Digital BW, The Print

Bob Frost wrote:

>David,
>
>  
>
>>Seiko or Epson Japan may be blind to the public relations disaster
>>about to visit them. If they persist I am sure my next printer will be a 
>>pigment Canon or HP
>>    
>>
>
>Out of the frying pan, and into the fire?
>
>HP is currently sueing one company for refilling used HP carts and calling 
>them new, and also sued another company for selling ink that infringed three 
>of HP's ink patents! They had to modify the ink so that it didn't infringe 
>HP's patents.  http://news.zdnet.com/2100-1040_22-5647086.html
>
>  
>
The last news on the one relating to the refills the refiller agreed to 
make it clearer on packaging that they were refills. Check HP's own 
press release:
<http://www.hp.com/hpinfo/newsroom/press/2005/051020a.html>

As for the one relating to the inks v�s Cartridge World America, it says:
"HP today notified Cartridge World North America that it has discovered 
infringements of an HP ink patent.. ...in March 2005, the same 
initiative also uncovered ink patent infringements in certain InkCycle 
cartridges sold under the Staples brand. HP and InkCycle quickly 
resolved the matter after InkCycle changed its ink formulations."

Those certainly aren't lawsuits.

read on...

However, HP DID win a lawsuit in 2002 relating to their cartridges (not 
surprising since they incorporate the printhead in them). Of course 
Lexmark lost a toner refill case at the US Supreme Court.

http://www.bizjournals.com/sacramento/stories/2002/01/28/daily17.html

Here's more on the HP ink patent lawsuit.
<http://news.com.com/HP,+InkCycle+settle+inkjet+refilling+suit/2100-1041_3-5737561.html>

Assuming the patent was properly granted, not so overly-broad as to 
prevent competitive innovation, and fully merited (some BIG "ifs" as the 
NY Times piece I noted makes clear 
<http://www.nytimes.com/2006/02/21/business/businessspecial2/21patent.html?_r=1&oref=slogin>), 
I have no problem with HP protecting the ink patents. Trying to shutdown 
refillers through legal extortion (IMHO the corporate equivalent of  
SLAPP suits 
<http://www.nolo.com/definition.cfm/term/1264241E-6BCC-41DE-88FB065B11543680>) 
I do have a problem with.

>Canon has just won a lawsuit against a company making cartridges that 
>infringed their patents -
>http://www.terrie.com/tt/2001-Richard/tt213.html
>
>  
>
January 17, 2003 is "just won?" They won a single lawsuit in Germany.  I 
really wouldn't call that indicative of the state of the law or even a 
holding that would help guide American jurisprudence.

>That's just two that caught my eye recently.
>
>  
>
You must read a lot of OLD news..


Bob, if you are going to quote something, could you please get all the 
facts right?
Keith

 
Keith Krebs

"Just some guy," caretaker of the Multiverse's largest EPSON printer 
User Community (highly recommended by Vogon Poets and MegaDodo 
Publications), at:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/EPSON_Printers/
and  the Multiverse's largest Canon printer User  Community at:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Canon-printers
"For the rest of you out there, the secret is to bang the rocks together 
guys"

 

****************************************************************
CONFIDENTIALITY & COPYRIGHT NOTICE:
This e-mail message, including attachments and contents, is � Copyright, 
Keith Krebs, 2001-2006, All Rights Reserved. It is expressly for the 
sole use of the intended recipient and may contain confidential and 
privileged information. Absent the express written authorization of the 
author, any unauthorized review, use, disclosure, transfer, or 
distribution is explicitly prohibited and taken at your own risk. If you 
are not, or are unsure whether you are, the intended recipient, please 
contact the sender immediately and destroy all copies of the original 
message. Violations will be prosecuted to the FULL extent allowed under 
applicable civil and criminal law. Imagery published or distributed in 
violation of these conditions shall be subject to a $1500/image 
liquidated damages charge, in addition to any applicable Copyright 
violation penalties.

POV IMage Service Banner
****************************************************************
{ The P.O.V. Image Service Website is still at http://www.p-o-v-image.com/ }





[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]