Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

I think you'd then have to enter some kind of a lease agreement, which would be a big turn-off for customers that would like to just buy a replacement cartridge without signing a contract.


1) As with many of the tricks that printer companies use to dissuade people from buying off-brand inks, if enough printer manufacturers did it, consumers might find that they have few other options -- especially if they've had poor luck with third-party inks.

2) I pay $3 a month for HP's Instant Ink program. It allows me to print up to 50 full-color pages a month with my inkjet printer, and when one of the cartridges is running low, it automatically sends a replacement. It's not significantly more expensive, in my case (low-volume usage), than buying the ink cartridges directly, but it's a lot more convenient. I'm not quite sure if it technically counts as a leasing program, but it follows a similar ethos. So I wouldn't so easily dismiss the idea that a leasing program would lead to a consumer backlash.


And then what happens if the consumer just ignores the lease and sells it anyway?

They tell the company "I threw it away".

People throwing used printer cartridges away would probably happen a lot, anyway, right?

Technically it would break the contract but the issue is that it would be very difficult to enforce.


1. This seems like collusion would be necessary

2. I have to think it's pretty hard to establish that a consumable is subject to a lease. What is returned at the end of the lease?




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: