|[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]|
From: "Bruce Roorda" <firstname.lastname@example.org> Date: Fri, 1 Mar 2002 22:00:50 -0600 Epson gives away its intellectual property (patented printers) for next to nothing in the expectation that they'll make up for it with ink (not their intellectual property) sales. Their intellectual property is patents. If you're not infringing the patent, you aren't stealing their intellectual property. Epson chose their own marketing strategy. Further, one purpose of granting patents is disclosure of how something is done, in the interest of spurring further innovation. Epson should probably try to switch to some sort of licensing arrangement where users pay Epson a certain price per print. In other words, where people didn't own their own printers. That would indeed be unfortunate. Chipped cartridges could actually have very real value-add for end users. The chip could, for example, contain profiling information about the ink, so that the driver could make minor adjustments between batches of ink. This would allow Epson to adjust ink formulation without having to replace the entire driver. Third parties could also use this to electronically label cartridges as containing quadtone inks. -- Robert Krawitz <email@example.com> http://www.tiac.net/users/rlk/ Tall Clubs International -- http://www.tall.org/ or 1-888-IM-TALL-2 Member of the League for Programming Freedom -- mail firstname.lastname@example.org Project lead for Gimp Print/stp -- http://gimp-print.sourceforge.net "Linux doesn't dictate how I work, I dictate how Linux works." --Eric Crampton - Turn off HTML mail features. Keep quoted material short. Use accurate subject lines. http://www.leben.com/lists for list instructions.