Ed Foster’s Gripelog || Lexmark Wins the Right to Sue Its Customers — Hmm, I missed this story as it snuck past the guards. This can’t be good.
“Please read before opening. Opening of this package or using the patented cartridge inside confirms your acceptance of the following agreement. The patent cartridge is sold at a special price subject to a restriction that it may be used only once. Following this initial use, you agree to return the empty cartridge only to Lexmark for remanufacturing and recycling. If you don’t accept these terms, return the unopened package to your point of purchase. A regular price cartridge without these terms is available.”
Unfortunately, the court upheld the lower court’s ruling that this “boxwrap” agreement does constitute a contract between Lexmark and the customer. The judges seemed to have no problem with the fact that any manufacturer could add similar post-sale usage restrictions on its packaging in order to eliminate aftermarket competition, or perhaps third-party support, or even the right of customers to repair, modify, refurbish, or resell the products they’ve purchased. Oh, well, it’s not like we didn’t already know which side most of our judges are on when the interests of consumer and business conflict.
We’re heading for the day when property rights will no longer exist for mere citizens. We will no longer own our cars, our houses, our TVs, etc. Everything will be rented, leased, or “sold” with draconian restrictions which eliminate any true right of ownership.
Unfortunately thats just the way it is. We live in a disclaimership society. Where;
You can gets a cellphone for $0!
Disclaimer: with 3 year service agreement and promise of first born.
You can get a 12 Pack of Pepsi for $2.00!
Disclaimer: you must provide us with a way to track all your purchases or pay the ‘non-club member’ price of $5.99
You can buy nearly anything you want!
With no warranty of merchantability or usability…
Systems Analayst, blah I am in the wrong business. I should be in the disclaimer writing business.
Not sure exactly what the rules are, and in this case it might not be extremly bad. However it sets a bad precident.
Lexmark is probably right here. I have one of their printers and the full rate cartridge without the return program deal is 50% more. So Lexmark is offering 1/3 off if you send the cartridge back to them, whcih they can then refill to sell again presumably. This 1/3 off is a better deal than OfficeMax giving you a ream of paper so they can sell their discount cartirdges.
All that needs to happen is for most consumers to stop buying their crappy printers and $40 cartridges. The average consumer in this country has pleaded ignorance way to long. It’s time to read the terms, educate yourself before you buy a product, and allow the market to blow these hogs into receivership. Is it so hard to research a purchase a few minutes, or return the thing if you don’t like the fine print. I’m sorry, a lot of this is just the lazy complacent consumers fault.
I don’t understand this in the least. I thought a REAL contract required (amongst other things) bargaining. I don’t understand how simply purchasing an item can create a contract. This is the same tenuous quasi-logic that says EULAs and those privacy policies on websites are legal.
That said, I hate Lexmark and their crummy printers. Just let them die.
I think that congress should pass a law:
“All conditional terms and agreements associated with the use of any product, that is or can be sold from the shelf of a store, need to be clearly stated on the outside of the packing in a type font no smaller than 7 point. If the product is to be purchased over the Internet, then the conditional terms and agreements must be clearly stated in 100 words or less, and require the purchaser to actively agree prior to purchase.”
“Sold at a special price” – Lexmark ink cartridges are very overpriced. After comparing prices for replacement cartridges and having given up on messy ink refill kits – I ended up buying a new Canon printer for $40 (with 4 full ink carts. included). About $10 – $20 cheaper than buying replacement Lexmark cartridges.
Well I can understand why Lexmark is peeved, they do more or less give the printers away, and make their money from the ink. Once you have one of their printers, they’ve got you locked in. (A bit like a drug dealer huh?)
But that’s their fault. They shouldn’t get mad when people find a way to get their drugs… er, ink for cheaper.
Does the same logic apply to condoms?
If I buy a video cassette and play it until it gives no more enjoyment – must I throw it away rather than recording my kid’s birthday party on it?
Unenforceable law – the best kind of monolistic practice. I can see the FBI breaking into my home in the middle of the night in search of empty print cartridges. Maybe I’ll just wait until I am labled a person of interest or have my picture up in the Post Office to worry about this. Perhaps, this is what the Patriot act was all about?
This will definitely discourage me from ever buying a Lexmark product – since I will never own it completely. INDEED – We should get Gates and Lexmark to duke it out over ownership of my machine. Whomever wins can pay the disposal fee when it goes to the landfill?
.
All I have to say is F-U Lexmark Stop charging $35 for $1 in ink. Who is ripping who off?? Maybe if these printer companies didn’t gouge everybody we wouldn’t be compelled to refill our own ink. I have refilled my catridges several times IT WORKS GREAT! So SUE ME!!