On 2 July, a French criminal court will hold its first procedural hearing in a case that tests how long a printer is allowed to last. Epson has been summoned before the Nanterre Criminal Court on charges of planned obsolescence and misleading commercial practices. The complaint, filed by the association HOP in September 2017, follows more than eight years of investigation by France’s consumer protection authority, the DGCCRF.
The prosecutor’s office alleges that Epson used techniques deliberately designed to reduce product lifespan in order to increase replacement rates. Two practices are at the centre of the case: blocking printing when ink cartridges are not yet empty, and prematurely shortening the lifespan of ink pads. Both force consumers into repurchasing, since the artificial signals effectively prevent printing or scanning.
This is the first legal action in France — and the world — based on the offence of planned obsolescence, which was introduced into French law by the Energy Transition Act of 2015. The case matters beyond one manufacturer. It establishes what evidence a prosecutor can use to show that a product’s lifespan was shortened on purpose, and it puts a price on that behaviour.
The scale of the market gives the case context. An estimated 1.1 billion ink cartridges are sold worldwide each year across all brands. A single cartridge can contain substances toxic to the environment and take over 1,000 years to decompose. Ink itself can be priced up to €7,500 per litre. When a printer refuses to work with ink still in the tank, the waste is not just financial.
Epson is not the only manufacturer under scrutiny. HOP filed a separate complaint against HP in late 2024, and that investigation is still ongoing. The legal landscape around product lifespan is shifting in parallel. EU Ecodesign regulations will expand to small appliances under EU Regulation 2024/1781, which means more products will eventually fall under repair-access rules.
Germany offers a partial model for how repair access can work. Its Ecodesign Act legally recognises volunteer repair initiatives as “professional repairers”, giving them access to spare parts and repair information. The eligibility process is deliberately light: non-commercial repairers must provide proof of membership, liability insurance, and a self-declaration of safety compliance. But gaps remain — independent repair shops outside the craft system sit in a legal gray zone with no standardised pathway, and the German parliament has asked the federal government to study the issue rather than resolve it.
What can you do with this? The practical lesson is about evidence. If your printer stops with ink still in the cartridge, or demands an ink-pad replacement earlier than expected, photograph the error message and keep the purchase receipt. That combination — a visible error plus proof of when you bought the machine — is exactly the kind of record a consumer complaint needs. You do not need to file a lawsuit; you need to preserve the trail in case a class action or regulator later asks for it.
What this trial cannot yet tell you is whether Epson is guilty. The hearing on 2 July is procedural; the court has not ruled on the merits. Until it does, the honest conclusion is that a legal definition of planned obsolescence now exists in France, and this case is the first test of whether it can be enforced.