Re: [dvd-discuss] more dmca nonsense--Lexmark printers

[mickey <mickeym(at)mindspring.com>]

They bundled a copyrighted work into the cartridge. I think that they 
called it a "toner authentication program" or something like that. 
Either that, or they bundled a TPM into the cartridge, and it controlled 
access to a copyrighted program in the printer.

Mickey

Michael A Rolenz wrote:

>
> Lexmark seems to have missed the fact that the DMCA controls access to 
> copyrighted works. How the ink in a inkjet cartridge is a copyrighted 
> work seems to have escaped Lexmark and the federal district court in 
> Lexington, Kentucky  but presumably this was a preliminary injunction 
> to give the judge time to read the case (I only hope when he does he 
> blasts the Lexmark lawyers)
>
>
> *Jeremy Erwin <jerwin@ponymail.com>*
> Sent by: owner-dvd-discuss@eon.law.harvard.edu
>
> 01/10/2003 01:25 PM
> Please respond to dvd-discuss
>
>        
>         To:        dvd-discuss@eon.law.harvard.edu
>         cc:        
>         Subject:        [dvd-discuss] more dmca nonsense--Lexmark 
> printers
>
>
>
>
> http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/7/28811.html
>
> Lexmark, like many printer manufacturers has obviously adopted the
> "sell the razor at a loss, but make money on selling blades... Now, a
> printer manufacturer can do a great many things to jumpstart this
> revenue generation, starting with only equipping printers with
> partially full cartridges.
>
> Of course, this is problematic, because a inkjet cartridge can be
> refilled, inexpensively, with ink. So in order to protect this dubious
> marketing decision, the cartridges are equiped with special chips, so
> that only certified (i.e. expensive, proprietary) ink replenishment
> techniques are used.
>
> Similarly, under the guise of stopping piracy, game machines check that
> only certified programs are run.
>
>
> And the chips are  (or so Lexmark claims) protected by the DMCA.
> Lexmark claims that licensed cartridge manufacturers have signed
> various contracts that forbid ink replenishment. Thus the printer
> checks the contract (chip), and assumes that if the chip responds
> properly, the cartridge inks and components are properly licenced--
> i.e. making Lexmark a lot of money, No contract-- no ink.
>
> In the past, we were free to ignore unenforceable, laughable contracts.
> The DMCA puts a lawyer in our electronic devices, pushing such
> contracts in our faces.
>
> http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/7/28811.html
>
> Jeremy
>
>
>