Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

SCOTUS: Patent Rights Over a Printer Cartridge Are Exhausted When It Is Sold

law.cornell.edu

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

131–140 of 319 posts

Re: SCOTUS: Patent Rights Over a Printer Cartridge Are Exhausted When It Is Sold

#131

Post by maxxxxx »

geofft wrote: post #52

I'm a little surprised that Ginsburg dissented here, and also dissented from Kirtsaeng v. John Wiley : naively, she's "liberal", and (at least in my bubble) being "liberal" is associated with wanting less strong IP protection. But I see also that she wrote the majority opinion in Eldred v. Ashcroft , saying that the 28-year extension to copyright terms was constitutional. What's the right way to understand her legal…

"she's "liberal", and (at least in my bubble) being "liberal" is associated with wanting less strong IP protection."

I may not agree with her opinion but I am happy about anybody who goes against the expected behavior because they are "liberal/conservative". It's time that the people in power think for themselves instead of going by party/ideology line.

I don't know much about IPO law but this seems to be a good thing for consumers and also the "market". I honestly thought that this court would just decide in whatever way corporations want them to deice.

Re: SCOTUS: Patent Rights Over a Printer Cartridge Are Exhausted When It Is Sold

#132

Post by apendleton »

geofft wrote: post #52

I'm a little surprised that Ginsburg dissented here, and also dissented from Kirtsaeng v. John Wiley : naively, she's "liberal", and (at least in my bubble) being "liberal" is associated with wanting less strong IP protection. But I see also that she wrote the majority opinion in Eldred v. Ashcroft , saying that the 28-year extension to copyright terms was constitutional. What's the right way to understand her legal…

Sibling responses here are good overviews of her views in this decision, but more generally, the liberal-vs-conservative view of the court is at least to some extent a media invention. 5-4 decisions tend to be big, juicy, mainstream-accessible politically oriented cases, so they get the most press, which leads to the perception that most cases are decided 5-4 along "political" lines. This is not true, though: unanimous decisions are the single most common outcome, and decisions that are not 5-4, or are 5-4 along some other axis, happen all the time, with justices predictably agreeing or disagreeing on certain issues in a way that's not aligned with the popular conception (e.g., Thomas and Scalia typically disagreed on fourth amendment jurisprudence despite being on the same "side").

Re: SCOTUS: Patent Rights Over a Printer Cartridge Are Exhausted When It Is Sold

#133

Post by lallysingh »

01572 wrote: post #129

Will companies now save more money on toner? Is there anyone selling a reverse-engineered, refillable pod for the coffee machines that only accept pre-filled proprietary ones? Do these coffee machine vendors seek to use patents to protect their sales of coffee ? Edit: I know Keurig and Nespresso are the well-publicised examples, but I was thinking of the others. I assume with reasonable confidence there are others st…

You can get a refillable pod for kuerigs. I think it's even kuerig branded. Is there another vendor you're thinking of?

Re: SCOTUS: Patent Rights Over a Printer Cartridge Are Exhausted When It Is Sold

#134

Post by gpm »

gameshot911 wrote: post #65

Can someone clarify one part: >The other option is to buy a cartridge at a discount through Lexmark’s “Return Program.” In exchange for the lower price, customers who buy through the Return Program must sign a contract agreeing to use the cartridge only once and to refrain from transferring the cartridge to anyone but Lexmark. >As a result, even if the restrictions in Lexmark’s contracts with its customers were clear…

IANAL, likely not, it sounds very similar to Morton Salt Co. v. G.S. Suppiger Co. [0] which found that since Suppiger "is making use of its patent monopoly to restrain competition in the marketing of unpatented articles, salt tablets, for use with the patented machines, and is aiding in the creation of a limited monopoly in the tablets not within that granted by the patent." it was barred from enforcing the patent and contract.

The risk of being barred from enforcing their patents probably encourages Lexmark to not even attempt to bring such a suit.

[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Morton_Salt_Co._v._G.S._Suppig....

Edit: HN seems to strip the trailing "." from the URL

Re: SCOTUS: Patent Rights Over a Printer Cartridge Are Exhausted When It Is Sold

#135

Post by Omniusaspirer »

joshuak wrote: post #54

Good, but the tip of the issue is licensing. Autodesk[1] has set precedence that all an organization must do to limit the resale of anything is institute a EULA. Simply by asserting that an offer is for a license not the thing being licensed the seller can bypass common law, Lord Coke, and the first sale doctrine. P.S. This also means that expensive professional software like Autodesk's, or anything with such an EULA…

There seems to be a logic gap here if I'm understanding the possibilities correctly.

