Supreme Court Printer Cartridge Case Could Be the Citizens United of Products

archive.is/1PxRp

At its most basic, the case is a dispute over Lexmark’s patent rights regarding refilling printer cartridges. Impression Products is a small business with about 25 employees. It specializes in buying used printer cartridges and remanufacturing them. In 2012, Lexmark decided to add Impression to an already existing lawsuit against other remanufacturers. While the other defendants eventually settled, Image has stuck it out and the case has made it to the highest court in the land.

You can read the full, technical details of the case here but the simple version goes like this: Since the ‘90s Lexmark has used what’s called a “shrink-wrap license” with its cartridges. It offers a “prebate” to consumers by knocking off 20% of the price in exchange for their agreement to never resell or reuse the cartridge. The consumer agrees to this the second they open the package. Essentially, Lexmark believes that those cartridges belong to them, not the consumer reselling them because the consumer didn’t have the right to sell them in the first place.

25 years ago, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, which hears patent cases, carved an exception out of the patent exhaustion principle allowing patentees to set post-sale restrictions so long as these are otherwise legal and “clearly communicated.” In a separate case, the Federal Circuit concluded that when a patented item is sold abroad, the patentee’s U.S. rights are not exhausted at all. The Federal Circuit upheld both of these precedents when it ruled against Impression Products earlier this year. The Supreme Court has never ruled on either of them.

scotusblog.com/2017/03/argument-analysis-justices-skeptical-categorical-exhaustion-patent-rights/

Other urls found in this thread:

boingboing.net/2017/03/22/make-hay-while-the-sun-shines.html
youtube.com/watch?v=ME7K6P7hlko
youtube.com/watch?v=7sArXw6ajNg
amazon.com/Axis-12-0081-Male-Male-Cable/dp/B000EIO8LA/ref=sr_1_13?ie=UTF8&qid=1490506471&sr=8-13&keywords=USB-B
wired.com/2010/06/iphone-jailbreak-prime/
twitter.com/AnonBabble

Wtf you don't own something you buy ??

bump

You did not know? Also company's are people

Thanks, I thought this was long over and done with - it started years ago.

That's a pretty fucking stupid way to do business.

No wonder ink cartridges are so expensive. Jesus.

Fuck Lexmark and fuck the printer jew. It's pretty fucking telling when it's cheaper to buy a whole new printer than it is to buy refills in many cases.

This is interesting. Thanks for posting. Definitely going to be following it.

How would this be legal at all? Wouldn't the First Sale Doctrine trump this?

so basically if impression products wins this case, all companies in the US can now restrict owners of products from doing what they actually like to the things that they own?
so like, ford can sell me a car, but then take the car back or undertake legal action against me if i start fucking with the engine (if they don't want me to)?

i hope they don't win.

>it's cheaper to buy a whole new printer than it is to buy refills in many cases
This. I've almost never bought refills for this very reason. Fucking stupid.

Nice thing about 3D printers is they don't have cartridges. Just a spool of plastic that anyone can make.

>company's are people
was pretty shocked the day I learned of that one user

pretty fucking shocked

anyone reading this post, it's fucking true, corporations(corp oration, dead speaking) only exist on paper and in database records, you have never met one, no one has ever met one, ther eis as much evidence for one existing as for bilbo baggins, yet they are people, according to the legal system

Actually Ford and other car companies have been suing people and companies that have altered their cars because consider the car a computer and you're not allowed to alter the software.

yeah.

it's corporate nanny state bullshit.

basically you work for your masters and they tell you what you can and can not do with the things they ALLOW you to have.

well yeah ford obviously has the rights to the code they use for stuff like controlling the engine, but this case seems to allow companies to prevent people from even transferring possession of their own assets.
i believe tesla also does something similar for example: you can buy their cars, but if you start manipulating the computers inside the car they can stop giving you support, and even sue you if you go around distributing hacks.

how did you not know this m8

No if Lexmark wins it is bad for consumers.

if they dont want people to alter their software then they should do a better job, and if the person who does a better job isn't employed by ford, ford should pay them.

but losers don't like winners, so the weak hide behind regulation and grow ever weaker.

