Schlosnagle.Com
find:
user login
username:
password:

Contact Info
Steve
Mo

poll
Which is your favorite Comic?
Angst Technology
Cool Cat Studio
diesel sweeties
Dilbert
Dykes to Watch Out For
Life on Forbez!!
MegaTokyo
Polymer City Chronicles
PvP
SinFest
Something in print!

[Results | Polls]
Votes: 3845

Lexmark Sues To Shut Down Competitor With DMCA from steve
Thu, Jan 16 @ 03:51 PM
Originally published January 16, 2003 On ExtremeTech.Com By Brett Glass

If there ever were a law which had nothing but bad or unintended consequences, the Digital Millennium Copyright Act would likely be it. Since it was signed into law, corporations have attempted to use it to suppress security advisories, deter the publication of scientific research, and eliminate consumers' fair use rights. The DMCA makes it illegal to make an end run around any restriction a manufacturer places on the use of something that's copyrighted -- including, for example, creating a device that lets you skip the commercials on a DVD.

Now comes Lexmark, which has hit upon yet another questionable use of the law: preventing third parties from selling remanufactured laser printer and inkjet cartridges. Lexmark recently filed suit against Static Control Components, a company which supplies replacement parts for laser toner cartridges, claiming that it was violating the DMCA by making it possible to sell reconditioned cartridges.

Here's why. Each Lexmark printer cartridge contains a built-in chip that identifies the cartridge as "genuine" and records when the toner has been exhausted. The printer won't work with a chip from a used-up cartridge (even if the toner is replenished) or if the right chip isn't there. Static Control sells replacements for Lexmark's chips, allowing cartridges to be refilled so long as they're "re-chipped" at the same time.

Lexmark claims that by provding a replacement chip, Static Control is violating the DMCA, because it is providing a device that circumvents a technological measure that controls access to copyrighted material. (In this instance, Lexmark claims that the copyrighted material is the internal computer code which makes the printer work.)

Since many common products -- from toasters to cars -- contain embedded processors that run copyrighted computer code, Lexmark's suit -- could have far reaching effects. Anyone who explained how to alter a common household device to make it more functional could be accused of a crime. Worse still, manufacturers could make it illegal for you to use third party supplies or replacement parts in virtually any product, from cars to copiers to computers.

In short, the worst consequences of this ill-advised law may be yet to come.


[ Reply to this ]

"Lexmark Sues To Shut Down Competitor With DMCA" | Login/Create an Account | 1 comment
Threshold
The comments are owned by whoever posted them. This site is not responsible for what they say.

Copyright officials rule against Lexmark (Score: 1)
by Steve on Wed, Oct 29 @ 01:39 PM
(User Info)

By Jack Kapica
Globe and Mail Update, Wednesday, October 29, 2003

The United States Copyright Office has ruled in favour of Static Control Components, of Sanford, N.C., saying that its microchips do not contravene the Digital Millennium Copyright Act.

Lexmark International, the world's second-largest printer maker, had charged that SCC violated the act by making components for use in remanufactured laser printer toner cartridges. Among the components is a chip that mimics the behaviour of one made by Lexmark.

The ruling says that section 1201 of the DMCA allows aftermarket companies to develop software for the purpose of remanufacturing toner cartridges and printers.

SCC argued that Lexmark was trying to shield itself from competition by installing a chip on its toner cartridges to make it difficult for third-party manufacturers to make generic cartridges.

The decision says that SCC is entitled to sell replacement chips for use in used Lexmark toner cartridges.

The DMCA, passed in 1998, allows for review of new types of works that require an exemption for being able to circumvent a technology measure that would control access to a copyrighted work.

Lexmark filed its suit against SCC in December, 2002, saying the DMCA shields itself from competition from the remanufacturing industry.

SCC manufactures components for recovering empty printer cartridges, refurbishing the cartridges and reselling them.

In August, the North Carolina Legislature approved a measure that made the Lexmark Return Program, formerly called the Prebate program, unenforceable in North Carolina.

"We are examining the documents and devoting a large amount of time with our economists and attorneys to calculate the damages that we feel we are entitled to from Lexmark because of their serious misdeeds," SCC CEO Ed Swartz said about the ruling.


[ Reply to This ]


This site crafted with thatware