SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
from the think-of-the-poor-rent-seeking-monopolists dept.
Score 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. [...]
"Extending the patent rights beyond the first sale would clog the channels of commerce, with little benefit from the extra control that the patentees retain," wrote Chief Justice John Roberts. In his opinion, Chief Justice Roberts contended that Lexmark's heavy-handed approach to discouraging cartridge remanufacturers only emboldened them to find new and innovative ways to circumvent the company's defenses.
A patent holder that restricts the reuse or resale of its printer ink cartridges can't invoke patent law against a remanufacturing company that violates the restriction, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled on Tuesday.
The court ruled that Lexmark International's patent rights are exhausted with its first sale of the cartridges, despite restrictions it tried to impose.
Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. wrote the opinion (PDF), joined in full by six justices. Justice Neil M. Gorsuch didn't participate in the case.
Additional coverage by Consumerist.
Doesn't the Supreme Court care how many lawyers this will put out of work? Think of the Lawyers! And the effect on commerce for those selling ink at $8,000 a gallon.
(Score: 2) by Celestial on Tuesday May 30 2017, @09:36PM (18 children)
Now I suppose the price of new printers themselves will go up accordingly.
(Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday May 30 2017, @09:39PM
As well it should be.
(Score: 2) by DannyB on Tuesday May 30 2017, @09:42PM (12 children)
I imagine so. If there are competing printer manufacturers, this should, in theory, force the price of printers down to the point where everyone can still make a profit.
Similarly ink cartridge prices will fall to where everyone can still make a profit.
Wouldn't you rather buy a (lets suppose) $200 printer once, and then inexpensive ink so that you could afford to print as much as you like?
How many ink cartridges, at today's inflated prices, does it take to recoup the cost of manufacturing the printer?
The lower I set my standards the more accomplishments I have.
(Score: 2) by Unixnut on Tuesday May 30 2017, @09:50PM (5 children)
> Wouldn't you rather buy a (lets suppose) $200 printer once, and then inexpensive ink so that you could afford to print as much as you like?
Thing is, you can already do that. The $200 printers never went away, you can still buy them, and they will happily take third party/refilled ink all day long.
I bought an Epson 1500W a while ago for around that price, and not only can you load it with any ink you want, you can get CISS system [wikipedia.org] for a bit extra, and then you can just buy bottles of ink cheaply.
I did the setup as I started printing a lot recently (primarily photos), so depends on your needs and how much you print. The option never went away, but a lot of cheaper printers came about to be sold as loss leaders.
I do find it odd however that you need a court to grant a person the "right" to refill a bottle they own with a liquid they own as well, about a surreal as being told I can't refill my coffee makers water tank with my own water unless the supreme court rules on it.
(Score: 3, Funny) by The Mighty Buzzard on Tuesday May 30 2017, @10:03PM
The day they try this, look to the news for a mass shooting at the Newell Brands HQ in Hoboken, New Jersey. That will be my fifteen minutes of fame.
My rights don't end where your fear begins.
(Score: 2) by Runaway1956 on Tuesday May 30 2017, @10:23PM (2 children)
"The $200 printers never went away,"
You're both right, and wrong. For you, who knows about printers, there were always options. But, you'll admit that printers, the sales, service, and maintenance of printers, have gotten just a bit complicated. The average consumer goes into Walmart, in need of a printer. Walmart doesn't have a lot of options, and most of those options are the dirt cheap options. So, Sally Q. Consumer compares the features of what is available, and opts for Brand X, which costs her about 50 bucks. She uses up all the ink supplied with the thing, goes back to Walmart, and finds that the ink costs 75 or 100 bucks. If Sally is lucky, she complains to the right person, who informs her that she can get a much better quality printer for 200, and refill it every year for about 20 dollars. If Sally is less lucky, she either pays for the overpriced ink, or she just throws away the printer, and buys a new one with it's supply of ink.
I'm about halfway between you and Sally. I really don't understand WHAT makes one printer better quality than another. But, I do know who to ask.
(Score: 2) by AthanasiusKircher on Wednesday May 31 2017, @03:48AM (1 child)
The average consumer is an idiot. But let's go with your scenario for a second.
And Sally rightly feels it is ridiculous that a bottle of ink costs $75. So, if Sally has just a tiny bit of sense, she might do a quick internet search for printer reviews, and realize that this cartridge thing is a scam for most printers. And then when she shops for her next printer, she can just look up a price for a cartridge online BEFORE she buys a printer.
I don't think it requires much specialized knowledge about printers to figure this out. Granted, many consumers get fooled by this the first time they buy a printer.
Also, Walmart doesn't just offer a line of rip-off cheap inkjet printers. A quick search shows me they offer a lot of laser [walmart.com] models, for example (many not that pricey), and if you happen to click on one, it likely will show you the toner cartridge and price among its suggested items list.