A company that does not need to compete is a waste of resources.

>how did you not know this m8
you mean you always knew? from birth?

If you really want to be surprised at how ridiculous this shit is getting, look at what John Deere is doing:

boingboing.net/2017/03/22/make-hay-while-the-sun-shines.html

>Desperate John Deere tractor owners are downloading illegal Ukrainian firmware hacks to get the crops in

>John Deere is notorious for arguing that farmers who buy its tractors actually "license" them because Deere still owns the copyright to the tractors' software; in 2015, the US Copyright Office affirmed that farmers were allowed to jailbreak their tractors to effect repairs and modifications.

>But the Copyright Office doesn't have the legal power to allow anyone to make a tool to make such modifications, which makes the Copyright Office exemption pretty symbolic.

>Nevertheless, Deere responded immediately to the Copyright Office ruling by amending the EULA for its tractors to prohibit any such modification, third party repairs, etc, and made farmers click through the EULA and "agree" to it in order to start up their tractors.

>Now, farmers find themselves in desperate straits. Not only does Deere gouge them on repairs ("$230, plus $130 an hour for a technician to drive out and plug a connector into their USB port to authorize [a user-swapped] part"), but the repair shops can be far away or busy, and thus a half-million dollar tractor can sit immobilized while a farmer frets about getting his crops in.

>To add insult to injury, the new Deere EULA makes farmers indemnify the company against "crop loss, lost profits, loss of goodwill, loss of use of equipment … arising from the performance or non-performance of any aspect of the software."

More in the article. It's fucked.

The questions that will be resolved as a result of this case is:

Does a “conditional sale” that transfers title with post-sale restrictions on the use or resale of the item avoids the patent exhaustion doctrine and therefore permit the enforcement of the post-sale restrictions by suing for infringement?

In light of Kirtsaeng v. John Wiley & Sons, Inc., which held that copyrighted work lawfully made abroad is subject to the same post-sale restrictions as work made domestically, does the sale of a patented article abroad exhaust the U.S. patent rights in that article?

This is a pretty big fucking deal then. No idea about how the other SCOTUS Justices will rule, but there's a sinking feeling that the conservative Justices will side with Lexmark b/c muh corporations are people

FUCK THE SUPREME COURT!

Part of the reason, yes, but the business model is not a secret - practically give the printer away, charge out the ass, for ink: profit. My dad worked for a big corporation that makes printers, and he admitted this in the 90's. Ink jet printers are one of the biggest scams out there. The ink costs pennies, and they charge sometimes 1000% higher.

Unless you're printing photos or art, or having a company pay for it, it's a ripoff. I went through too many printers, expensive and cheap, before I finally woke up and stopped handing money to them. Fuck Canon, Epson, and the rest of them. Plus, there are so many places now where you can get stuff printed cheap, it's stupid to pay for a printer.

I bought a $200 color laser 4 years ago. I still have 80% of the toner carts that came with it, and I use it regularly - but I can let it sit for a month, and I don't have to go through 2 o3 three ink packs to get it printing again, like I did with all of the cheap desktop printers I bought. I have a good desktop scanner, and nobody needs a fax anymore, so fuck the "all-in-one" cheapo printers, too. I can use cheap paper, too, instead of over-priced inkjet paper.

Do that, or get one of the refillable systems they have on the market, especially for the high end printers, like the ones for posters. Every print shop I know converts theirs to the endless ink systems, and buy the same damned inks Eposn and Canon rip you off for.

The other reason this is a thing, is business is slowly going paperless. They need to make money somehow. Printing is a dying industry, desktop and commercial.

insanity

how?

my teacher told me about it when i was 10, and before that my parents had already filled me in that companies can sue other people and so on.

I thought I read somewhere that by ounce printer ink the most expensive liquid in the entire world.

Because Lexmark is against consumers modifying/selling the product sold to them, not Impression. You seem to have this backwards.

