Downgraded Epson Xp-330 Firmware and Now the Ink Shows Full
A class activity lawsuit alleges that Epson wrongly prevents their printers from working with ink made past any other manufacturer.
William Mondigo and Richard Famiglietti say that when they purchased their printers, they reviewed the specifications for them, and noted that Epson did not disclose that the visitor would disable the printers if a third-party ink cartridge was used.
Allegedly, Epson engages in a “systematic campaign” of disabling Epson printers when the user attempts to use non-Epson ink cartridges. Mondigo and Famiglietti say that the company does this by designing software updates that purposely disables the printers when the non-Epson ink cartridges are installed.
The two customers keep to state that there is nothing wrong with the tertiary-political party ink cartridges, noting that they piece of work with Epson printers that have not been given the software update that disables the printers.
Mondigo and Famiglietti also note that they and other customers actively did non authorize Epson to disable their printers. The customers explain that a purchaser must agree to Epson’due south licensing agreement, and they note that the licensing agreement states that Epson may implement software updates. However, the license allegedly does not explain that these updates could disable the printers.
Mondigo and Famiglietti say that for many users, these updates finer ruined the Epson printers. The customers say they were forced to pay more for ink cartridges than they otherwise would, because Epson ink cartridges cost significantly more than third-party cartridges, some costing as much as $150.
Additionally, the plaintiffs note that in many cases, the cost of replacement cartridges over the lifetime of the printer is higher than the toll of the printer itself.
The Epson printer course action lawsuit states that Epson did non inform printer owners that the visitor would update the software so that the printers would not work with non-Epson printer ink. The Epson printer course action lawsuit goes on to say that Epson advertised that the software updates would “amend the printers and set up known issues.”
The Epson ink cartridge course action lawsuit says that Epson’due south action to disable the printers when 3rd-party cartridges are used goes across data provided in the Epson 2018 Annual Report. Allegedly, that report did note that Epson printers could be used with third-political party ink cartridges, and explained that customer use of these third-party products could cutting into the company’south bottom line.
Even so, the Epson printer ink cartridge class action lawsuit says that in that report, Epson does not discuss disabling printers as a way to increase the company’south market shares, and merely suggests tactics including “emphasizing the quality of genuine Epson brand” and “raise[ing] customer experience and developing new products…”
Was your printer disabled later on you used a third-party ink cartridge? Allow usa know in the comment department.
Mondigo and Famiglietti are represented by
Jae K. Kim, Eric D. Zard, Edwin J. Kilpela and James P. McGraw of Carlson Lynch LLP and Michael Yard. Yarnoff of Kehoe Law Firm PC.
The
Epson Printer Ink Cartridge Grade Action Lawsuit
is
William Mondigo, et al. 5. Epson America Inc., Case No. 3:19-cv-02009-BEN-BGS, in the U.S. District Courtroom for the Southern District of California.
Please note: Meridian Form Deportment is not a settlement administrator or constabulary business firm. Acme Class Actions is a legal news source that reports on class action lawsuits, grade action settlements, drug injury lawsuits and product liability lawsuits. Height Class Actions does not process claims and we cannot advise you on the status of whatsoever course action settlement merits. You must contact the settlement administrator or your attorney for any updates regarding your claim status, claim course or questions virtually when payments are expected to be mailed out.
