North European SW Solution Manager

HP Linux Imaging and Printing (HPLIP) 3.26.4 drivers add support for new printers. This release adds support for multiple printers in the HP LaserJet Pro, OfficeJet Pro, and DeskJet Ink Advantage series. HP released today the HP Linux Imaging and Printing (HPLIP) 3.26.4 drivers, a release that adds support for several new printers in the HP LaserJet Pro, OfficeJet Pro, and DeskJet Ink Advantage series. HPLIP 3.26.4 adds support for new printers, including HP LaserJet Pro MFP 3106sdw and HP LaserJet Pro MFP 3105sdw, HP Envy 6500e series and HP Envy 6500 series, as well as HP OfficeJet Pro 9730, HP OfficeJet Pro 9730e, HP OfficeJet Pro 9720, HP OfficeJet Pro 9720e, HP OfficeJet Pro 8130e All-in-One, and HP OfficeJet Pro 8130 All-in-One series. In addition, the HP Liux Imaging and Printing 3.26.4 release adds support for new HP OfficeJet printer series, including the HP OfficeJet 8130e All-in-One, HP OfficeJet 8130 All-in-One, HP OfficeJet Pro 8120e All-in-One, HP OfficeJet Pro 8120 All-in-One, HP OfficeJet 8120e All-in-One, and HP OfficeJet 8120 All-in-One. New HP DeskJet printer series are supported as well in this release, including the HP DeskJet Ink Advantage ultra 5800 All-in-One, HP DeskJet Ink Advantage ultra 5100 All-in-One, HP DeskJet 4300e All-in-One, HP DeskJet Ink Advantage 4300 All-in-One, HP DeskJet 4300 All-in-One, HP DeskJet 2900e All-in-One, HP DeskJet Ink Advantage 2900 All-in-One, and HP DeskJet 2900 All-in-One. Discover more 9to5Linux merchandise store Unfortunately, this release does not add support for any recent GNU/Linux distributions. HP Linux Imaging and Printing 3.26.4 is available for download right now from the official website. To install the new version, select your favorite distro from the drop-down list and download the automatic installer. Follow the instructions provided by HP to install the HP Linux Imaging and Printing drivers in your GNU/Linux distribution. This release comes six months after the HPLIP 3.25.8 release, which only introduced support for new printers in the HP LaserJet Enterprise series. For more details, visit the official release notes. The HPLIP (HP Liux Imaging and Printing) project provides printing support for over 3,490 printer models, including Deskjet, Officejet, Photosmart, PSC (Print, Scan, Copy), Business Inkjet, LaserJet, Edgeline MFP, and LaserJet MFP. HPLIP is a free, open source software distributed under the MIT, BSD, and GPL licenses. Enjoyed the article?

HP Dimension 3D video conferencing to launch in Canada: the future of immersive workspaces. * Paris Oyekunle * 9 hours ago HP Canada confirmed this week that HP Dimension, a revolutionary 3D video conferencing system, will officially launch in the Canadian market in September 2026. This hardware breakthrough, first showcased at the HP Imagine event in New York City, allows remote professionals to engage in lifelike, glasses-free 3D communication. By combining 8K light-field displays with advanced spatial software, the system aims to eliminate the visual fatigue of traditional 2D meetings. This technology represents a significant shift in corporate communication, prioritizing human presence in an increasingly distributed global workforce. Key Takeaways: * HP Dimension brings glasses-free 3D video calling to Canada in September 2026. * The system utilizes 8K light-field technology and Google Beam software for immersive presence. * A new "MODDEN 26" modification for Madden NFL 26 highlights critical concussion symptoms. * Data security experts recommend the 3-2-1 backup rule for World Backup Day 2026. How does HP Dimension 3D video calling work? The core of the HP Dimension experience is a 65-inch 8K light-field screen that projects a solid, holographic-like image of the person on the other end. Unlike previous attempts at 3D communication, this system requires no specialized headgear or active-shutter glasses. An array of six or seven integrated cameras captures every nuance of the user's appearance, including eye contact and subtle body movements. This creates a sense of "spatial reality" where participants feel as though they are sitting across the same physical table. The platform leverages Google Beam software, a technology previously developed under the moniker "Project Starline." During live demonstrations, the depth perception was so precise that physical objects held by participants appeared to enter the viewer's personal space. This level of immersion is designed to foster deeper engagement and reduce the cognitive load associated with interpreting 2D video feeds. While the hardware is currently priced at approximately $24,999 USD in the United States, Canadian pricing will be finalized closer to the autumn release date. What is the broader vision for the intelligent work ecosystem? The launch of HP Dimension is part of a larger strategy to create a more connected and intelligent work environment. HP's interim CEO, Bruce Broussard, emphasized that society is at a defining moment regarding how people live and work. The company is also rolling out HP IQ, a new artificial intelligence platform intended to streamline experiences across various devices and spaces. This ecosystem focuses on making complex digital interactions feel simple and personalized. "Technology breakthroughs build on the last, scale instantly, and lower the cost for the next breakthrough," stated Broussard. "What we're continuing to build is to make the complex simple, resulting in more personalized and integrated experiences." This focus on personalization and productivity is driving the adoption of high-end hardware in the enterprise sector. As remote work becomes a permanent fixture for many Canadian firms, the demand for tools that simulate physical presence is expected to grow. The integration of AI and spatial computing suggests a future where the physical distance between team members becomes irrelevant to the quality of their collaboration. Why is the MODDEN 26 initiative targeting digital sports? Innovation is also reaching into the realm of health awareness through a unique collaboration between Toronto-based Klick Health and The Derek Sheely Foundation. They have introduced "MODDEN 26," a free modification for the Windows PC version of Madden NFL 26. This digital tool reintroduces concussion mechanics into the game to educate players about the realities of traumatic brain injuries. More than a decade after concussions were minimized in mainstream sports titles, this mod uses visual and auditory cues to simulate injury symptoms. Players using the mod will experience dizziness, blurred vision, and tinnitus if their digital athlete sustains a heavy hit. These symptoms directly impact gameplay performance, forcing users to take their players to a medical tent for examination. This initiative serves as a vital educational tool, as many athletes do not immediately recognize when they have sustained an injury. Understanding concussion signs and symptoms is essential for ensuring the long-term safety and recovery of amateur and professional athletes alike. How can the 3-2-1 rule protect your digital assets? As digital ecosystems become more complex, the importance of data integrity remains a top priority for both individuals and businesses. World Backup Day, observed annually on March 31, serves as a critical reminder to evaluate current storage strategies. Data loss can occur through hardware failure, cyberattacks, or accidental deletion, making a robust backup plan indispensable. Experts advocate for the 3-2-1 backup rule to ensure maximum security for important documents and media. This strategy involves keeping three separate copies of your data: the original file and two backups. Users should utilize at least two different media types, such as a local external solid-state drive (SSD) and a secure cloud service like Microsoft OneDrive or Google Drive. Crucially, at least one copy must be kept off-site. This protects the data from localized disasters like fire or flood. Utilizing modern tools, such as the SanDisk Phone Drive for mobile devices, makes maintaining these backups more accessible than ever before. The convergence of 3D communication, AI-driven productivity, and digital health awareness highlights a significant shift in the tech landscape for 2026. As HP Dimension prepares for its Canadian debut, the focus remains on enhancing the human experience through technology. Whether through immersive video calls or safer gaming environments, these advancements prioritize meaningful interaction and user well-being. Maintaining a proactive approach to technology - from adopting new communication tools to securing personal data - will be essential for navigating the evolving digital workspace.

