Landmark patent case will determine whether you can ever truly own a device again


#1

[Read the post]


#2

Are we ready to start executing corporate types in the street yet? Some of these people need to go.


#3

I’m all for it. Instead of hunting lions or other animals, you can hunt investment bankers and hedge managers. And the best part is that nobody likes them so you can’t get in trouble!


#4

Lexmark was formed on March 27, 1991 when IBM divested a number of its hardware manufacturing operations, including printer and printer supply operations, to the investment firm Clayton & Dubilier & Rice, Inc. in a leveraged buyout.[2][3][4][5] Lexmark became a publicly traded company on the New York Stock Exchange on November 15, 1995.[6]

so calling them a IBM division misses the point.


#5

To be fair, both single use and refillable cartridges were available; the single use cartridges were discounted compared to refillable ones, but perhaps that’s simply the thin edge of the wedge, analogous to the brief period when Adobe both rented and sold its software.


#6

Rest assured, any bystanders who may be present will inexplicably see nothing.

They may applaud when the carnage is over, though.


#7

(starts sharpening knives and looking up molotov cocktail making)


#8

If the court allows this to go through and Lexmark to win. We may as well reenact the French Revolution here.


#9

Equal parts white gas, dawn dish…

Wait a second, is this a trap?


#10

#11

…until now.


#12

Before anyone had imagined ubiquitous computing, people could still imagine ubiquitous surveillance, ubiquitous law enforcement, totalitarianism from which there could be no escape. Usually I heard it called, “Orwellian Nightmare”, and it was either a cautionary tale to be avoided, or the inevitable end game given current trends.

Calling it, “The Internet of Things” doesn’t make it sound any more fun, honestly. I became a manipulable object when handcuffs were put on me. Now that the shackles can be written into my electrics, their true function won’t be visible until I want them to do something that the actual owners don’t.


#13

They already have their cake, my cake, and are busy eating your cake too.

When things should be dealt with standards based on consumer health and/or safety they claim there is no need for regulations establishing those standards because competition will solve it, then when there is real competition they claim the public will suffer because of poor quality or poor safety.


#14

I know, let’s maybe imagine an alternative to this “Internet of Things” idea. We could call it, “Internet of People”,


#15

Hmph. Sounds socialist.


#16

#17

Yeah, if Bernie Sanders can get elected, it might do for socialism what Obama has done for being black.


#18

I’m dealing with the fallout of a similar case pushed by the college textbook industry in 2013. John Wiley sued an importer of international edition textbooks on the grounds that works copyrighted in another country negated First Sale doctrine regarding their sale in the US, allowing them to dictate any terms they pleased. The case went to the Supreme Court where it was ultimately knocked down as the justices realized the disaster for our economy this potentially presented. In retaliation the textbook publishers collectively raised international book prices to try and kill textbook reimporting, which has for a time been the primary source of all textbooks sold on-line. Then they hired a litigation mill named Oppenheim and Zebrak to harass small book traders across the market using a legal theory they call Indirect Infringement that puts every book trader and every college student who buys books on-line to save money in legal jeopardy.

Having a small one man home business as a textbook scout working for several wholesalers, I was targeted by these people last year and last month they filed suit against me. They so ridiculously embellished the case that it actually drew the attention of publishing journals both here and in the UK. I’m completely incapable of affording any representation or defense and so am helpless as these people railroad me for sake of whatever agenda they are pursuing. I’m disabled and will very likely lose my only means of income and my home. As a last resort, I’ve created a crowdfunding campaign to raise money for a defense, though given the impossible amount required it’s largely about trying to shame these publishers into intervening in their runaway litigation mill. I won’t post the link in case that’s forbidden, but anyone interested in more details can search my name on Facebook and GoFundMe.


#19

assuming that the sky doesn’t immediately rain fire, perhaps Americans will realize that socialist principles can help moderate capitalism in a very positive way (for the 99%)


#20

I paid for it, I possess it, I own it. I can force any bit in its storage up or down, limited only by my knowledge and tools available. I can attach wires, or cut traces, hack or change the controller chip, MITM and fake its communications.

I own the thing. No lawyer nor other suit’n’tie type should dare to tell me that I don’t have the right of doing something with my possessions. Otherwise they can quickly find out what end of the soldering iron is the hot one.

We need generic cores for devices from printers to washing machines, with type-specific modkits for attachment of individual different types; they tend to be pretty similar anyway. As a bonus, this will allow easier repairs/reclaims/upcycling of discarded devices where the controller bought the farm.