCA unless you intend to pirate or facilitate piracy of copyrighted works. What effect the ruling will have isn't clear, but it goes MUCH farther than the Lexmark decision. Lexmark basically said (a) that the code contained in the Lexmark printer cartridges wasn't copyrightable and therefore the DMCA couldn't apply, and (b) that in any event, the code was only protected from one form of access, but was completely unprotected via another - i.e. it was not effectively protected. Meaning the 6th circuit didn't really address the big issue - can the DMCA be used to stifle competition?
To get a quick idea of where the Chamberlain Group decision went, read the relatively short (2 page) concurring opinion in Lexmark by Judge Merritt (cite: 387 F.3d 522) Lexmark Opinion on Findlaw [findlaw.com].
Opt out of inkjets and buy a cheap HP laserjet... (Score:3, Informative)
This past weekend I was shopping at a Goodwill (you wouldn't believe the crazy and cheap stuff you can find - and most of it works!), and one of the workers brought out an HP LaserJet 5MP. Not a fast printer, but seeing the "P" said to me "Postscript SIMM" and I prayed it was still in place. A quick check of the printer revealed not only was the SIMM in place, but that 32 meg of RAM was also installed, along with paper and a toner cartridge. It also had an Appletalk adaptor connected. All of the cords, and all of the covers. It was in perfect condition.
I picked it up, took it over to the electrical testing outlet (each store has one or two for this purpose), plugged it in, turned it on, and hit the test print - beautiful output! A little slow, but nice. No streaks, just crisp 600 dpi black and white. I then had it print the diagnostics page - no probs there, either - and it came up with a page count of approximately 43,000! Just a young'un!
I powered it off with a crazy grin on my face, seeing the price tag of $9.99, and knowing I had a wallet full of 20% off coupons...
One sawbuck later and two dollars in change back I was the proud owner of a working Postscript laser printer, perfect for my *nix needs!
Please note - it is not an uncommon occurrance to see HP Laserjets at Goodwill, though this is the first time I have seen a 5MP - most of the time I run across III's and 1100's, occasionally a 6, and never a 4 (yet) - I also once found a color laser printer (don't remember the brand) for $50.00 - but I didn't take it because I remember one of employers purchasing the same machine and spending close to $200.00/ea for the three color toner cartridges (cyan/yellow/magenta), though the black cartridge was fairly cheap...
Re:I for one... (Score:2, Funny)
Besides, I'm an engineer - I have no natural sense of humor.
(I've also been working on an NT-4 server all day, which is enough to impair anyone's sense of humor.)