MeaserkiteAftermarketInk.com - We only sell Formulabs ink!!! (A serious business proposal. No Lie!

[Taliesyn]

I cannot comment as to if Formulabs are an example, but some of the
better ink formulators have licensing agreements which restrict the
naming of the manufacturer of the inks used in 3rd party cartridges.

They do so for a number of reasons. In some cases, they produce the OEM
inks, and the OEM doesn't want the 3rd party manufacturers from being
able to advertise the fact that the inks are coming from the same source
(even if their formulations might be slightly different). In other
cases, since 3rd party ink companies may sell the inks at considerably
differing prices, to prevent price wars the manufacturer of the ink
doesn't want consumers to be able to know who is selling their inks and
do price comparisons. Further still, some formularies may not allow
their names to be mentioned because the 3rd party ink distributor takes
full liability for any mishaps with the ink and the end user's printer.

What I am getting at is there are a number of reasons in the ink
industry for the source manufacturer not to wish their name be included
on the retail products, and it is not necessarily because they wish to
hide the ink used because of QC issues.

Much like any grocery "store brand" product we buy. Many of them are
made by the same companies that make the major brand items - from peanut
butter to what have you. I don't give a damn who makes it as long as I
like the price and it works (tastes good, looks good). And obviously,
they cannot say on the package that such and such an item was made by
Kraft, for example. Who'd buy Kraft next time at twice the price when
they could get the store brand (made by Kraft) for much less!

Same with ink, except I don't do a taste test . . . ;-). I let my
printers decide if they like it (physically), and I like the printed
results (visually).

-Taliesyn

 

[measekite]

I cannot comment as to if Formulabs are an example, but some of the
better ink formulators have licensing agreements which restrict the
naming of the manufacturer of the inks used in 3rd party cartridges.

They do so for a number of reasons. In some cases, they produce the
OEM inks, and the OEM doesn't want the 3rd party manufacturers from
being able to advertise the fact that the inks are coming from the
same source (even if their formulations might be slightly different).
In other cases, since 3rd party ink companies may sell the inks at
considerably differing prices, to prevent price wars the manufacturer
of the ink doesn't want consumers to be able to know who is selling
their inks and do price comparisons. Further still, some formularies
may not allow their names to be mentioned because the 3rd party ink
distributor takes full liability for any mishaps with the ink and the
end user's printer.

What I am getting at is there are a number of reasons in the ink
industry for the source manufacturer not to wish their name be
included on the retail products, and it is not necessarily because
they wish to hide the ink used because of QC issues.

That is false in this case. Occasionally a relabeler may advertise that
fact but not prominently. I also had one that said so over the phone
but not public ally in writing so I did not believe the claim.

 

[measekite]

Much like any grocery "store brand" product we buy. Many of them are
made by the same companies that make the major brand items - from peanut
butter to what have you. I don't give a damn who makes it as long as I
like the price and it works (tastes good, looks good). And obviously,
they cannot say on the package that such and such an item was made by
Kraft, for example. Who'd buy Kraft next time at twice the price when
they could get the store brand (made by Kraft) for much less!

Now lets look at things appropriately. In the case of a store brand it
may be made by the same (canner) as a major brand but with lower quality
ingredients so only the labor and plant equipment are essentially the same.

 

[Frank]

Now lets look at things appropriately. In the case of a store brand it
may be made by the same (canner) as a major brand but with lower quality
ingredients so only the labor and plant equipment are essentially the same.

Nope! Sorry but that's now what happens. Nothing is changed...nothing.
It's exactly the same unless otherwise specified. Your stupid statement
that "lower quality ingredients" are substituted is not true.
Do you actually know anything at all about anything?
Frank

 

[Frank]

measekite wrote:

That is false in this case.

No! You're wrong and you don't have any idea of what you're talking about.
You don't even know what "contract manufacturing" is.


Occasionally a relabeler

There is no such thing as a "relabeler".

may advertise that

fact but not prominently. I also had one that said so over the phone
but not public ally in writing so I did not believe the claim.

