OT: CLASS ACTION AGAINST EPSON

jazzmaster wrote on 5/28/2009, 11:09 AM
Here is a copy of a letter I sent to the California Department of Justice asking for a class action suit against Epson. If anyone is interested, they might to the same in their own state.
Burt Wilson

Attorney General’s Office
California Department of Justice
Attn: Public Inquiry Unit P.O.
Box 944255
Sacramento, CA 94244-2550

RE: CLASS ACTION SUIT AGAINST EPSON USA

In 2006, Epson USA settled a class action suit against them because their ink cartridges were not empty when the computer screen–an Epson program–said they were. Rebates of $40 were issued to qualified users.

Now it’s time to go after them again!

Epson recently came out with the “Aritsan” series of ink jet computers and at least for this particular brand (I own an Artisan 700 “all-in-one” ink jet printer, bought in March of this year) they have engineered a microchip in their cartridges that prevents an owner from buying ink from anyone except EPSON USA–or their sole outlet in Illinois!

In my case, I went to print a black & white job and the printer said I needed to replace my cyan cartridge. The thing is: the printer shut down from printing anything until a cyan cartridge was purchased and installed. I couldn’t even print my black & white job and it was important. I had to go find another computer and printer to do it! All printing was shut down completely until I bought a new ink cartridge from them.

I’m sure you will agree this is not right. They are holding printer owners hostage for ink sales. We cannot go to a refill place and get cheaper ink. We cannot even get it as Costco, Staples, Frys or anywhere else. We are forced to order it by mail from Epson USA.

When Ford sells a car, it recommends that the owner use genuine Ford parts, but the owner has the freedom to go anywhere in the aftermarket to get it cheaper. That’s the American way of life!
Epson is controlling the entire aftermarket. If they are allowed to do this, the rest of the printer industry will follow suit. The consumer will lose his freedom of choice in the aftermarket.

Please investigate this and start a class-action suit against EPSON USA. I will be happy to participate as the plaintiff.

Comments

Jay Gladwell wrote on 5/28/2009, 12:15 PM

Hey, Burt, knowing what you did about Epson's approach (2006), why did you buy another one of their printers?

My Epson is on it's last legs, and when they go I'm NOT buying another Epson.


Sidecar wrote on 5/28/2009, 12:40 PM
Had two Epsons. Terrible. Will never buy one again.
blink3times wrote on 5/28/2009, 1:33 PM
[i]"In my case, I went to print a black & white job and the printer said I needed to replace my cyan cartridge."[i]

Epson has been doing this for a couple of years now. I junked mine (which was perfectly good at the time) and went with HP instead. I won't EVER buy Epson again.
Steve Mann wrote on 5/28/2009, 2:07 PM
I've been pretty happy with all my Epson printers. Currently I use a CX6000, Stylus Photo 900, R2000 and R2800 - never a problem. I only use Epson cartridges because the cheap substitutes never match my color profiles, and the only time I used one I had head clogging problems. I have printed hundreds of DVDs, photos and countless pages of printed stuff.

And, BTW, black ink is really dark gray and some of the colors are needed to reproduce black.
farss wrote on 5/28/2009, 2:23 PM
Same down here, I imported 5 Stylus Photo 900s years ago when they first came out and they're still going strong. Dabbled with all the others and they're all just junk. Try getting drivers for HP products. Then try getting their drivers to actually work.

I have no problem with Epson stopping people from using anything but Epson ink. It's their product, they can make it do whatever they like.

No wonder the USA's economy is a basket case. Litigation is not an industry, it's a plague.

Bob.
Sebaz wrote on 5/28/2009, 2:36 PM
I'm sorry to hear that Epson is doing this. Their printers are my no. 1 choice, I've had nothing but problems with HP, they are absolute pieces of junk, while all the Epson printers I've had always worked without trouble.

I have no problem with Epson stopping people from using anything but Epson ink. It's their product, they can make it do whatever they like.

I don't think so. I think the guy that made the Ford analogy was right. I wouldn't have a problem with Epson preventing people from using other cartridges if their own were not grossly expensive. I could pay twice as much for the Epson ones as opposed to the generics, but I have an Epson CX3200 scanner/printer with two cartridges that would cost me $70 to replace, while generics run me down $11. That's a hell of a difference. Granted, their quality is not good and when you don't use the printer for days they will clog and you will have to run several cleaning processes to unclog them. But I do have another Epson, the R280, which prints on DVDs and CDs, which I plan to keep with the original cartridges, which of course don't clog over time.
jazzmaster wrote on 5/28/2009, 2:58 PM
For me, what it all boils down to is that I had to print out an important document--in b&w--and because my cyan cart was low, that killed the whole machine! I couldn't print. THAT is NOT RIGHT! At least they should let me (you) decide when to replace the cartridges that is low and let me keep printing what I have to do if that cartridge is not affected!
Burt
blink3times wrote on 5/28/2009, 3:06 PM
"Try getting drivers for HP products. Then try getting their drivers to actually work."