>but there's a sinking feeling that the conservative Justices will side with Lexmark b/c muh corporations are people
wont happen honestly, most people will throw a fit if it does.

It's irritating that ink cartridges are overpriced despite there being multiple competitors. Who knows if it's illegal collusion or just an unspoken agreement to not compete on price. It's a market failure.

But it you ask any left-bot whether Unions are people, they will scream "Hell yah!"

It can be, sure - especially when you get into the specialty inks, like the so-called UV resistant stuff, for the high end inkjets.

The reality is, a lot of the "grey market" ink is made by the same companies that make the "legit" stuff, like, they run the official stuff during the day, and run bootleg at night. Very common in China to have that happen. They sell it for pennies on the dollar.

Wew. Sure smells like communism in here. If you can't handle capitalism, move to North Korea you commie fucks.

The most famous example being Ferrari.

They can repossess their cars at any time.

Purchasers sign an agreement that they will never "review" their cars or lend them for benchmarks and testing.

Both, really. All of them do it. It's the standard business model for inkjet printers.

You can get a B&W laser for under $100 these days, and get large capacity toner carts cheap. What do you even need an inkjet for? Let someone else print out your vacation pictures, and you won't have to deal with the hassle.

oh, you're right. i did get the companies switched up.

no, i approve of capitalism. i just don't like the idea of some company owning literally everything i have, and me leasing it.

Can some Jew lawyer explain how this doesn't violate the doctrine of first sale?

>company's are people
does that mean the 1st amendment and the 2nd amendments apply to companies? a company can own firearms to protect itself from tyranny?

I can't really see how a eula could be enforcable, a contract requires both parties signatures, and unreasonable items in a contract are unenforceable

this doctrine of "leasing" the software is complete bullshit too, but they make shit up all the time then try to enforce it, another kike trick

>my teacher told me about it when i was 10, and before that my parents had already filled me in that companies can sue other people and so on.
but did they tell you that they only exist on paper?

have you watched "strawman" on YT?
youtube.com/watch?v=ME7K6P7hlko

youtube.com/watch?v=7sArXw6ajNg

will they? they are as retarded as the rest of us then(in that regard)

t. gomrade sonig stalin

err, dunno

does it mention persons, or men?

pretty sure the 1a has been ruled to include compnaies though

No. For example, if you go to Blockbuster Video and buy one of the VHS movies they have for sale (e.g., The Peacemaker with George Clooney that was just released ) you cannot make duplicate VHS (or Betamax) tapes and sell them. You purchase a license for home viewing, not for duplication and distribution.

yes, they did. my teacher even told me about how the duty to shareholders works, how deprecation works, etc. i was stunned to find out that wasn't required knowledge in high school. even now they only teach you about maybe like how debt works in year 11 and 12, and you have to sign up in university to learn how corporate law works.

blame your parents m8.

I finally got rid of all my inkjets in both work and at home. Not only is it an obvious scam, but the printer companies have been caught quite a few times doing deceptive crap.

I hope Lexmark loses. They do have something going in their favor, though. I think all print carts have chips in them. If those chips need to be altered in any way, it may violate the DMCA.

But I do have the right to sell the physical copy I purchased, which is what the people in this case are doing.

Did you just wake up from a 20 year Coma?

who THE FUCK still prints things?

If you're too lazy to read the article, then don't comment. The first sale doctrine has nothing to do with this case, it's another issue entirely. First sale doctrine os over copyrights, this is patent law and contract law.

It's bad enough you think you can arm chair lawyer the issue by throwing words around that don't apply - but it's fucking ridiculous that you're going to try to do it without reading the article.

But, considering you don't know the difference between copyright, patent, and contract, reading the article would be pointless for you.

Unless there is a do not transfer clause.

corporatism is not capitalism, it's welfare for too big to fail losers.

That's copyright. This case isn't about copyright.

No, what do you mean?

Lexmark will almost certainly win because of a mountain of precedent in their favor.

What we need in this country is some kind of consumer bill of rights. Unfortunately that will never happen because congress is bought and paid for.

Fucking lawyers.

Under copyright law.

