Ah. Agreed. Then let's solve the problem of printers altogether. Why let them enforce the use of only certain ink refills? Surely that also is monopolistic behaviour?
In markets in SE Asia, I've seen people still use older Canon models because it allows them to fill their ink cartridges and beat the cost of having to buy official ink cartridges. Those printer still work well afterwards. A business I once consulted for had a 10 years old printer that still was chugging on happily with cheap ink fills.
Comments
What does HW mean here? Handheld Wearable?
Would that mean letting e.g. Sony PS5 devices allow homebrew markets to be used legally on their consoles? That would be awesome for the consumers.
Yeah... Maybe hardware is a bit broader than what I had in my mind. My thoughts currently are "if it has one app market, then it has to have more".
I didn't mean firmware. This sounds like an interesting discussion for another day...
'Hardware' probably
Ah. Agreed. Then let's solve the problem of printers altogether. Why let them enforce the use of only certain ink refills? Surely that also is monopolistic behaviour?
In markets in SE Asia, I've seen people still use older Canon models because it allows them to fill their ink cartridges and beat the cost of having to buy official ink cartridges. Those printer still work well afterwards. A business I once consulted for had a 10 years old printer that still was chugging on happily with cheap ink fills.
Who has a monopoly? Anticompetitive behaviours are legal if you aren’t a monopoly—they’re what businesses call moats.
If the ftc had teeth it would be good for it to a enforce restraint of trade laws against hardware lock-in like this.
Don't let the perfect be the enemy of the good.