Digital BW, The Print

From David Dorn

<Here is where Epson's arrogance comes in.  I print mainly B&W.
<Epson's matte is simply too warm.  Now don't tell me they don't know
<it.  Ebony is the only 3rd non Epson ink I use in my 2200.  All they
<have to do is make an alternative ink and I would be 100% Epson.

I'm not sure Epson is the one that is arrogant here. "Epson's matte is 
simply too warm.... All they have to do is make and alternative ink and I 
would be 100% Epson." Let me get this straight, you are saying Epson should 
use your opinion, (one that I happen not to agree with) and if they changed 
their product based on that opinion everything would be fine.

Frankly I'm not exactly sure which side of this lawsuit I will end up on. 
All I can tell you is that I like my 2400, I am very happy with the prints, 
which are all B&W. I would like to have less expensive carts, but compared 
to the sale price of a print, ink is a negligible cost. Consumers always 
have the right to vote with their checkbook. I know that some see this as 
Epson's attempt to eliminate that right. I'm not sure if there is a viable 
market for third party inks and cartridges, Epson will ever be able to 
eliminate the competition.


Gary

www.pbase.com/garyallenbrown
baffin@...

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

Canon has just won a lawsuit against a company making cartridges that 
infringed their patents -
http://www.terrie.com/tt/2001-Richard/tt213.html

That's just two that caught my eye recently.

Bob Frost.


----- Original Message ----- 
From: "David M. Dorn" <dmdorn_ct_usa@...>

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]

Keith,

> As for the one relating to the inks v\ufffds 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.


Well Keith, I'm no lawyer, but have to rely on what the media tell me. How 
about this? :-

"On Friday, HP sued InkCycle in U.S. District Court in Madison, Wis., 
alleging that the company's ink violates three HP patents."

 http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2005/03/29/BUGUBBVSLH1.DTL


Is that a lawsuit or not?

Bob Frost.


----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Editor P.O.V. Image Service" <editor@...>

Bob Frost wrote:

>Keith,
>
>  
>
>>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.
>>    
>>
>
>
>Well Keith, I'm no lawyer, but have to rely on what the media tell me. How 
>about this? :-
>
>"On Friday, HP sued InkCycle in U.S. District Court in Madison, Wis., 
>alleging that the company's ink violates three HP patents."
>
> http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2005/03/29/BUGUBBVSLH1.DTL
>
>
>  
>
That's the very InkCycle suit HP's own site says was settled quickly out 
of court.  ;-)
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]

I'm late looking at this thread, but it is interesting to see the stakes.
Someone else may well have noted the following, and if so forgive me.  The
following is from Seiko Epson's 2005 annual report (one year old as it files
on a fiscal year ended March 31):

"(1) Epson’s relies to a significant degree on profits from its inkjet
printer business
Epson’s ¥942,401 million of sales from its information-related equipment
business for the year ending
March 2005 constituted 63.7% of its consolidated sales, which were
¥1,479,750 million (excluding
inter-segment). Inkjet printers and consumables accounted for much of the
sales and profits of the
information-related equipment business. So there is a possibility that
sluggish sales of inkjet printers
and their related supplies will have a material adverse effect on Epson’s
overall results.

(4) Epson might experience a reduction in the market for Epson-brand
consumables
Consumable products for inkjet printers, especially ink cartridges, are
particularly important to Epson’s
sales and profit. There are third parties who supply ink cartridges that can
be used in Epson printers.
These alternatives products are generally sold at prices cheaper than
Epson’s brand products, and they
are slowly gaining market share in Japan and the United States, but even
more so in Europe and
developing countries. Such third parties will continue to expand their share
of the market for these
alternative products in the future, so for Epson to remain competitive, it
might have to lower its prices of
such consumables.
In responding to such risks as a decline in its share of the market for
Epson-brand products and a
reduction in prices, Epson has will continue to introduce onto the market,
in accordance with the demands
and tastes of consumer in each region, its own products that appeal to
consumers searching for quality
and ease of use. For example, it will aim to maintain and improve the
quality of its products, and it will
strive to boost their user-friendliness, such as by using even longer
lasting ink and an array of single-color
ink cartridges. Epson will also take legal measures to if any of its patent
rights or trademark rights it
holds over its ink cartridges are infringed.
There is no assurance, however, that any of these efforts will be effective,
and if Epson’s profit from
consumable products for inkjet printers declines because, for example, in
the future the market share
occupied by the alternative products increases further or Epson must reduce
the prices of its brand
products, then Epson’s results might consequently be adversely affected."

So, Seiko Epson is saying that out of sales of roughly USD12.7 billion, its
information-related business sales were roughly USD8 billion, of which
"much" was attributable to inkjet printers and consumables.  That's a lot of
money for those little cartridges.  While not a huge company by U.S.
standards, it is interesting that it sees third-party inks as something
worthy of comment.  Wonder what the "array of single-color ink cartrideges"
is?  Anyone interested in following lawsuit disclosures for U.S. traded
companies (Seiko Epson is traded on the TSE) can go to www.sec.gov and look
up their disclosures in the footnotes to the financial statements, or 8-K
forms filed.

Ken