HP is under fire from the International Imaging Technology Council (Int’l ITC) for implementing firmware updates that disable the functionality of third-party ink and toner cartridges in its printers. This practice, known as Dynamic Security, has been a point of contention for several years, but the Int’l ITC is now emphasizing its concerns in light of recent developments.
The Int’l ITC, a nonprofit organization representing North American toner and inkjet cartridge remanufacturers, argues that HP’s actions violate the guidelines set forth by the General Electronics Council’s (GEC) Electronic Product Environmental Assessment Tool (EPEAT) 2.0 registry. This registry, which was updated in December 2025, aims to promote sustainability in product design and supply chains.
EPEAT 2.0 and Its Implications
The EPEAT 2.0 criteria specifically prohibit firmware updates that intentionally disable third-party cartridges. The guidelines require manufacturers to either refrain from such updates, provide approved solutions that allow the use of remanufactured cartridges, or offer remanufactured cartridges for sale on their websites. Currently, there are 163 products registered under EPEAT 2.0, but notably, none are printers.
Recent Firmware Updates and Industry Response
Despite the new EPEAT 2.0 standards, HP has continued to release firmware updates that affect multiple printer models, including the OfficeJet Pro 7720. The Int’l ITC has expressed skepticism regarding HP’s commitment to comply with these environmental standards, citing a pattern where HP prioritizes profits over sustainability.
Tricia Judge, the Int’l ITC’s executive director, pointed out that HP is unique among printer manufacturers in its use of lockout chips that are activated through firmware updates. This practice has drawn criticism for misleading customers who seek environmentally friendly alternatives.
Previous Attempts to Address the Issue
In 2023, the Int’l ITC requested the GEC to revoke the EPEAT registration of 101 HP printers due to violations related to Dynamic Security, but this request was denied. Judge noted that while EPEAT 1.0 had basic criteria, EPEAT 2.0 aimed to close loopholes that allowed HP to claim compliance while still interfering with the use of remanufactured cartridges.
As of now, HP has not responded to requests for comment regarding these allegations. The ongoing debate highlights the tension between environmental standards and corporate practices in the printer industry.
This article was produced by NeonPulse.today using human and AI-assisted editorial processes, based on publicly available information. Content may be edited for clarity and style.
