Do you really own what you bought? New insights from Supreme Court decision Impression Products vs. Lexmark International

Supreme Court decision PDF file: Impression Products vs. Lexmark International

Wired, “The Supreme Court Just Bolstered Your Right to Repair Stuff”

“Impression Products vs. Lexmark International hinged on two points: Did Impression infringe upon Lexmark’s patents by (1) reselling cartridges in the United States when Lexmark explicitly prohibited reuse and resale, and (2) importing without authorization cartridges Lexmark sold abroad. Various courts split on these questions, and everyone from the AARP and Huawei to Costco and the Auto Care Association weighed in when the case finally reached the Supreme Court.

Why all the fuss? Because this wasn’t really about printer toner. It was about your ownership rights, and whether a patent holder can dictate how you repair, modify, or reuse something you’ve purchased. “This case raises important questions about the reach of American patent law and how much control a manufacturer can exert after its products have been lawfully sold,” the editorial board of The New York Times wrote in 2015. “Taken to their logical conclusion, Lexmark’s arguments would mean that producers could use patent law to dictate how things like computers, printers, and other patented goods are used, changed, or resold and place restrictions on international trade.”

Consider this: Countless people hack their Keurig machines to brew “unauthorized” coffee brands. Can Keurig sue them? Could Apple or Samsung stipulate that you can’t resell their products on Craigslist or eBay? Could John Deere claim that a repair tech is infringing upon its patent rights by repairing a broken combine without permission? Consumer rights advocates at the EFF and Public Knowledge worried that a ruling in Lexmark’s favor would “jeopardize independent product refurbishers and repair services”.”

Air Passenger Rights Advocate interview re Passenger Bill of Rights

The following is my video interview with Dr. Gabor Lukacs, Air Passenger Rights Advocate, to talk about the new Airline Passenger Bill of Rights (Bill C-49).

Air Passenger Rights Advocate interview re new Passenger Bill of Rights

Legal References:

• Bill C-49 (An Act to amend the Canada Transportation Act) (first reading)

Dr. Gabor Lukacs, Air Passenger Rights Advocate (FB page), notes references:

• Myth Buster: Air Passenger Bill with no Rights
• 5 Reasons not to Trust the Canadian Transportation Agency

News References:

• CBC News, “New passenger bill of rights spells out compensation for air travellers – Minister says airlines must find volunteers to deal with overbooked flights – or up the ante on compensation“
• CBC News, “Passenger bill of rights will set national standard for air travel Legislation for air travellers part of minister Marc Garneau’s overhaul of transport regulations“
• Global News, “Passenger bill of rights to outline what airlines owe you for travel disruptions“
• Toronto Star, “Ottawa calls for compensation for air travellers who suffer delays, cancellations – Airline passengers who suffer delays, cancelled flight and lost bags will have a greater ability to get compensation from airlines under legislation introduced Tuesday.“
• Toronto Star Editorial, “Air passenger bill of rights long overdue – Just don’t expect an end to the headache of being bumped from a flight.”

Government news release References:

• Transport Canada news release: Minister Garneau introduces legislation to support Canadian travellers and promote economic growth
• Transport Canada news release: Air Passenger Rights (Backgrounder From Transport Canada)

(May 16, 2017 CBC News Live video, Transport Minister Marc Garneau takes questions about the government’s air passenger bill of rights bill)

Instant Pot DUO-60/DUO-Plus-60 Design Flaw

Let me make a few things clear. I enjoy cooking with my iPot (Instant Pot). I even admire the inventor/entrepreneur/company that makes iPot (have a read of this enjoyable and insightful 30th Jan, 2017 Globe & Mail news article “Ottawa entrepreneur’s Instant Pot has attracted a devoted following of home cooks“). I think it is awesome to see Canadian inventor/entrepreneur making a name and money from a great product in US, Canada and around the world.

At the same time, I think it is important to point out problems, or design flaws when we see them. Customer feedbacks are good ways for companies to learn to improve their products over time.

I talk about a design flaw for my Instant Pot DUO-60 in the following video. And then I realized Instant Pot had come out with a newly designed DUO-Plus-60 around April 2017 which unfortunately has the same design flaw (based on unboxing video I watched)  I identified in the video. It is a bit disappointing the design flaw isn’t fixed with the new DUO-Plus-60.

Instant Pot DUO-60/DUO-Plus-60 Design Flaw

Watch Berkshire Hathaway 2017 annual meeting Livestream 10AM ET, May 6th

Have a watch of the livestream of the Berkshire Hathaway 2017 annual event by Yahoo Finance (10AM ET, May 6th Sunday, 2017).

From CNN Money, “Warren Buffett should answer these 6 key questions”

“Are you ready for the so-called Woodstock of Capitalism? Warren Buffett will address tens of thousands of Berkshire Hathaway shareholders at the company’s annual meeting in Omaha on Saturday.