EFF challenges secrecy in Eastern District of Texas patent case. Clinic students Emily Ko and Zoe Lee at the Technology Law and Policy Clinic at the NYU School of Law were the principal authors of this post. Courts are not private forums for business disputes. They are public institutions, and their records belong to the public. But too often, courts forget that and allow for massive over-sealing, especially in patent cases. EFF recently discovered another case of this in the Eastern District of Texas, where key court filings about Wi-Fi technology used by billions of people every day were hidden entirely from public view. The public could not see the parties' arguments about patent ownership, the plaintiff's standing in court, or licensing obligations tied to standardized technologies. EFF seeks to uncover sealed information in Wilus. The case Wilus Institute of Standards and Technology Inc. v. HP Inc., highlights a recurring transparency problem in patent litigation. Wilus claims to own standard essential patents (SEPs) related to Wi-Fi 6 - technology embedded in everyday devices. Wilus sued Samsung and HP for patent infringement. HP argued that Wilus failed to offer licenses on Fair, Reasonable, and Non-Discriminatory (FRAND) terms, which are required to prevent SEP holders from exploiting their position, by blocking fair access to widely used technologies. In reviewing the docket, EFF found that many filings were improperly sealed under a lenient protective order without the required, specific justification needed in a proper motion to seal. Because there is a presumption of public access to court filings, litigants must file a motion to seal and demonstrate compelling reasons for secrecy. This typically requires a document-by-document and line-by-line justification. In the Eastern District of Texas, that standard is often not enforced. Instead, district judges allow litigants to hide information using boilerplate justification in a protective order without explaining why specific documents or specific parts in a document should be hidden. In Wilus, two sets of documents stood out. First, Samsung moved to dismiss the case, arguing Wilus may not have validly obtained the patents - raising doubts about whether they had standing to sue at all. Wilus's opposition to that motion was filed completely under seal, with no redacted public version available at all. That briefing likely addresses the patent assignment agreements that underpin Wilus's business model - information the public has an interest in, especially in cases involving non-practicing entities (NPEs) like Wilus. Second, filings related to HP's supplemental briefing on FRAND obligations were also sealed in full, with no redacted versions available to the public. Whether Wilus is bound by FRAND has implications far beyond this case. Companies subject to FRAND must adhere to reasonable licensing terms, while those that are not can charge significantly higher licensing fees. In both instances, the public was shut out of arguments that bear directly on how essential technologies are licensed and controlled. EFF pushes for public access. EFF raised these concerns with Wilus's counsel and pressed for public access to the sealed records. Wilus ultimately agreed to file redacted versions of several documents now available as Document Numbers 387, 388, and 389. That result is progress, but it shouldn't require outside intervention. Public versions of court filings should be the default, not something negotiated after outside pressure. Even now, these newly filed redacted versions conceal significant portions of the parties' arguments. The public still cannot fully see how this case about technologies that are used every day is being litigated. Why public access matters. Sealing court records is designed to be rare. To overcome the presumption of public access, litigants must show compelling reasons for secrecy. That's because open courts are a distinguishing feature of American democracy. The public, journalists, and policymakers all have the right to observe proceedings and hold both government actors and private litigants accountable. Some filings do contain trade secrets or commercially sensitive information. But that doesn't mean litigants should be able to hide information without explaining why. The Eastern District of Texas allows litigants to bypass the requirement to explain why. EFF confronted this very same issue in its attempt to intervene in another Eastern District of Texas case, Entropic v. Charter. The same pattern appeared again in Wilus: instead of narrowly tailored redactions supported by specific reasoning, filings were withheld wholesale. Courts must enforce the standard. Courts, not third parties, are responsible for protecting the public's right of access. That means enforcing the "compelling reasons" standard, as a matter of course. Parties seeking to seal sensitive information should be required to justify each proposed redaction. The Eastern District of Texas' current approach falls short. By allowing broad, unsupported sealing through expansive protective orders, it effectively treats judicial records as confidential by default. Heavy caseloads don't change the rule. Administrative burden cannot override constitutional and common law rights. Judicial records are presumptively public. Courts, including the Eastern District of Texas, should enforce that presumption. Other federal courts get it right. The Eastern District of Texas is an outlier. In the Northern District of California, judges routinely reject overbroad sealing requests. As Judge Chhabria's Civil Standing Order explains: [M]otions to seal... are almost always without merit... Federal courts are paid for by the public, and the public has the right to inspect court records, subject only to narrow exceptions. The filing party must make a specific showing explaining why each document that it seeks to seal may justifiably be sealed... Generic and vague references to "competitive harm" are almost always insufficient justification for sealing. This approach reflects the law: sealing must be narrowly tailored and specifically justified. Court transparency is fundamental. At first glance, secrecy in patent litigation may not seem alarming. But it signals a broader erosion of transparency. The widespread use of expansive protective orders in the Eastern District of Texas is a practice that risks spreading if courts do not enforce the law. These practices allow private parties to obscure information about disputes involving technologies that shape modern life. That undermines a core principle of a free society: transparency regarding the actions of powerful actors. Courts are not private forums for business disputes. They are public institutions, and their records belong to the public. So long as these practices continue, EFF will keep advocating for transparency and working to vindicate the public's right to access court records.