EPSON CHALLENGED …..INK PATENT BATTLE

[Anonymous]

Epson challenged in patent battle
Ink
cartridge market set for court ruling as import company refuses to back
down.A court battle is set to determine the future of the UK ink
cartridge market with the possibility of a landmark legal decision over
patent rights.The outcome of the litigation could lead to a change in
the shape of the imaging industry if a court rules against Seiko Epson
Corporation (SEC) in its patent dispute with Medea International, an
import firm based in Dundee, Scotland.Earlier this year, SEC commenced
a series of legal proceedings against smaller rivals it claimed were
infringing its UK patent rights.But directors at Medea claim their
Inkrite PhotoPlus cartridges do not infringe on Epson products and
insist “our system, our process and the basic scientific principles
used for its operation are fundamentally different”.In August, Epson
succeeded in agreeing to settle a separate intellectual property rights
action against a UK-based internet retailer, Recharge Inkjet
Technologies, which traded online as CartridgeMonkey.As part of the
agreement, Recharge agreed not to infringe Epson’s patents and
registered designs and to make a substantial settlement payment to
Epson.But news of the impending court battle could seriously handicap
Epson’s continued efforts to clean up the cartridge market as potential
rivals wait for the judge’s decision with interest.

Imaging
industry expert Jim Forrest, a senior analyst at Lyra Research, told
OPI: “If the court decision does go against Epson I would imagine we
would be seeing a lot more Epson compatible products hitting the
market.”Before they started issuing lawsuits the floodgates were open
and the company has been successful in dramatically reducing this
market. However, if they lose the case the clock will be reset and the
dozens and dozens of companies that were affected by the threat of
legal action will be returning to the market.”Epson has been extremely
successful in taking a lot of these compatibles off the market with
these lawsuits. However, this is the first time to the best of my
knowledge that a company has refused to settle and back down. I’m
surprised that they’ve decided to fight the battle.”This is a high-risk
strategy for Medea but it certainly could be counter-productive for
Epson.”Epson – one of the top four printer manufacturers together with
Canon, Hewlett-Packard and Lexmark – announced it means business when
it comes to protecting its patents.Epson claims that Medea, a computer
consumables distributor in the UK and Europe, has infringed on patents
belonging to Epson by importing ink cartridges compatible with Epson
printers into the UK. Medea sells these imported cartridges in the UK
under a number of brands, including Inkrite PhotoPlus.In a press
statement, Epson insists Medea’s imported cartridges have a spongeless
valve design which it claims is too similar to Epson’s patented Smart
Valve Technology.Seiichi Hirano, CEO of the Imaging Products Operations
Division at Seiko Epson, said: “We do not take the decision to litigate
against another company lightly. However, to protect our technology
against the various claims being made by Medea International and by its
continued acts of importation into the UK which infringe Epson’s UK
patents and which undermine the benefits provided to our customers,
Epson has been forced into taking the decision of starting UK patent
infringement proceedings.”Third-party companies currently have 38
percent market share in unit terms and 24 percent in revenue terms – a
modest figure because their cartridges are cheaper to buy.Managing
Director at Medea International, Yusuf Okhai, told OPI: “Perhaps SEC
are all too aware that when customers compare Inkrite to Epson OEM
cartridges, they will also make the smart decision and use that product
that gives them the highest ‘bang per buck’, and perhaps SEC don’t feel
altogether confident that an informed consumer will choose to use their
high priced products – so they choose to revert to using corporate
bullying tactics, trying to squash the competitors with endless legal
documents and claims that most can ill afford.”However, we are going to
defend our products and our investment. We can only hope that the
consumer will take a look at what we have to offer and get the chance
to make up their own minds. If people like us don’t challenge this
monopolistic market that the OEMs will always try to protect using
these restrictive measures, only the consumer will pay.”The most common
question we are asked is how it is possible for a small company to
produce what we refer to as superior technology.”Simply put, ‘Necessity
is the mother of invention’. If we made millions of dollars from
selling 10-year-old technology at extortionate prices by maintaining an
artificial monopoly, I don’t think I would spend the time, energy,
effort and money to make something better.”But we don’t – we need to
innovate to survive. We need to deliver consistently more for a price
that is consistently less in order to sell against the giants of this
industry. So we are still fighting our corner, and will continue to do
so.”

[Author]

October 24, 2006 at 4:28 PM