Is this a Hardware or Software Issue?

[Viper1j]

Doing a little trial prep to fight a $40.0 parking ticket. The machine only takes credit cards. My argument is that all governments MUST TAKE CASH.
It says right on the bills,: "this is legal tender for ALL debts, public and private".

I was going to scan 1, 5, 10, and 20 bills to present in court.

But what I get when I try is, "this application does not support the unauthorized processing of banknote images"

WTF?

I'm using an Epson XP-320 all in one printer, scanner/copier.

Any help out there?

 

[SamirD]

It is illegal to copy government IDs and legal tender, and has been since the advent of the copier. Looks like Epson has taken enforcement to the next level.

I would suspect software vs hardware.

But while I think you're right in your stance, unless you have experience in a courtroom or a very nice judge, you're going to be eaten alive. They won't give a flying fuck about your argument even though you're right in principle. Take it was from someone who literally was assaulted on his own property and then was prosecuted for assault--wtf? The government here is becoming as corrupt as the third world and we slowly going to hell in a handbag. Pay the piper and then make sure you never park there again. Leave, flee, and get yourself to someplace better. 'You can't fight city hall' is not entirely true, but 'you can't fight city hall and come out ahead' is absolutely correct. Even when you win, they'll make sure you lose.

 

[mindless1]

1) You're going to lose because paying for service is not the same thing as fulfillment of a debt to a creditor. US dollars is the denomination but that does not require anyone to take cash as the point of a new agreement such as a purchase of goods or services, unless you have a unique state law requiring it.

Payments to Government Agencies
Although it is possible to find an occasional case that suggests that a unit of state or local government is obligated to accept cash payments,2 there are in fact no cases that expressly hold that such an obligation exists.
When courts have been called upon to address the issue, they have consistently found that government restrictions on whether, when, where and how cash payments may be made are permissible under the law.3

2) Scanners/copiers have had software recognition of US currency for years. Your best bet would be a currency (re)design newer than the software, but may still be illegal.

3) Why would you need to scan currency when you can hand them the genuine currency, then be told #1 above?

 

[SamirD]

That's interesting that there's case law on this matter.

 

[Viper1j]

1) You're going to lose because paying for service is not the same thing as fulfillment of a debt to a creditor. US dollars is the denomination but that does not require anyone to take cash as the point of a new agreement such as a purchase of goods or services, unless you have a unique state law requiring it.

Payments to Government Agencies
Although it is possible to find an occasional case that suggests that a unit of state or local government is obligated to accept cash payments,2 there are in fact no cases that expressly hold that such an obligation exists.
When courts have been called upon to address the issue, they have consistently found that government restrictions on whether, when, where and how cash payments may be made are permissible under the law.3

2) Scanners/copiers have had software recognition of US currency for years. Your best bet would be currency newer than the software, but may still be illegal.

3) Why would you need to scan currency when you can hand them the genuine currency, then be told #1 above?

I want to make copies of the FRONT ONLY to highlight that it's "legal tender", and since court exhibits tend to remain in evidence. I'm not giving free money to them. All the case law I've found relates to how businesses can choose to take payments for goods and services.

It's also a common sense thing.. If "unauthorized processing of banknote images" is not supported, How do I get "authorized"? There must be some method. I wanted to call Epson, but they're idiots.

But while "Agents of The State" may offer alternative methods of payment, they can not refuse their own currency.

1. U.S. Constitution, Article 1, Section 10, Clause 1, "No State shall... coin Money; emit Bills of Credit; make any Thing but gold and silver Coin a Tender in Payment of Debts...." 2. See, e.g., Nemser v. New York City Transit Auth., 140 Misc.2d 369, 530 N.Y.S.2d 493, 494 (1988), which applies a reasonableness standard to when a municipality must accept cash payments. 3. See, e.g., In re Reyes, 482 B.R. 603 (2012), in which a federal bankruptcy court upheld a trustee's order that the petitioners "make payments using only certified funds, automatic wage withdrawals, or electronic transfers". 4. See, e.g., Picano v. Borough of Emerson, 353 Fed.Appx. 733, 735 (3rd Cir. 2009).

 

[Micrornd]

2) Scanners/copiers have had software recognition of US currency for years. Your best bet would be currency newer than the software, but may still be illegal.

