S.C.C. SUES FUTURE GRAPHICS & MITSUBISHI

[Anonymous]

Future Graphics and Mitsubishi Kagaku Imaging Respond to SCC’s Lawsuit
Los
Angeles, CA: April 2006 – Static Control Components  filed a lawsuit
(ref. number 1:006-cv-00154) against Mitsubishi� Kagaku Imaging
Corporation  and Future Graphics LLC, alleging violation of the North
Carolina Trade Protection Act and civil conspiracy.
SCC claims that
FG and MKIC used the SCC correlative product codes to match MKIC
products to the products containing SCC part numbers and therefore
expedite the transition of MK Imaging products to customers wishing to
purchase the qualified MKIC products that they had come to rely on.
Future
Graphics “believes these allegations to be absolutely false.” They
state: “At no time was it necessary or desirable for FG to utilize SCC
correlative information, and FG did not possess this information at the
time of the suit.
“Furthermore, FG does not bypass qualifying
procedures on any toner product we sell just because there may be
product codes apparently matching our suppliers product to one sold by
another distributor. There are several reasons for this.
“First, FG
has always operated under the policy that one can never be certain that
a product previously supplied by another distributor is actually the
product the customer thinks it to be. Therefore, testing is necessary
to assure the validity of the product….
“Second, FG is fully
capable of and is equipped to test toner/OPC combinations in a thorough
and timely fashion, especially in conjunction with the unsurpassed
technical capabilities of MKIC.
“As far as OPCs are concerned, it is
obvious to anyone in the industry that FG does not need SCC part
numbers to know the difference, for example, between an HP4000 and an
HP4100. All that is required is that the customer specify their
requirement for the printer application.
“FG has therefore agreed
that it will not use the SCC correlative part numbers. To agree not to
do what it previously had not been doing nor had any intention of doing
was a simple decision.
“As always, Future Graphics prefers to do
business the old-fashioned way, relying on time-honored principles of
freedom of choice, quality, service, and price — not on courtrooms and
restrictions placed on buyers and/or sellers. FG believes that the
customer should have the right to purchase what and from whom it
chooses.
“FG looks forward to being of continuing service to the remanufacturing community.”
In
its response, Mitsubishi Kagaku Imaging Corporation addressed the SCC
lawsuit brought in connection the MKIC’s decision to terminate its
distributorship with SCC and enter a new and exclusive relationship
with Future Graphics.
“It has been reported that representatives of
SCC have been making inaccurate and defamatory statements to the market
regarding MKIC’s products and MKIC’s right to sell its own products,”
begins the response. MKIC says it sees no basis for the claims made by
SCC and will “vigorously defend its rights.”
Furthermore, MKIC
enumerated the “facts” in question-and-answer format, contending that
MKIC owns the intellectual property rights to the OPC drums and toner
at issue, and that the products being sold to Future graphics are the
same ones sold to SCC, with the exception of “certain plactic
components previously purchased from SCC.”
MKIC further stated that
testing procedures for MK Imaging now adhere to STMC testing protocols
rather than those required by Static Control, noting that Future
Graphics encourages industry standardization advanced by STMC testing.}
The
MK Imaging brand OPC drums and toner are now exclusively distributed by
Future Graphics and Delacamp, although MKIC claims that SCC was offered
a supply of the products during the transition period following
termination of its distribution agreement.

[Author]

April 6, 2006 at 11:32 AM