So yeah, if Sally is 70 years old and doesn't understand how to do an internet search or read reviews online, I can understand how she might not be able to figure out that it's possible to buy a printer with a cheaper refill. Do such people exist? Yes. But it's not as hard as a chance encounter with "complaining to the right person" anymore.
(Score: 2) by mhajicek on Wednesday May 31 2017, @05:41AM
Or get the cheap printer on clearance for $20 or $30 with ink in it every time it runs dry. Comes with a free scanner too.
The spacelike surfaces of time foliations can have a cusp at the surface of discontinuity. - P. Hajicek
(Score: 2) by mhajicek on Wednesday May 31 2017, @05:37AM
They've already tried coffee makers that will only take a certain brand of coffee.
The spacelike surfaces of time foliations can have a cusp at the surface of discontinuity. - P. Hajicek
(Score: 2) by hemocyanin on Tuesday May 30 2017, @09:50PM (2 children)
The bigger question in my mind, why do people by inkjets when they can have laser?
(Score: 4, Informative) by ese002 on Tuesday May 30 2017, @10:17PM (1 child)
Because laser printers cost more and have lousy color definition?
If you print often and mostly text or geometric shapes, there is a strong case for laser printers. If you print rarely, with photos being a large chunk, inkjets are a better choice.
Actually, for those who print rarely, this decision is a bum deal. Printers will become more expensive, a cost that can not be avoided. In return, ink will be cheaper, except that you are not printing often, you aren't spending much on ink anyway.
(Score: 2) by frojack on Wednesday May 31 2017, @12:33AM
That theory has already been dis-proved.
There is third party ink and toner for just about every printer on the market. And printers are still dirt cheap. Their prices are not going up, (still going down actually) because the price of ink/toner has been arbitrarily forced down by in-house refills or commercial refill services. Every Office Supply store has a house brand of ink cartridges, and way back in the 90s we were already having the local guy come to the office and "drill and fill" toner cartridges.
HP and friends are still making money on printers. And they are still making money on toner and Ink. Refill doesn't work forever. Printers don't last forever. The cheap printer as Loss Leader is largely an urban myth. They really can churned out a laser printer for under 200 bucks at a profit.
No, you are mistaken. I've always had this sig.
(Score: 2) by Magic Oddball on Wednesday May 31 2017, @01:01AM (2 children)
A hell of a lot of people (including me) don't have enough discretionary income to spend much over $100 (if even that) on a printer these days — and finding out which models are worthwhile that allow third-party cartridges can require more time & energy than many people can (or wish to) dedicate to the task.
(Score: 3, Informative) by schad on Wednesday May 31 2017, @02:57AM
If you print something only once every few years, use a service like FedEx Office or borrow somebody's printer. For many years this is what I did, since I only needed a printer (and scanner and fax machine) to fill out paperwork for HR when I changed jobs.
If you print frequently, surf Craigslist for used office lasers. You can find one for under $50. I was going to go this route, but then work offered to buy me a printer for my home office so I did that instead.
For photo printing, use a service. It costs around a quarter per print. I doubt you can beat that price no matter how "cheap" ink gets.
(Score: 2) by AthanasiusKircher on Wednesday May 31 2017, @03:56AM
Look up your printer on some other online store that sells your printer and has reviews and links to "recommended items" that will often include compatible cartridges. You can then generally click on the 3rd party cartridge and discover whether people reviewing it says it actually works. It literally might take a couple minutes per printer option you're considering.
If your budget is so constrained that a $100 printer is barely affordable, investing 10-20 minutes in looking up easily findable info online before making a purchase is probably a good time investment, considering how much money it will likely save you down the road.
(Score: 4, Insightful) by Thexalon on Tuesday May 30 2017, @10:05PM (3 children)
Maybe, although if I had to guess the first order of business for the printer manufacturers will be redoubling their efforts to detect third-party and refilled cartridges and make the printer not function if they are discovered.
The only thing that stops a bad guy with a compiler is a good guy with a compiler.
(Score: 2) by kaszz on Tuesday May 30 2017, @10:33PM (1 child)
And there is a *huge* hacker community to take up the challenge. And if the effort to circumvent this shit has to be done. Then any bonus discoveries will be taken advantage of fully.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday May 30 2017, @10:54PM
Just stop using printers...
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday May 31 2017, @12:44AM
How well did that work for Kurig? Now we'll give printer manufacturers a teeeeeeeeeny bit more credit than Kurig and say that I doubt their DRM would be as easy to defeat as clipping the top off a legit cartridge and taping it to the sensor but the end result will be the same. No one will want buy that printer when the one next to it wouldn't have that limitation.