You've never called or spoke to anyone about after market inks. You
simple make up what you want and post it as being "true". It isn't and
we all know it.
We've been onto your charade now for years.
Grow up!
Frank

 

[Burt]

(snip)

I did read a few articles of the Epson or HP sueing after-market for
patent infringements.
(snip)
Stan

I believe that the suites had to do with aftermarket cartridge design, not
the ink in the cartridge. It is my understanding that, in the case of HP,
the prefilled aftermarket carts are actually used OEM HP carts that have
been refilled and labeled by the refiller or vendor. For these carts it is
probably safer to use your own OEM cart and refill it as you will then know
the number of refills it has had. Some HP carts are less easy to fill than
others. Some also have an id chip that requires you to insert and remove
carts (I use Canons and don't know the sequence) to fool the printer as it
apparently only remembers the last cart inserted. For anyone who is
interested in HP cart refilling, someone on this NG will certainly know the
sequence that fools the printer into thinking the newest cart inserted is
actually a new OEM cart instead of a refilled cart.

 

[theory4debate]

I found the article and it's title "New Printer Cartridge or a Refill?
Either Way, Ink Is Getting Cheaper" the date of the article is
February 4, 2006 from nytimes.com. (New York Times.) It's free to
access the article, but you need to get a free account. I'm only
going to post snips of it because I don't want to get in trouble for
copyright material.

"The ink used by some of the refillers is very similar to that used by
the manufacturers. For instance, Rapid Refill's ink is supplied by OCP
of Germany and formulated to perform like the ink that Hewlett,
Lexmark or Brother put in originally. Cartridge World will not
disclose its sources of the 150 to 200 different inks at a typical
store, but Mr. Yarkin said, "We are matching their ink."

It is no empty boast. Hewlett went after Cartridge World last October
for using ink that infringes on patents for its Vivera line of inks.
It demanded that the company, based in Emeryville, Calif., stop using
inks with the same chemical composition. Also last year, Hewlett filed
a lawsuit against InkCycle, the company that makes refills under the
Staples brand, asserting that the company had violated three patents
covering fast-drying ink for plain paper and methods for preventing
color from bleeding on paper. The dispute was resolved when InkCycle
changed its formulation."

 

[Burt]

I found the article and it's title "New Printer Cartridge or a Refill?
Either Way, Ink Is Getting Cheaper" the date of the article is
February 4, 2006 from nytimes.com. (New York Times.) It's free to
access the article, but you need to get a free account. I'm only
going to post snips of it because I don't want to get in trouble for
copyright material.

"The ink used by some of the refillers is very similar to that used by
the manufacturers. For instance, Rapid Refill's ink is supplied by OCP
of Germany and formulated to perform like the ink that Hewlett,
Lexmark or Brother put in originally. Cartridge World will not
disclose its sources of the 150 to 200 different inks at a typical
store, but Mr. Yarkin said, "We are matching their ink."

It is no empty boast. Hewlett went after Cartridge World last October
for using ink that infringes on patents for its Vivera line of inks.
It demanded that the company, based in Emeryville, Calif., stop using
inks with the same chemical composition. Also last year, Hewlett filed
a lawsuit against InkCycle, the company that makes refills under the
Staples brand, asserting that the company had violated three patents
covering fast-drying ink for plain paper and methods for preventing
color from bleeding on paper. The dispute was resolved when InkCycle
changed its formulation."

pretty much what Art Entlich said about licensing agreements to not sell the
same ink formulation as OEM. Epson's suite had to do with cartridge design,
as I recall.

 

[measekite]

It can violate a patent but that does not mean it is identical in every
respect. For sure Formulabs ink is their own formulation and is not the
same as Canon OEM CL8 longer lasting ink which is new. So if you
purchased a Canon IP4300 then you must use Canon OEM CL8 ink. If you
use something else then it is not a complete IP4300 printing system but
a hybrid of something.

 

[Frank]

It can violate a patent but that does not mean it is identical in every
respect. For sure Formulabs ink is their own formulation and is not the
same as Canon OEM CL8 longer lasting ink which is new.

And you know that to be a fact because...?
Provide irrefutable proof of that statement, ok?

So if you

purchased a Canon IP4300 then you must use Canon OEM CL8 ink.

And you're just ignorant enough to actually believe that? Cause no one
else in the entire world believes that.

If you

use something else then it is not a complete IP4300 printing system but
a hybrid of something.

"Printing systems" only exist in your feeble mind. You are the only
person in the world who believes the lying crap you continually post.
Frank

p.s. I have an ip4300 and I use only hobbicolors ink in it...lol.
You know nothing!
NOTHING!!!