Have you even read the article? It lays out specifically what issues are being argued here by both sides.

Don't even comment again until you read it.

Fucking lazy shitposters.

gas the printers, ink war now

>read the article REEEEEEEEEEE

This isn't Reddit.

The case isn't really about consumers. The lawsuit is against manufacturers who recycle Lexmark's carts, not the people who sell them or trade them for filled ones - that's a completely different issue, and the lawsuits will probably be against end users if they win here.

Blockbuster...

Really? You're so against learning something, you're gonna post that? You're going to fight for the ability to be dumb? Really?

Yeah, I get that. I just don't think they'll stop with the "upcycler" company.

Everything's moving to the John Deere model posted about here and it actually really worries me. I work in tech, and this anti-competitive anti-consumer mentality driving everything is really going to fuck us over long term. Some country without all these absolutely insane IP laws is going to pull the rug out from under us if we're not careful.

The other irritating thing is that printers don't come with a USB cable. They're sold separately and way overpriced, like $15 or $20. The brazenness of it is kind of surprising.

I expect to pick up the relevant points in context and discuss them in context of the towers of my own expertise, not have to deal with you acting like an Austrian at a picnic.

they taught yu that an imaginary thing has the same rights as a man?

So? What about it? I rented a movie there tonight.

>Don't even comment again until you read it.

You can't stop me

No, you're fighting to be lazy, and dumb.

Tell more stories about your dad in the printer business.

Relevant.

The bigger company wins. It's called liberalism/leftism. if you disagree you are a fascist right-winger nazi bigot.

Any questions?

all of that + jews.

well, yeah. things only have the "rights" that we say they do, and those rights functionally exist only if we enforce them. everyone of any relevance is in agreement that corporations have rights similar to those of people, businessmen do things as if that's the case, so yeah. an "imaginary thing" does have the same rights as a man.

you can buy a USB-B cable for $2 dollars.

amazon.com/Axis-12-0081-Male-Male-Cable/dp/B000EIO8LA/ref=sr_1_13?ie=UTF8&qid=1490506471&sr=8-13&keywords=USB-B

printer companies really should move over to just using simple USB-A male to USB-A male though. that would also help with the odd occasion when you need to transfer files between two computers, don't have a network handy, and don't have external media handy.

low quality b8 m8

IF they win. I think they have a pretty big roadblock trying to get past enforcing the patent past the first sale, which one of the judges brought up, because you can't blanket apply an agreed "contract" you enter into opening a box or wrapper, onto people down the chain, or like they brought up, outside of the US jurisdiction.

On a non-legal aside, Lexmark's end game is poorly thought out. They're fighting cart recyclers, because it's a shrinking market, and most of their profits are tied up into it - the expectation is, if they shut down the recyclers, they'll lose income. The flaw in thinking is:

A. People won't just stop buy Lexmark products because they're tired of high ink prices (and you know if they win, prices will be jacked up even higher)

B People are buying fewer printers anyway

I'm sure the execs and lawyers at Lexmark are telling the CEOs and investors that a win here will recapture lost sales - they have to, to keep their jobs. God forbid they drop ink prices to compete with the recyclers, and make more money with more sales. But that's corporate america - when your product/market fails - sue. Justifies all those corporate paychecks and legal fees (that they take a deduction over on top of).

That's our corporate culture now - sell cheap, shoddy products with expensive consumables, and sue when someone tries to save people money.

THIS IS WHAT YOU GET WHEN YOU FUCKING TRUST LAWYERS FUCK THEM AND KIKES

Wouldn't be worth it. He did meet with some of the big tech people, he had meetings with people like Jobs and Gates - no surprise, he said Gates was wierd, and Jobs was an arrogant ass. He was also involved with moving manufacturing over to China in the 90's, which we had a lot of arguments over.

It was a long time ago, I've forgotten a lot of it. The stuff I remember is the things he saw in the labs at different companies, that didn't reach the market for years - he had an HD tv, that was illegal in the US at the time, when LCDs were'nt on the market yet. I have it in a box somewhere. Plus, most of what he did was making deals, not working with engineers or anything. He was in China or Japan two weeks every month the last decade of his career.

