Cory Doctorow writes about some coffee-maker company that is adding DRM to its coffee pods. Cory is hoping that this will result in case law that makes it harder for other companies to pull this kind of stunt, and I am certainly on his side there. I am less hopeful of actual success, because the DMCA is an abomination of a law that any sensible legislature would have repealed long ago. But there are precedents for decent rulings.
I have a different hope: I hope that people boycott the company. I don't drink coffee, so I won't be involved here. But I can say that I have bought two printers since Lexmark tried this on, and in both cases they were not on my list of printers to consider. Nor will they be on the next one. It doesn't matter how exclusively you lock up your consumables - if no-one's buying, you're not making money. We have to punish this kind of behaviour.
It's not moral. Companies like this are not providing any more useful service to customers by doing it, they are just trying to charge more money. That's something they are entitled to do, but not with the force of the law behind them.
A company that had a patent on their cartridge design would be a different thing. That would mean they had some kind of new invention behind it; something worth protecting (well, at least in theory). I would need to be convinced it was something useful to me before I would accept such a product, but it's at least possible. A company that is just trying to make their product less usable has nothing at all going for them.
The constitution says copyrights and patents are intended "To promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts, by securing for limited Times to Authors and Inventors the exclusive Right to their respective Writings and Discoveries."
DRMing your coffee refills does not achieve progress of any kind. It deserves no protection whatsoever. I hope this company changes its mind or goes broke. The legal smackdown that Cory wants to see would be an excellent reason for either of these things to happen.
I have a different hope: I hope that people boycott the company. I don't drink coffee, so I won't be involved here. But I can say that I have bought two printers since Lexmark tried this on, and in both cases they were not on my list of printers to consider. Nor will they be on the next one. It doesn't matter how exclusively you lock up your consumables - if no-one's buying, you're not making money. We have to punish this kind of behaviour.
It's not moral. Companies like this are not providing any more useful service to customers by doing it, they are just trying to charge more money. That's something they are entitled to do, but not with the force of the law behind them.
A company that had a patent on their cartridge design would be a different thing. That would mean they had some kind of new invention behind it; something worth protecting (well, at least in theory). I would need to be convinced it was something useful to me before I would accept such a product, but it's at least possible. A company that is just trying to make their product less usable has nothing at all going for them.
The constitution says copyrights and patents are intended "To promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts, by securing for limited Times to Authors and Inventors the exclusive Right to their respective Writings and Discoveries."
DRMing your coffee refills does not achieve progress of any kind. It deserves no protection whatsoever. I hope this company changes its mind or goes broke. The legal smackdown that Cory wants to see would be an excellent reason for either of these things to happen.
No comments:
Post a Comment