Reader Comments

Subscribe: RSS

View by: Time | Thread

• 

  Karen Dudnikov, 17 Jul 2006 @ 3:56pm

  
  

  re: good for Greg Beck

  this is just the tip of the iceberg of companies attempting to control the secondary market on the internet by falsely claiming copyright or trademark infringement

  [ link to this | view in chronology ]

• 

  anonymous coward, 17 Jul 2006 @ 4:20pm

  
  

  expect to see a huge flood of printer cartridge resellers.
  
  either you make money selling cartridges or you make money by suing the printer mfgs when they try to stop you from doing business.

  [ link to this | view in chronology ]

  • 

    William Williams, 17 Jul 2006 @ 4:32pm

    
    

    Re:

    That would be great maybe the price of ink will finally come down if there is some competition. I know those things should only cost 5 or 6 bucks but I always end up paying 30

    [ link to this | view in chronology ]

    • 

      inky, 17 Jul 2006 @ 5:17pm

      
      

      Re: Re:

      William is almost right. HP pays a little over a penny per milliliter for its ink. That's $0.10 - $0.15 per cartridge for the ink. Add about $2 for the cartridge an a few cents for packaging. Everything over $3 is advertising and PROFIT.

      [ link to this | view in chronology ]

• 

  Mr. No NO, 17 Jul 2006 @ 5:14pm

  
  

  Cost of ink by William WIlliams

  The only problem with them bringing the price of ink down is that the actual printer prices would sky rocket. Ink and toner is how these companies make money. They often only make 10-15% margins on the printers, but the ink and toner, like you stated, is more like 200-300% margins.
  
  Sure, we could have $5 ink (instead of $30) but we could also have $300 inkjet printers (instead of $50 ones).

  [ link to this | view in chronology ]

  • 

    Adam, 17 Jul 2006 @ 6:03pm

    
    

    Re: Cost of ink by William WIlliams

    Even so,
    The long-term savings, if you keep your printer around for any real amount of time, would WAY outshine the extra cost of the original printer
    
    so, say a 50$ printer goes to 300$
    and the 30$ ink cartridge drops to 5.
    after your tenth cartridge, you'll have saved as much as you spent extra on the printer, every time after that you're saving 25bucks PER!
    
    to equal out the difference... you'd have to take the difference in cartridge price, times the life span, IN NUMBER OF CARTRIDGES, and add it to the original sticker...
    so, if they wanted the same profits a printer that had an avg lifespan of 5 years, at 5 (2.5 of black and color) cartridges a year, is a 25 cartridge lifespan....
    25 cartridges times 25 dollar difference per equals 675 dollars of difference in profit to make up..
    
    would YOU pay 725 for cheap lexmark?
    no.

    [ link to this | view in chronology ]

• 

  BillDivX, 17 Jul 2006 @ 5:41pm

  
  

  seriously

  I never print anything unless it's critical to have it on paper. Probably has something to do with the fact that whenever I go buy cartridges, I stare in wonder at HP's $50 cartridge price.

  [ link to this | view in chronology ]

• 

  Sanguine Dream, 18 Jul 2006 @ 5:37am

  
  

  I gave up...

  on printing years ago. I was buying $30 carts, use them 5-10 times then they would dry out before I used them again.

  [ link to this | view in chronology ]

• 

  Andrew N., 18 Jul 2006 @ 6:00am

  
  

  The way I do it...

  Is to just buy a new printer every time. I can get a new $50 printer with a $20 mail in rebate (which are stupid, but if you do them, it works) and spend as much as a cartrige. Then, you just sell the old printer on eBay.

  [ link to this | view in chronology ]

• 

  Karen, 18 Jul 2006 @ 6:04am

  
  

  re: missing the point

  I think you've gotten off topic.
  
  This is about a company that decided someone couldn't use their name to sell a compatible product.
  
  It was a company deciding to control the secondary market. The guy didn't sue to make money, he sued to be able to continue his LEGAL business.
  
  The guy wasn't selling ink cartridges. He was selling labels that fit a certain printer.
  
  Could you see Dymo going after Xerox if Xerox said "our paper fits in Dymo, HP and Epson printers"
  
  No. But this guy was selling his labels on eBay and Dymo decided that since eBay makes it so easy to shut down a listing they would go after him there.
  
  They KNEW they didn't have the right to do so, they probably only did it because they never expected to be sued.

  [ link to this | view in chronology ]

  • 

    Gabriel Tane (profile), 18 Jul 2006 @ 9:26am

    
    

    Re: re: missing the point

    "The guy wasn't selling ink cartridges. He was selling labels that fit a certain printer."
    -Karen

    
    
    No, these guys are right on target. Here's why:
    
    "Hi. Would you like to buy these GT-Direct Printer Cartridges? They are compatible with HP model XYZ printers."
    
    Exact same thing. The only difference would be if I stole HP's patented methods for producing the carts. And if I backwards engineered my carts to fit their ports, I'm not even "copying" their carts. I'll just make the tops round or something and BAM... different item.

    [ link to this | view in chronology ]

• 

  firemeg, 19 Jul 2006 @ 8:29am

  
  

  Doesn't Surprise Me...

  that eBay was pulling these auctions. Doesn't seem as if there was any copyright infringement going on. eBay's VERO program oversteps the boundaries all of the time when removing listings such as this.
  
  eBay is also a bit hypocritical, since it is still in the midst of lawsuits over intellectual property that eBay allegedly stole from at least two different companies.

  [ link to this | view in chronology ]