Menu
Epson faces consumer suits in the US

Epson faces consumer suits in the US

Consumers fed up with the high cost of ink jet cartridges are taking Epson to court, accusing it of manipulating equipment in order to sell more ink.

A lawsuit filed in the District Court in Texas claims some models of Epson ink jet cartridges prematurely block Epson printers from functioning even though “substantial ink” remains in the cartridge.

The suit, filed in Jefferson County, is the third such suit involving the same law firm. Like the others, it seeks class action status and asks a judge to order Epson to notify customers that replacement cartridges may still be usable even when Epson’s equipment says they’re spent, and to compensate customers who discard the usable cartridges.

Harnes Keller, of New York, together with local counsel, filed similar claims in a San Mateo, California, Superior Court, and also at Kings County, New York, Supreme Court in August. Neither case has gone to trial.

An Epson spokesperson declined to comment on any of the lawsuits, beyond calling the initial New York lawsuit “unfounded.”

Chip and Cartridge Challenge

The problem was with Epson ink jet cartridges outfitted with an Intellidge microchip, Harnes Keller attorneys said. Because the Intellidge chip stopped Epson printers from operating until the ink jet cartridge was replaced, the plaintiffs charge that Epson was in breach of contract with its customers, who were entitled to use all the ink in the cartridge.

The cartridges actually contain up to 38 per cent more usable ink after the Intellidge chip cuts them off, according to research cited in the suits.

“Because of Epson’s deceptive practices, consumers have been forced to purchase replacement inkjet cartridges prematurely and have paid for ink in inkjet cartridges they can never use,” the complaint reads.

Epson responded that a safety reserve of ink remained inside its cartridges after they expired to prevent damage that could occur to the print head if the cartridge ran dry.

The lawyers said they were seeking class status in order to represent anyone who purchased an Epson brand ink jet cartridge fitted with an Intellidge chip.

Not Running on Empty

The complaint also cites research by the British magazine, Which! Online.

Testers there were able to override the Intellidge chip on Epson cartridges and print between 17 and 38 per cent more “good-quality pages”.

The testers used a $US30 chip resetting mechanism to override the Epson printer chip. Which! Online also reports “premature warnings” of low or no ink using ink jet cartridges from HP, Canon, and Lexmark that continued to produce quality printouts.

Experts say most expired ink jet cartridges, including those from Epson, will have a certain amount of waste ink left over in spent cartridges.

How much is left over depends on the manufacturer.

Imaging expert, Jim Forrest, called the lawsuit against Epson “frivolous.”

He said an Epson ink jet cartridge that runs completely dry could damage the hardware’s printing mechanism.

“If Epson says consumers will get 100 printed pages based on its specs, then a consumer will likely get that,” Forrest said. “Yes, there may be some ink left over, but that is by design.”

Forrest said Intellidge chips were used to monitor the amount of ink inside the ink jet cartridge. The chip did not measure the real volume; instead, it estimated the amount of ink used and predicted when the cartridge would be empty. The chip transmitted estimated ink levels to the printer, which alerted the user with a screen message.

“The printer will automatically stop working when there is no more safely usable ink in the cartridge,” Epson said.

The company said users get all the ink they pay for, because Epson charged for cartridges based on usable ink volume and printed pages per cartridge.

The company provides yield information on printer packaging and on its site, but not on ink jet cartridges.

Related Battles

Smart chips such as the Intellidge have raised a firestorm of criticism before. Lexmark recently won a challenge to its cartridge return program.

The company offers a discount to consumers who agree to return used cartridges only to Lexmark for refilling or recycling. The policy was unsuccessfully challenged by the Arizona Cartridge Remanufacturers Association, which wanted to be able to refill and resell Lexmark cartridges.

A separate lawsuit brought by Lexmark against Static Control Components (SCC) is still pending. In that suit, Lexmark has charged that a microchip, the Smartek, made and used by SCC in remanufactured laser printer toner cartridges to defeat Lexmark’s technological controls, violates Epson’s copyright.

Third-party companies that remanufacture ink jet and toner cartridges complain Intellidge and similar chips make it hard to refill and reuse empty cartridges. Remanufactured ink jet cartridges will work with all Epson printers, although Epson says users won’t get the advantage of advanced features like ink level monitors without the Intellidge chip.

Customers, of course, like the lower price tags often offered by third-party ink cartridges. They want the option of buying the no-name cartridges without worrying that using them will damage their printers.

Epson Takes Heat Overseas

In a related matter involving Epson’s use of the Intellidge chip, the Dutch Consumer Association recently backed off from its allegation that Epson customers were unfairly charged for ink they can never use.

In July, it advised its 640,000 members to boycott Epson ink jet printers. The Netherlands-based organisation urged Epson to modify its printers so they would continue printing until no ink remains in the cartridge. The group also suggested consumers use a third-party mechanism to override the Intellidge chip.

Epson responded with advertisements in several national Dutch newspapers calling the tip “dangerous advice”. Epson representatives told Associated Press reporters the company it was considering legal action against the Dutch Consumers Association.

Later in July, the Dutch consumer group retracted its call for a nationwide boycott of Epson products. It issued a statement conceding that residual ink left in Epson cartridges was necessary for printers to function properly.


Follow Us

Join the newsletter!

Error: Please check your email address.
Show Comments