That's interesting, I had read and heard that also.
So I tried a little experiment.
No matter what denomination bill I used or what date of the bill's printing, my Canon MP830s both scanned and copied them in perfect detail.
They are, however, set up as UK, rather than US machines (so that I can use the CD, DVD, Blu-Ray disk printing feature not available to US machines)
Maybe being set as UK machines is the reason

I do seem to remember that it has been ruled in federal courts that reproducing the image of currency is not illegal, if the image is noticeably smaller or larger than real currency.
I seem to remember the ruling on this based on some artist's lithograph.
Maybe scanning or copying at a magnified size would be allowed by an Epson.

 

[Viper1j]

It is illegal to copy government IDs and legal tender, and has been since the advent of the copier. Looks like Epson has taken enforcement to the next level.

I would suspect software vs hardware.

You were correct. After playing with many files. MS Paint has no issue with scanning the bills. I have to save them as a .psd to import into Adobe to make my exhibits look presentable.

Thank God it wasn't something in the firmware, I was going nuts trying to beat this.

Thanks.

That's interesting, I had read and heard that also.
So I tried a little experiment.
No matter what denomination bill I used or what date of the bill's printing, my Canon MP830s both scanned and copied them in perfect detail.
They are, however, set up as UK, rather than US machines (so that I can use the CD, DVD, Blu-Ray disk printing feature not available to US machines)
Maybe being set as UK machines is the reason

I do seem to remember that it has been ruled in federal courts that reproducing the image of currency is not illegal, if the image is noticeably smaller or larger than real currency.
I seem to remember the ruling on this based on some artist's lithograph.
Maybe scanning or copying at a magnified size would be allowed by an Epson.

I'll have to play with that someday..



I'll have to play with that

 

[SamirD]

I want to make copies of the FRONT ONLY to highlight that it's "legal tender", and since court exhibits tend to remain in evidence. I'm not giving free money to them. All the case law I've found relates to how businesses can choose to take payments for goods and services.

It's also a common sense thing.. If "unauthorized processing of banknote images" is not supported, How do I get "authorized"? There must be some method. I wanted to call Epson, but they're idiots.

But while "Agents of The State" may offer alternative methods of payment, they can not refuse their own currency.

1. U.S. Constitution, Article 1, Section 10, Clause 1, "No State shall... coin Money; emit Bills of Credit; make any Thing but gold and silver Coin a Tender in Payment of Debts...." 2. See, e.g., Nemser v. New York City Transit Auth., 140 Misc.2d 369, 530 N.Y.S.2d 493, 494 (1988), which applies a reasonableness standard to when a municipality must accept cash payments. 3. See, e.g., In re Reyes, 482 B.R. 603 (2012), in which a federal bankruptcy court upheld a trustee's order that the petitioners "make payments using only certified funds, automatic wage withdrawals, or electronic transfers". 4. See, e.g., Picano v. Borough of Emerson, 353 Fed.Appx. 733, 735 (3rd Cir. 2009).

Well, you've done your homework and seem ready for the fight. It will still be easy for the Judge to rule against you on the Article 1, Section 10, Clause 1 because currency in the US (as most other nations) is not a gold or silver coin.

Regardless of what happens, please do update this thread with the results from your case. I want to see if they actually try to counterargue your point (as they should) or just blow you off and make you appeal it or take it to a trial by jury.

 

[mindless1]

Waste of time. You parked there. The meter wasn't paid up when ticketed. I guarantee that your defense won't work, just as it wouldn't work if the meter took quarters and you only had dollar bills. This is not some "new" issue.

The funny part is you're essentially suggesting all anyone has to do to park for free, is not have the correct payment method.

I don't like city income coming from meters but I do recognize that in certain congested non-residential areas, they are useful to keep parking space turnover happening so spots are freed up.

 

[Viper1j]

Waste of time. You parked there. The meter wasn't paid up when ticketed. I guarantee that your defense won't work, just as it wouldn't work if the meter took quarters and you only had dollar bills. This is not some "new" issue.

The funny part is you're essentially suggesting all anyone has to do to park for free, is not have the correct payment method.

I don't like city income coming from meters but I do recognize that in certain congested non-residential areas, they are useful to keep parking space turnover happening so spots are freed up.

Not exactly. I'm contending that by requiring a credit/debit card only, you are essentially giving the city a blank check. They can charge as much, or as little, as they want, regardless of how long you're parked there. They can offer an alternative method, but as "Agents Of The State" they cannot refuse their own currency.

My hearing is tomorrow afternoon, I found a way to make my exhibits highlighting, "this is legal tender, for all debts public and private." I have Constitution on my side, I expect to kick ass and take names.