And many more will be watching the festivities on their phones, computers or tablets thanks to a livestream of the event by Yahoo Finance. This is the second straight year that Yahoo will simulcast the event.“

May 10, 2017 update:

May 6th, 2017 Market Watch “Warren Buffett live blog recap: Berkshire Hathaway annual meeting”

May 6th, 2017 FT, “Buffett at Berkshire’s annual meeting 2017 – as it happened”

Morningstar, “2017 Berkshire Hathaway Annual Meeting Live Blog“

United CEO Oscar Munoz, Executives from Alaska Airlines, SouthWest, American Airlines testify in front of Congress

LIVE FB video stream of senior airline executives testify in front of US Congress.

16:40 United CEO Oscar Munoz
22:28 Alaska Airlines
27:56 SouthWest
33:35 American Airlines
39:37 Consumer Union (policy arm of Consumer Reports)

See also Global News report (with video), “United Airlines CEO Oscar Munoz tells U.S. Congress the David Dao incident was ‘a mistake of epic proportions’”

Delta beats United and other airlines by offering up to $9,950 (over 7 time previous max.) to flyers who give up seats

AP is reporting that “In an internal memo obtained by The Associated Press, Delta says gate agents can offer up to $2,000 in compensation, up from a previous maximum of $800, and supervisors can offer up to $9,950, up from $1,350.”

With the ongoing United mess which I wrote about here and here, United has lost a chance to turn its mess into an opportunity to lead as Delta beats United and other airlines by offering up to $9,950 (over 7 time previous max. of $1,350) to flyers who give up seats.

April 16, 2017 Update: Too little too late, “United Airlines issues a new policy requiring crews to be booked sooner” – //The company said late Friday that it will now require commuting staff and crew members to check into flights 60 minutes prior to departure.//

What would Warren Buffett tell United Airlines to do?

Billionaire investor Warren Buffett‘s Berkshire Hathaway Inc. is reportedly the largest single shareholder of United Airlines parent’s United Continental Holdings (UAL) with a stake of 28.95 million shares, or 9.2% of the shares outstanding (according to latest SEC filings).

So far Buffett has not spoken about this United self-inflicted mess (United Express Flight 3411 incident wiki page) yet but we may learn something from history. You see, Buffett biography The Snowball‘s author Alice Schroeder reported Buffett (an American Express investor) wrote the following during the 1963 Salad Oil Scandal (or “Soybean Scandal”) [with emphasis added],

“It is our feeling that three or four years from now, this problem may well have added to the stature of the company [American Express] in establishing standards for financial integrity and responsibility which are far beyond those of the normal commercial enterprise.“

Schroeder continues in The Snowball [with emphasis added],

“Buffett wrote that two paths lay before the company, and that an American Express that took responsibility and paid the $60 million [note: remember, this is 1963!] to the banks would be worth very substantially more than American Express disclaiming responsibility for its subsidiary’s acts.” He described the $60 million payment as inconsequential in the long run, like a dividend check that got “lost in the mail”.“

Using history as guidance, what would Warren Buffett tell United Airlines to do?

My guess is Buffett would advice United CEO Oscar Muñoz (or whoever replaces him) to take responsibility and pay a reasonable amount to settle the pending lawsuit as a United that take responsibility “would be worth very substantially more than United disclaiming responsibility“.

And in an imaginary world that Muñoz (or whoever replaces him) doing the RIGHT THING, “this problem may well have added to the stature of the company [United] in establishing standards for integrity and responsibility which are far beyond those of the normal commercial airlines.” Yes, things need to be done RIGHT now, and United need to lead in “establishing standards for integrity and responsibility which are far beyond those of the normal commercial airlines.”

We will see what will happen in time. With Berkshire’s $2 billion (April 13 closing price of $68.07 multiply by 28.95 million shares) investment holding in United, I won’t be surprised reporters will want to ask what Buffett thinks about this mess next time he is interviewed on CNBC or other news media. We will see if I’m right or wrong.

Have a watch of Dr. Dao’s lawyers (more info at Thomas Demetrio’s law firm) and his daughter Crystal Dao Pepper’s hour long press conference today (CNN report) (CBC FB full video, CBC News report).

April 13, 2017 Update:

Sen. Franken (April 11, 2017), “Sen. Franken Presses United Airlines to Explain Forcible Removal of Passenger on Weekend Flight” [emphasis added]

“– A federal cap exists on the amount of money a commercial airline may compensate a passenger for being involuntarily denied boarding or rescheduled for a flight. Why was the full amount of $1,350 not offered to passengers aboard Flight 3411 before the passengers were involuntarily denied boarding and forcibly removed? Does the $1,350 cap serve any benefit to consumers?

– Was the Louisville-bound flight oversold prior to including the four United Airlines personnel reported to have been granted seats to enable them to reposition from Chicago to Louisville? If so, were there alternative flight or ground transportation options for these four crew members that could have ensured they arrived in Louisville with sufficient time to board their next flight? Did United Airlines have the ability to assign other crew members to that flight departing from Louisville?

– Does United Airlines limit the number of airline tickets that may be oversold on each flight?“

Aviation Week, “Podcast: United in Crisis” – ATW and Aviation Daily editors discuss multiple mishaps and backlash after video of passenger’s violent removal goes viral.

LA Times Op-Ed. “Let Richard Branson kill United Airlines”

LA Times, “At United Airlines and Wells Fargo, toxic corporate culture starts with the CEO”