Recharger Magazine
info@rechargermag.com
1050 E. Flamingo Rd., Ste. N237
,
Las Vegas, NV, 89119
Ph: +1 (702) 438-5557
Fax: +1 (702) 873-9671
download vCard
An ironic decision in a Belgian court could find Lexmark paying for a judge’s ruling against it to be printed in the pages of Recharger Magazine.
The case, brought to court by Eddie Samson of Samson Computer, a Belgian imaging supplies dealer and remanufacturer, alleged, among other things, that Lexmark was marketing some of its Linea cartridges as new, and not remanufactured.
Lexmark’s Linea line of cartridges is intended for use in HP and Canon printers. Samson said all but two of the cartridges in the Linea line are new; the cartridges for the HP 2100 and 4000 are remanufactured. The suit specifically focused on the Linea 140127X, for the HP 4000. According to Samson, the advertising for the cartridges was misleading, because it did not mention on the packaging that the cartridge was not new, and did not use the word "remanufactured." In its advertising, Lexmark did not distinguish between the 140127X and other new cartridges in the line.
As part of the judge’s ruling, Lexmark was ordered to "give an announcement of the preamble, the text of Points 19 to 29 inclusive and the operative provisions of this judgment on their Web site as well as in the first issue of ‘Bulletin’ issued by Lexmark Inc. after legal notice of the judgment, within seven working days of legal notice of this judgment."
According to Samson, this included paying to have the order translated into English. The Dutch version of the ruling can be found on Lexmark Belgium’s Web site at http://www.lexmark.com/vgn/images/portal/Publicatie%20maatregel.pdf.
The order also "authorizes the Appellant (Samson) to have the same sections of this ruling published in the specialist journal ‘Recharger Magazine’ at the Defendants’ expense."*
Lexmark was given 20 working days from the date of the ruling, May 17, to comply with the order. For every day past the 20 days that Lexmark fails to comply, it will be charged 1,000 Euros, or approximately $1,200.
*Reprinted from an unofficial translation of the ruling.