What stops me from founding a company through which I get paid, leveraging that company to purchase 100% of my "assets", then instituting a EULA and selling (at no cost) a lifetime license to use anything I want to myself? As per your logic (as I understand it), I could then declare myself utterly destitute and owning $0 worth of assets. My company could also claim $0 worth of assets.

At that point, could I not play any number of games to increase eligibility for government assistance programs or reduce tax burden?

(This is a quick thought, so if there's any glaring flaws in this idea please do point them out.)

Re: SCOTUS: Patent Rights Over a Printer Cartridge Are Exhausted When It Is Sold

#136

Post by bluGill »

frandroid wrote: post #9
snerbles wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Justices typically recuse themselves from cases that pre-date their nomination.

But they could decide to jump in?

Possibly, but why? He has to learn everything there is to know about being on the supreme court (including things like where to park in DC), and all the other work he is expected to do. All this to weigh in on a case that was 7-1 (and the 1 was a minor dissident), so his voice would mean nothing to the result, and it would inflame the Democrats (in this case - if a Democrat did the nomination the Republicans would be inflamed) who would look extra hard for a reason to impeach him. If congress is close such a thing along might be enough to impeach.

If this ever happens it will probably be a 4-4 decision where the other justices - knowing they are tied - ask for a tie breaker. Expect there to be a lot of publicity: they will want to make it clear to everything that everything is being done right. This probably includes redoing the oral hearings for the benefit of the new member.

Re: SCOTUS: Patent Rights Over a Printer Cartridge Are Exhausted When It Is Sold

#137

Post by [deleted] »

gameshot911 wrote: post #65

Can someone clarify one part: >The other option is to buy a cartridge at a discount through Lexmark’s “Return Program.” In exchange for the lower price, customers who buy through the Return Program must sign a contract agreeing to use the cartridge only once and to refrain from transferring the cartridge to anyone but Lexmark. >As a result, even if the restrictions in Lexmark’s contracts with its customers were clear…

[deleted]

Re: SCOTUS: Patent Rights Over a Printer Cartridge Are Exhausted When It Is Sold

#138

Post by [deleted] »

tbirrell wrote: post #87
gameshot911 wrote: post #65

Can someone clarify one part: >The other option is to buy a cartridge at a discount through Lexmark’s “Return Program.” In exchange for the lower price, customers who buy through the Return Program must sign a contract agreeing to use the cartridge only once and to refrain from transferring the cartridge to anyone but Lexmark. >As a result, even if the restrictions in Lexmark’s contracts with its customers were clear…

No. That's what SCOTUS is saying. Lexmark is trying to enforce a contract over an item that they do not control. Is like if you signed a contract with me that every time you handed someone a glass of water, you would require them to say "thank you" in a non-native language. I have no control (legal or otherwise) over your actions or the glass or the water, therefore the contract is not enforceable. In the case, Lexma…

[deleted]

Re: SCOTUS: Patent Rights Over a Printer Cartridge Are Exhausted When It Is Sold

#139

Post by ChuckMcM »

asr wrote: post #121
ChuckMcM wrote: post #84

Yay, hopefully this will translate into a non-crazy ink refill situation which will translate into a much reduced price in ink cartridges. My hope is that the following will occur; 1) People who sell re-filled cartridges, and offer to refill your existing cartridges will no longer suffer malicious lawsuits from HP & Lexmark. 2) That will increase the supply and create a price competition between re-fillers. Making it…

If what you are hoping for is a situation where manufacturers will sell printers at a loss and then also sell ink at cost, I don't think that's a long-run equilibrium. If you are looking for printers where you can get ink at cost in exchange for paying a bit more up front, that's available now: https://epson.com/ecotank-super-tank-printers Kodak also did this ~10 years ago [1] but I cannot figure out if they still us…

Thanks for the link to the Eco-Tank/Super Tank printers from Epson. I have ordered one of the wide-format ones to see how well it works. Sad that the 'print only' wide format is only available outside the US. Seems like 'print only' is the 'manual transmission' of the printer market :-)

What I always hope for, and never expect, is people competing and using engineering quality as a competitive discriminator. I want the ink jet printer that German engineers designed to show they could do a better job than the Swiss engineers. The one that prints repeatably color and registration accurate prints as the building it is in burns down around it. I had a Mannesmann-Tally printer that I swear would stop bullets while it continued to chug away on your printouts. I remember those days fondly :-).

I'll settle for paying a 50% gross margin on a printer that is supported by all my systems, doesn't use a proprietary paper, ink, or other part that insures I can continue to use and service it for 10 years.

Post reply on HN