- This topic has 0 replies, 1 voice, and was last updated 9 years, 9 months ago by
.
-
Posts
-
Pelikan recognizes HP’s printer cartridge patent claims
Within
the context of the patent infringement lawsuit filed by the printer
manufacturer Hewlett-Packard with the District Court in Düsseldorf
against the Hanover-based printer consumables supplier Pelikan
Hardcopy, the defendant has now recognized the patent claims of the
plaintiff. When asked about the case by heise online, a spokesman of
the court on the afternoon of Friday the 27th of July 2007 confirmed
that this was the case. The hearing scheduled for next Thursday had
therefore been canceled, the spokesman added.The lawsuit had
centered on Pelikan’s alternative cartridges to HP’s No. 28 and No. 57
triple color cartridges, which are used in many older, still very
popular Deskjet printers. In a departure from common practice Pelikan
is alleged to have marketed newly manufactured copies of the originals
in place of used and refilled original cartridges. The integrated print
head of these cartridges in particular is protected by a variety of
patents. Thus HP has patented, among other features, the way in which
the FET circuits have been adapted and the ground lead arrangement of
the wiring heater element of the thermal print head. In addition
Hewlett-Packard had claimed that three of its patents relating to the
composition of the ink itself had been violated.Details of the
out-of-court settlement have not been released by either party. Neither
HP nor Pelikan have yet been prepared to comment. It thus remains
unclear what the impact on the future range of HP inkjet printer
consumables offered by Pelikan will be. Whether the settlement includes
a promise by HP to withdraw the action it has filed with the District
Court in Cologne also remains to be seen. In the action filed there the
printer manufacturer had accused Pelikan of unfair competition
practices, because the cartridge copies marketed by Pelikan had on
their packaging inaccurately been described as recycled products.Observers
do not exclude the possibility that Pelikan itself might have been the
victim of irregularities perpetrated by foreign suppliers, which,
without the headquarters in Hanover being aware of what was happening,
had on occasion made up for the odd scarcity of empty originals by
turning to patent-infringing copies made in Asia.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.