Lexmark v. Static Control Case Archive
Printer maker Lexmark sued chipmaker Static Control Components (SCC). SCC produced replacement microchips that enabled printer cartridge remanufacturers to refill laser toner cartridges and sell them more cheaply. Lexmark claimed that SCC circumvented Lexmark's access control technologies and infringed its copyrights by "reverse engineering" its printer toner cartridges in the course of developing its replacement chips. The copyrights in question were to Lexmark software contained on its toner cartridge chips.
Lexmark cited provisions of the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA) in the lawsuit. The district court ruled in Lexmark's favor, then Static Control appealed to the Sixth Circuit. EFF filed an amicus brief to the appeals court supporting Static Control.
The Sixth Circuit ruled in favor of SCC, holding that (1) some of the Lexmark software was insufficiently creative to deserve copyright protection and (2) the authentication handshake did not effectively protect the software because printer owners could directly access the software through other open interfaces.
While an important victory against the anti-competitive uses of the DMCA and digital rights management (aka "technical protection measures"), the Sixth Circuit ruling likely will not prevent companies from trying tactics similar to those used by Lexmark in the future.
In addition, Lexmark is also using patent law to restrict competition in secondary markets for refilled toner cartridges.
Documents
Table Of Contents
- Sixth Circuit Appeal:
- District Court Preliminary Injunction:
- Complaint:
- Other files:
- Other Related Action:
Sixth Circuit Appeal:
- October 26, 2004 Sixth Circuit Opinion[PDF, 138.24 KB]
- July 30, 2003 Brief of Amicus Curiae of Sony Computer Entertainment America Inc. in Support of Lexmark[PDF, 911.83 KB]
- July 2, 2003 EFF amicus brief in support of Static Control Components, Inc.[PDF, 197.23 KB]
- July 1, 2003 Brief Amicus Curiae of Computer & Communications Industry Association In Support of Static Control Components, Inc.[PDF, 1.31 MB]
- June 23, 2003 Appellate Brief of Static Controls[PDF, 2.43 MB]
District Court Preliminary Injunction:
- March 3, 2003 Court's Preliminary Injuntction Ruling[PDF, 1.52 MB]
- February 6, 2003
SVTC Silicon Valley Toxics Coalition[PDF, 297.53 KB] Amicus Brief opposing a preliminary injunction
- February 3, 2003
AAIA Automotive Aftermarks Industry Association[PDF, 397.88 KB] Amicus Brief opposing a preliminary injunction
- APRA Automotive Parts Rebuilders Associations Basel Action Network[PDF, 252.43 KB] Amicus Brief opposing a preliminary injunction
- January 31, 2003
CCIA Computer and Communications Industry Association[PDF, 187.52 KB] Amicus Brief opposing a preliminary injunction
- Static Control's opposition to Lexmark's motion for preliminary injunction.[PDF, 444.67 KB]
- January 30, 2003
ITC International Imaging Technical[PDF, 142.90 KB] Amicus Brief opposing a preliminary injunction
- Law professors[PDF, 166.84 KB] Amicus Brief opposing a preliminary injunction
- January 29, 2003
GRRN Grass Roots Recycling Network[PDF, 192.16 KB] Amicus Brief opposing a preliminary injunction
Complaint:
- December 20, 2002 Complaint in Lexmark v. Static Control Components[PDF, 602.71 KB]
Other files:
- March 10, 2003
EFF Reply comment filed with the Copyright Office[PDF, 145.49 KB] in support of the exemptions from s.1201 sought by Static Control Components Inc.
- March 10, 2003
EFF Reply comment filed with the Copyright Office[PDF, 145.49 KB]
Other Related Action:
- SCC v. Lexmark Antitrust Complaint[PDF, 165.79 KB]
