Digital BW, The Print

I've posted my letter to the U.S. Trade Representative at
http://paulroark.com/Letter-Schwab.zip.  I re-worked it from the original
letter to Bush.

 

After reading the ITC opinion in this matter, published at
http://edisweb.usitc.gov/edismirror/337-565/Violation/286157/337193/12ea/8e7
03a.pdf a couple things come to mind.

 

First, they focused only on the minutia of Epson patents.  ("How many angels
can dance on a chip contact" comes to mind.)  A patent dealing with chip
contacts was a major focus.  This suggests to me that the third party chips
as well as cartridges may be excluded.  We could, of course, just take the
Epson chips off their old carts and re-set them - which is probably what is
behind the 260 chip and its connection to the cartridge.  Also, resetting
devices and chips do not appear to be showing up very rapidly for the 260
and 3800.

 

Second, the ITC staff appears to have agreed with Epson on the required
public interest element, which includes the impact on U.S. competition and
consumers.  The opposing party did not submit anything.  In short, this
required element appears to never been contested or investigated.  I think
this is a good reason for the U.S. Trade Representative to disapprove the
matter.  A critical issue was never determined in a proper proceeding. 

 

Paul

www.PaulRoark.com <http://www.paulroark.com/>  

 

 

 

 

 



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