Judge tosses lawsuit that said HP unfairly locks consumers into using its ink

A federal judge in California has dismissed a class action lawsuit accusing tech giant HP Inc. of unfairly locking consumers into using only its branded ink cartridges in HP printers, dealing a blow to critics of the company’s controversial ink practices.

The lawsuit, filed on behalf of consumers, alleged that HP’s firmware updates intentionally disabled printers when non-HP or refilled ink cartridges were used, effectively forcing customers to buy HP’s own — and often more expensive — ink products. Plaintiffs argued this behavior was deceptive and anti-competitive.

However, U.S. District Judge Beth Freeman ruled this week that the plaintiffs failed to demonstrate sufficient harm under consumer protection laws and that HP had adequately disclosed its ink compatibility policies in product materials and user agreements.

The "Dynamic Security" controversy

At the center of the case was HP’s use of what it calls “Dynamic Security” — a software feature introduced in many HP printers that prevents the use of third-party ink cartridges not recognized as HP-authorized. Critics have long argued that the feature misleads consumers and inflates the long-term cost of printer ownership.

HP has maintained that the security feature is intended to protect printer functionality, reduce fraud, and ensure optimal print quality. The company also says Dynamic Security is clearly disclosed at the time of purchase.

Consumer advocacy reaction

Consumer rights groups reacted with disappointment to the ruling, calling it a missed opportunity to challenge what they see as a monopolistic grip on the ink market. “Locking customers into a single brand of ink — especially without their clear consent — is not only anti-consumer, it’s anti-competitive,” said a spokesperson from the nonprofit group Public Knowledge.

HP welcomed the court's decision, stating: “We are pleased with the outcome and continue to stand by our commitment to product integrity, print quality, and customer satisfaction. We clearly inform customers about our ink policies.”

What’s next?

Although the lawsuit has been dismissed, legal experts say the broader debate over printer ink restrictions is far from over. Some lawmakers have also expressed interest in re-examining consumer protections in the digital products space, especially regarding software updates that change product functionality after purchase.

Meanwhile, consumers continue to look for affordable printing options — and increasingly question the real cost of that inexpensive printer.

An easy solution

Consumers who are looking for ease of use and affordability would do well to look at laser printers instead of ink-jet models. An inexpensive black-and-white laser printer from Brother, Canon or HP cost a little bit over $100 and will print for months on a laser refill, depending on usage.

Laser refills cost around $22, are easy to install and aren't prone to smudging, like ink.