My $200 color laser is Wifi enabled. Only way to go!

>HDTV illegal in the US

You're joking, right?

What the fuck is wrong with her toes?

Lexmark is fucking retarded.

Instead of putting a childish 'we own this thing forever, you're only renting it as a vessel to deliver ink to paper' clause on the cartridges, they should've just offered a refilling service, and competed with other such services.

You do realize that plasma tv's came on the market years before lcd tv's, and that stations were broadcasting hdtv even before that, right?

detecting massive amounts of kikery

Massive amounts of capitalism, you mean.

nah, you gommi fug

if it was capitalism, some manufacturer would do what suggested

Having your entire possesions "leased" and not owned is not capitalism, its feudalism.

Is this not basically the DRM debate?

Fug Stallman was right.


The model probably wasn't approved by the FCC.

I'm surprised someone isn't making aftermarket control units for the tractors that just plug into the harness where the factory unit goes to bypass the whole mess. Even sold at a premium I imagine farmers would be very eager to never have to deal with the problems associated with JD again.

I read all these posts and bet not one you has actually read you Steam Account terms of service.

Many years ago I moved and didn't have internet for two weeks. NONE of my Steam games would work even though the complete game was on my system. I uninstalled Steam and NEVER bought anything on Steam ever again.

No physical media that I OWN, no purchase.

Lexmark is going to lose. See
wired.com/2010/06/iphone-jailbreak-prime/
The government has already recognized that, obscure minutia of copyright law notwithstanding, consumers own the things they buy and can do with them as they will. Lexmark no more continues to own the cartridges it sells than Apple continues to own the iPhone it sells. And unlike, say, Roundup Ready seeds which the company can legally force you to not replant, there is nothing that can grow from a refurbished printer cartridge. Lexmark had better just accept the loss and start opening up its own cartridge refurbishing centers.

On the other hand, printer ink has ALWAYS been a scam in the Gillette Razor model. Fuck them.

To play your games offline first make sure your game is updated. Then make steam client restart in offline mode. I haven't connected in months and still able to play my games.

How likely is it that this ink situation is to intentionally force the masses to need a third party for printing?

imagine if someone made an open source control unit.

John Deer would flip a shit.

This sounds like urban legend bullshit

>Wifi enabled
Whenever I stumble across an unsecured printer via my phone I queue up several hundred Wojaks and Pepes. I hope that one day I consume $300 of toner from you for being an unsecured pleb.

That would be kinda difficult to get to the end users since they'd have to assemble the whole thing from off the shelf parts unless they're all willing to go in on having a small run done by a manufacturer. You'd also need a bunch of people to contribute to developing the software to run on it which would be fairly difficultly since not everyone has a John Deere tractor with their hypothetical open source control unit laying around to test code on. Maybe there are a few control systems engineers that gave up on slaving away in Silicon Valley and went into farming that could get together and do it.

There's no way a JD control unit takes more processing power than a Raspberry Pi can put out. The only hard part will be to manufacture a means to connect it to the no doubt proprietary plugs.

Nothing?

Speak for yourself.

I am the corporation representing user Incognito, not the person user Incognito.

Sometimes the "invisible hand" is invisible because it's not there.

Get cancer you dumb faggot

>There's no way a JD control unit takes more processing power than a Raspberry Pi can put out.
I dunno. I was reading into a little bit and apparently there are numerous sensors or ports for sensors on the tractors to track things like soil quality. I know they also have integrated GPS and sensor systems for partially and maybe fully automated control on newer models. I wouldn't be surprised if it's actually a fairly powerful computer system in those tractors. However it would probably be pretty easy to put something together that would just let you start and drive the thing for use in emergencies. Better to have a tractor that runs and drives without the fancy gadgets than no tractor at all.

>The only hard part will be to manufacture a means to connect it to the no doubt proprietary plugs.
Repining plugs or making adapters is a technically trivial if time consuming and tedious part of the process.