An appeals court has dealt another blow to Lexmark’s use of the DMCA to keep someone else from selling cheap, compatible inkjet cartridges.
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit has rejected Lexmark’s request that it reconsider an earlier decision favoring Static Control Components Inc. (SCC), a maker of components used by third parties to make refurbished cartridges. Sanford, N.C.-based SCC is Lexmark’s opponent in the case.
The earlier decision allowed SCC to continue selling its chips for Lexmark laser printers at least until the case goes to trial late this year. Lexmark had asked the appeals court for a hearing to reconsider that decision, but the appeals court turned down its request on Feb. 15, SCC announced yesterday.
The case has been closely watched in the industry, where printer manufacturers make much of their profits through sales of their own cartridges. Refurbished cartridges typically sell for about 30% less than those from the major printer vendors.
Lexmark filed suit against SCC in December 2002, accusing it of violating copyright law as well as the DMCA. It alleged that SCC’s Smartek chips include Lexmark software that is protected by copyright. The software handles communication between Lexmark printers and toner cartridges; without it, refurbished toner cartridges won’t work with Lexmark’s printers.
The use of the DMCA to this end is a great example of how goofy the law is. I hope that when the case finally goes to trial, it will put an end to these sorts of lock-into-the-supplier shenanigans.
And, on a related note, a woman is suing HP (and seeking class-action status) for making their (similarly proprietary and chip-protected) inkjet cartridges “expire” electronically after a given period. HP claims its to keep the ink fresh. Others are pretty certain it’s to keep the cartridges from being refilled by third parties.
And on a related note to that related note, some advice on how to bypass HP’s expiration firmware on inkjet cartridges.