SoylentNews

Fnord666 [soylentnews.org] writes:

A corporate squabble over printer toner cartridges doesn't sound particularly glamorous, and the phrase "patent exhaustion" is probably already causing your eyes to glaze over. However, these otherwise boring topics are the crux of a Supreme Court case that will answer a question with far-reaching impact for all consumers: Can a company that sold you something use its patent on that product to control how you choose to use after you buy it?

The case in question is Impression Products, Inc v Lexmark International, Inc [scotusblog.com], came before the nation's highest court on Tuesday.

As with many SCOTUS disputes, Lexmark is a devil-in-the-details case that could have wide-ranging implications for basically everyone who ever buys anything — so, all of us.

Here's the background: Lexmark makes printers. Printers need toner in order to print, and Lexmark also happens to sell toner.

Then there's Impression Products, a third-party company makes and refills toner cartridges for use in printers, including Lexmark's.

Lexmark, however, doesn't want that; if you use third-party toner cartridges, that's money that Lexmark doesn't make. So it sued, which brings us to the legal chain that ended up at the Supreme Court.

Source: Consumerist [consumerist.com]

Original Submission