Someone mentioned something about in the US, this would be illegal due to DRM laws - not sure about the specifics of this, but regardless an open source printer seems like something we've needed for ages, as printers are something that always seem like way more of a headache then they need to be. It seems like such a simple technology that has existed for quite some time, but they are always such a pain to deal with. (Maybe it's just my bad luck with printers?)

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] pelespirit@sh.itjust.works 5 points 10 hours ago (2 children)

I don't think DRM is a thing for this in the US, since it's using all original software and parts. I could be wrong, but that's how I read this.

https://uslawexplained.com/digital_rights_management_drm

[–] Creat@discuss.tchncs.de 6 points 9 hours ago (2 children)

I think it's about printers being required by law to (covertly) watermark copies as such, and make it somewhat traceable. This is supposedly to prevent duplication of protected works (books?) but also to prevent someone just using it to print money (badly, probably).

To my knowledge all major brands incorporate something like this.

Wikipedia article about the technology

[–] pelespirit@sh.itjust.works 3 points 9 hours ago

I think it’s about printers being required by law

I didn't see anything about being required by law. Yes, all major brands probably do this, but for different reasons than required by law. Also, what about the lesser brands, are they required by law or can they skirt the law somehow? This printer is not a major brand. Again, not a lawyer, but I don't see how this is a problem. Also, it's going to be coming from France.

[–] corsicanguppy@lemmy.ca 2 points 9 hours ago (1 children)

required by law to (covertly) watermark copies

What a ridiculous rule that is -- and you know someone dramatically shouted "won't someone think of the children" somewhere in its passing.

[–] hector@lemmy.today 1 points 7 hours ago

Yes probably justified with arguments to prevent people from sharing child abuse pictures.

[–] ToTheGraveMyLove@sh.itjust.works 8 points 10 hours ago

Yeah, "not legal in the US due to DRM laws" makes zero fucking sense in this context