HP has (quietly) settled a class action lawsuit over claims it deliberately blocked customers from using third-party toner cartridges in its printers, without paying a penny in damages.
Locking Out Third-Party Toner
The lawsuit centred on HP’s controversial Dynamic Security feature, i.e. software designed to detect and reject toner cartridges not produced by HP itself. The system, enabled through automatic firmware updates, left some users unable to print at all if they’d chosen cheaper, third-party alternatives.
The lead plaintiffs included Mobile Emergency Housing Corp (MEHC), a US-based organisation providing emergency shelter services, and Performance Automotive, a car parts business. Both reported that HP printers they had purchased in good faith suddenly stopped accepting non-HP toner after a firmware update was remotely triggered. For example:
– MEHC said it had bought an HP Color LaserJet Pro M254 in 2019 and opted for third-party toner in 2020 to cut costs. The following month, a firmware update rendered the cartridges useless.
– Performance Automotive said it had a similar experience with its HP Color LaserJet Pro MFP M281fdw after installing an update that blocked non-HP supplies.
A Profitable Strategy?
It seems that HP hasn’t denied the existence of Dynamic Security. In fact, it appears to have defended the system openly. For example, speaking back at the 2024 World Economic Forum in Davos, CEO Enrique Lores highlighted how HP’s business model depends on profits from consumables, not hardware, saying: “We lose money on the hardware, we make money on the supplies,” and that, “we’re investing in that customer every time a printer is sold.”
The fact that in FY2024, HP’s printing division generated $4.5 billion in net revenue, much of it from proprietary ink and toner sales, appears to support this idea.
Lores has also argued that Dynamic Security helps protect customers from potential security threats, claiming third-party cartridges could, in theory, carry malicious firmware. However, such risks remain hypothetical and there’s little evidence of this happening in real-world scenarios.
Settlement Without Liability
Rather than fight the lawsuit in court, HP has now agreed to settle without admitting wrongdoing. Under the terms, the company will continue to disclose that its printers may block third-party cartridges and has pledged to allow customers the choice to install or decline firmware updates containing Dynamic Security.
“HP denies that it did anything wrong,” the official settlement notice states, “but agrees to maintain certain disclosures and options regarding firmware updates.”
While it appears that no compensation will be paid, the agreement marks another chapter in HP’s ongoing efforts to defend its closed ecosystem, even as it comes under increasing scrutiny from customers and regulators alike.
The Growing Backlash Against Lock-In
Unfortunately for HP, this issue isn’t likely to go away. Many customers see the lockout as an unfair restriction, especially when third-party cartridges can cost a fraction of the price. On forums and social media, frustrated users have voiced concerns about being forced into costly purchases with little warning or transparency.
For businesses that rely on predictable print costs, these kinds of restrictions can have real operational impacts. For example:
– Disruption risk. Sudden firmware changes can halt printing workflows, causing downtime for organisations.
– Cost inflation. HP-branded toner is often significantly more expensive, impacting budgets for schools, small businesses, and non-profits.
– Reduced trust. Customers may question whether HP prioritises their interests, or simply its bottom line.
HP’s Not The Only One
It’s worth noting here, however, that HP’s not alone in exploring this kind of supply-chain lock-in. Other printer makers, including Canon and Epson, have also been accused of using software to prevent third-party cartridges from functioning.
However, HP has become one of the most visible examples, perhaps because it’s also one of the most vocal. With lawsuits, user complaints, and increasing regulatory scrutiny in both the US and EU, it seems that efforts to tightly control consumables may be backfiring.
A 2023 report by the European Commission warned that such tactics could breach consumer rights, and several EU countries are now pushing for regulations guaranteeing “the right to repair” and “freedom of choice” for printer supplies.
HP, meanwhile, remains firm on its stance, offering its own cartridge recycling programmes and claiming that its proprietary ecosystem is ultimately more sustainable and secure.
That said, for many customers, particularly in sectors where budgets are tight, that argument is proving increasingly hard to justify.
What Does This Mean For Your Business?
HP’s settlement may avoid an outright legal defeat but is likely to leave lingering concerns for businesses that rely on its printers. The company’s willingness to restrict functionality through remote updates (especially without warning) appears to raise serious questions about control, transparency, and long-term value.
While HP has pledged to give users the choice over future firmware updates, the incident highlights the risks of buying into ecosystems that can be altered unilaterally. For small businesses, charities, schools, and other organisations with tight margins, the ability to use affordable third-party toner isn’t just a preference but is a necessity.
It’s also a warning sign for procurement teams, i.e. printer selection should no longer be just about hardware specs or upfront cost. It’s about understanding how restrictive the vendor’s software policies are, and what support (or surprises) may lie ahead.
If anything, this case shows how vendors are doubling down on closed-loop business models. Companies may want to reassess whether HP’s approach aligns with their operational and financial priorities, or if a more open, flexible printing solution would be the smarter investment.
As printer manufacturers continue to balance profit protection with customer satisfaction, the pressure is on to prove that these digital lock-ins serve users as well as shareholders.