https://hothardware.com/news/us-supreme ... cartridgesScore one for the little guys. In a precedent-setting decision handed down this morning, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that a company’s patent rights are forfeited once they sell an item to a consumer under the “first sale” doctrine. This idea was central to Impression Products, Inc. v Lexmark Int’l, Inc. and is a major blow to companies that sell their printers for (relatively) low prices and then recoup any losses on the sale of expensive ink and toner cartridges.
US Supreme Court Protects Consumers' Right To Refill Ink Cartridges In Precedent-Setting Lexmark vs Impression Case
- FlyingPenguin
- Flightless Bird
- Posts: 32773
- Joined: Wed Nov 22, 2000 11:13 am
- Location: Central Florida
- Contact:
US Supreme Court Protects Consumers' Right To Refill Ink Cartridges In Precedent-Setting Lexmark vs Impression Case
"Turns out I’m 'woke.' All along, I thought I was just compassionate, kind, and good at history. "
Re: US Supreme Court Protects Consumers' Right To Refill Ink Cartridges In Precedent-Setting Lexmark vs Impression Case
Very good. OEM ink jet cartridges are out of control. The Cannon we have at home would cost $100 if we bought the Cannon branded replacements.
Maybe printer companies should offer home consumer leasing. I know this may sound crazy but I really wouldn't mind leasing a printer at home and paying a rate based on how much we use it. Include in the rate consumable options and the ability to upgrade to newer models. To me this would show incentive on the manufacturers part to reduce electronic waste by providing a means of recycling a printer and cartridges. For the consumer, this would mean better printers because the manufacture doesn't want to be replacing the thing. I know small business options exist but they are way too pricey for the average home user that at most prints 50 to 100 document pages a month and a few pictures.
The only time I print these days is if I need a return label or the very rare occasion I sold something. Otherwise I print everything to a pdf that's in a folder that in-turn gets back up to crashplan. I rarely need to even look in that folder.
Maybe printer companies should offer home consumer leasing. I know this may sound crazy but I really wouldn't mind leasing a printer at home and paying a rate based on how much we use it. Include in the rate consumable options and the ability to upgrade to newer models. To me this would show incentive on the manufacturers part to reduce electronic waste by providing a means of recycling a printer and cartridges. For the consumer, this would mean better printers because the manufacture doesn't want to be replacing the thing. I know small business options exist but they are way too pricey for the average home user that at most prints 50 to 100 document pages a month and a few pictures.
The only time I print these days is if I need a return label or the very rare occasion I sold something. Otherwise I print everything to a pdf that's in a folder that in-turn gets back up to crashplan. I rarely need to even look in that folder.
Re: US Supreme Court Protects Consumers' Right To Refill Ink Cartridges In Precedent-Setting Lexmark vs Impression Case
Once in a while common sense wins. I just use an old HP laserjet for most stuff and get 2 years on a cartridge. My wife does a little design work and likes to make notebooks on recipes and other stuff and we got her a big HP deskjet which also scans and does double sided copying. We reached the point of just buying HP ink because of the aggro we had with after market ink. About 1 in 4 cartridges caused a problem and we just decided to bite the bullet and pay more so we didn't have problems.
Re: US Supreme Court Protects Consumers' Right To Refill Ink Cartridges In Precedent-Setting Lexmark vs Impression Case
Thank goodness. That said, finding good refill ink is difficult. Thus why I went to toner.
- FlyingPenguin
- Flightless Bird
- Posts: 32773
- Joined: Wed Nov 22, 2000 11:13 am
- Location: Central Florida
- Contact:
Re: US Supreme Court Protects Consumers' Right To Refill Ink Cartridges In Precedent-Setting Lexmark vs Impression Case
Seems like there's even more to like about this case. It has wide reaching ramifications.
http://gizmodo.com/fans-of-cheap-drugs- ... 1795662756
Fans of Cheap Drugs and Printer Ink Just Won Big in the Supreme CourtBig pharmaceutical companies, on the other hand, must be pissed right now. Giants like Pfizer and Eli Lilly and Co. PhRMA wanted the court to protect US patents abroad because that would help them prevent Americans from buying their drugs for much cheaper prices in countries like Canada and Mexico and then bringing them back to the States. When a single Viagra pill costs over $60 in the US, you can only imagine how much money was at stake here.
All things considered, consumers and advocates for their rights won today. This case has been called the Citizens United of products, but this time the Supreme Court actually came down on the side of the people instead of the corporations. That means you can keep buying cheaper printer cartridges, cheaper smartphones, cheaper drugs—the price of pretty much anything that’s protected by a shady patent isn’t going to skyrocket any time soon. That’s great news for printer enthusiasts and sufferers of erectile dysfunction alike.
http://gizmodo.com/fans-of-cheap-drugs- ... 1795662756
"Turns out I’m 'woke.' All along, I thought I was just compassionate, kind, and good at history. "
Re: US Supreme Court Protects Consumers' Right To Refill Ink Cartridges In Precedent-Setting Lexmark vs Impression Case
It doesen't make sense (using boner pills as an example) how it can cost one price in one area and another in another. They are all made at the same place the the place where they are cheaper is farther away from the factory? That's how supply and demand works?
Re: US Supreme Court Protects Consumers' Right To Refill Ink Cartridges In Precedent-Setting Lexmark vs Impression Case
I've never understood drug costs. I get that a company needs to recoup the cost of research and trials but they should recoup these costs quickly. I think drugs cost so much in the US simply because they can and do.
Re: US Supreme Court Protects Consumers' Right To Refill Ink Cartridges In Precedent-Setting Lexmark vs Impression Case
I'll stick with laser printers. My HP has has the same cartridge in it since 2010 and it's still going. I don't print a whole lot. If that had been an inkjet, I would have had to replace the cartridges by now and I would have clogged up nozzles.