But in Lexmark, the consumer had an option of receiving a "prebate" requiring them to return the used cartridge or paying a higher price and not having the restriction against reuse. I believe that element of consideration could be deemed necessary for the shrink wrap restriction to be enforcable. Bob Michaels --- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, Ernst Dinkla <E.Dinkla@c...> wrote: > No cart chip but a boxwrap > > http://www.corante.com/copyfight/archives/2005/09/ 02/the_latest_ip_crime_boxwrap_patent_infringement.php > > > -- > Ernst Dinkla > > > www.pigment-print.com > ( unvollendet )
Message
Re: Another Lexmark invention
2005-09-05 by Bob Michaels