 

[SamirD]

That's a good point about the credit cards, but everyone is doing it now even though it shouldn't be legal without adequate disclosure. It would be nice to know how much the authorization amount is and when the auth is released as this affects how much available credit there is, and even moreso for debit cards as real cash is 'frozen' from using while the authorization stands. There should be disclosures about this on the meters or a reference to where these disclosures are, but I suspect there's none because most people are just stupid enough to just download some app and put in their credit card into because it says so on the meter.

I like where the EU has taken a stand with all the non-sense created by American companies going awol even on the spirit of the law. It will probably be a decade or more before US laws of similar magnitude get a lot of this nonsense in check, mainly because of politics and corruption. In the meantime, the citizens suffer the consequences.

 

[mindless1]

Not exactly. I'm contending that by requiring a credit/debit card only, you are essentially giving the city a blank check. They can charge as much, or as little, as they want, regardless of how long you're parked there.

They can charge as much or as little as they want if it takes coins too. It's not at all a blank check, the rates are shown on the meter. If you get overcharged, then you have a case for reimbursement if you can prove it. It might not be hard to prove if there is (say) a 1 hour limit that can't be renewed. If you don't pay at all, you have no case.

They can offer an alternative method, but as "Agents Of The State" they cannot refuse their own currency.

You're doubly wrong. They can refuse currency. They are not there collecting the parking fee. A machine is not an agent of the state.

Obviously if it were illegal to put in these credit card only meters, nobody would be doing it. Rest assured that legal counsel was consulted before implementation.

My hearing is tomorrow afternoon, I found a way to make my exhibits highlighting, "this is legal tender, for all debts public and private." I have Constitution on my side, I expect to kick ass and take names.

You don't, and the judge is going to think you're obtuse. Instead of alienating the court, you should plead a hardship (and bring proof of income) if the $40 fine won't fit into your budget. At that point the judge will probably say "then don't drive", but at least it has a "chance" of getting you out of some if not all the ticket fee.

Would you believe it if the US Treasury told you? Quote Link:
I thought that United States currency was legal tender for all debts. Some businesses or governmental agencies say that they will only accept checks, money orders or credit cards as payment, and others will only accept currency notes in denominations of $20 or smaller. Isn't this illegal?



Frankly I never liked the coin meters. It's MUCH more convenient to not have to think ahead about how many quarters are in my pocket and stop to make change first, just to park at a meter. Plus I already have too much weighing my pockets down and making holes in them, and wearing funny looking hairless patches on my legs. I could keep a stash of quarters in the vehicle but again it's more convenient to not have to do so.

 

[pcgeek11]

Watching for a result.

 

[Viper1j]

As Vinny Bag O' Donuts would say.."It appears my argument DOES hold water!"

The judge stated that the city was conducting "an experiment", and that not all of the meters had been converted to credit card only. So for people that challenged not being able to use coins/cash the tickets were being dismissed. Apparently for those that don't challenge, they just suck it up and pay the bucks.

I hope their experiment fails because, not everyone wants to give any government unlimited access to their cash.

 

[SamirD]

BRAVO!!

How much of an argument did you have to present? Or once you entered a plea of not-guilty did the judge just explain the situation and dismiss it?

 

[mindless1]

Lucky you, getting both a lenient judge and it happening to be a new deployment.

That is what got you off, not the argument about "legal tender".

 

[Viper1j]

BRAVO!!

How much of an argument did you have to present? Or once you entered a plea of not-guilty did the judge just explain the situation and dismiss it?

I just made my case and presented my exhibits, and he dismissed it. And told me if I got any more tickets to make sure to show up and fight it.

And he DID agree my point about legal tender. He said in that in the future though, I should attempt to find the meter maid. That person refusing would make my case stronger.

But back to the original subject matter."this application does not support the unauthorized processing of banknote images"

If you can be "unauthorized ", the flip side of that coin is you can be "authorized". What the process?

 

[SamirD]

I just made my case and presented my exhibits, and he dismissed it. And told me if I got any more tickets to make sure to show up and fight it.

And he DID agree my point about legal tender. He said in that in the future though, I should attempt to find the meter maid. That person refusing would make my case stronger.

But back to the original subject matter."this application does not support the unauthorized processing of banknote images"

If you can be "unauthorized ", the flip side of that coin is you can be "authorized". What the process?

Nice work! Sounded like you had a good judge in a good mood as well. I've had such luck before, and it's nice to have such a victory.

I think to make authorized duplicates of legal tender, you need to be some sort of government office affiliated with the Treasury. I'm sure the exact law that prohibits duplication would have a better clue as to how to become authorized.