Huh?
I have absolutely no issues with my HP drivers (HP C5280). I can even (and do) print disks directly from Photoshop. As for driver availability... you can EASILY download them from their site and there are a number of different options (load the full driver package.... or the bare bones driver pack)
Chienworks wrote on 5/28/2009, 3:06 PM
Not that i approve of preventing consumer choice, but consider ... If Epson couldn't guarantee ink sales and had to depend on making an income from the initial printer sale, expect the price of printers to skyrocket. Imagine having to pay $750 for that printer instead of $75. That's not a pleasant thought.

On the other hand, if the whole purpose of the suit is to allow you to keep printing on the ink you have left, then i'd support that.
Chienworks wrote on 5/28/2009, 3:12 PM
I have to agree with Blink here. HP has always performed marvelously well for me. Of course, i usually avoid the commercial/home drivers, preferring the business/corporate driver or even the driver in Windows if available.

On the other hand, i've never owned or encountered an Epson printer that worked worth spit. I don't know any Epson owners personally who wouldn't want to toss their Epson printers out on the street and let them get run over.
John_Cline wrote on 5/28/2009, 4:01 PM
I guess the answer to this is to have spare cartridges handy. I never wait until I run out of something I use regularly before I go purchase more. Epson posted a perfectly reasonable technical explanation why they require all cartridges to have ink in them. I'll see if I can find it again and post the link. My Epson printers are perfectly acceptable. for one-off disc and photo printing. For larger runs, I have an older Primera Bravo II and an HP color laser printer.
JJKizak wrote on 5/28/2009, 4:39 PM
Someone some time ago in a previous thread suggested the following of which I concur: For your daily internet printing get a color laser or black & white laser quality wise which is good enough. They are blisteringly fast and you don't have to change the toner for 10,000 copies. I have and older Xerox I use for this with printer input. The laser will run off paper faster than greased lighning. For High end quality I use the inkjet Epson R1800 which is outstanding and has the DVD printing also for low volume disc printing. A whole slug of pro papers are available. The other suggestion is what my guru buddy does---buy a new cheap ass printer after the ink runs out---same price as bying the replacement ink. Although I wonder if you hooked up a gallon of ink to the machine how that would work out.
JJK
im.away wrote on 5/28/2009, 4:58 PM
This issue is not as simple as you would first think. There are several parts to the whole when it comes to the inks in printers (not just Epson.)

Firstly, as already stated in this thread, if Epson or any other manufacturer was unable to make sufficient money in after purchase ink sales then the cost of printers would surely rise astronomically.

Secondly, in order to achieve the printing results that you expect, the inks are formulated to have, among other things, specific viscosity, specific droplet size, specific bonding properties and so on. You cannot expect Epson to release their formula for their inks to the aftermarket manufacturers can you?

Thirdly, many of the properties of the inks, as mentioned above, ensure that the print-head does not block up as can often be the case with poorly formulated inks from aftermarket suppliers. Epson and other manufacturers have to deal with countless warranty claims by owners who have used incorrect inks in their printers. Even rejecting a warranty claim costs them money.

So, would it be unreasonable to protect the end-user from themselves by forcing them to buy inks that will do the job they were designed to do AND prevent the printer from failing and sullying the manufacturer's reputation? I don't think so.

The principles of competetion are still there. You have the right to purchase whatever printer you choose based on price versus perceived performance that you will get from the product. You can determine, BEFORE PURCHASE, the availability of inks and the cost of them and incorporate that into your buying decision. Just apply due diligence when making the original purchase decision and you should be happy with what you get.

For the record, I don't have any barrow to push in this matter. I'm not in the IT industry (although I was) and I don't own an Epson printer.

Cheers

Russ
blink3times wrote on 5/28/2009, 5:15 PM
Nah... I don't buy any of that for a second. The generic ink that sells for 50 to 75% less is no different. I used to refill my ink cartridges on my own with no-name ink back when it was permitted. You couldn't tell the difference operationally... or by eye. I could buy 15 refills for the price of ONE cartridge replacement.

One of those cartridges (HP, epson... or otherwise) holds about $0.10 worth of ink.... and they know it. They're ALL making a killing off of ink and it has little to do with the price of printers. And this idea that they're subsidizing low printer prices with the high price of ink??? Come on... Do you REALLY believe that??? Epson seems to be spending an absolute horrid amount of money in attempts to FORCE the consumer's hand... when they don't need to be. Lower the price just a little and the restrictions just a little.... and they'd make A LOT more money.

As far as ink goes... they're ALL rip-off artists...... but epson seems desperately to want first prize in this department.
jazzmaster wrote on 5/28/2009, 6:28 PM
"On the other hand, if the whole purpose of the suit is to allow you to keep printing on the ink you have left, then i'd support that."

Right on! Why put my work at risk because of another kind of ink? And, do they TELL you this in the instructions? Dear user "please go out right away and buy another set of cartridges because the printer will stop printing when any one of them gets low on ink?"

This is unAmerican!!
Editguy43 wrote on 5/28/2009, 6:35 PM
I recently replaced 2 carts. that were empty but all others were almost full but after I replaced the empty ones and it ran its thing. two others that were full before were now almost empty..

What is up with that. I have loved my epson r380 but I do think that they have quite a scam running not sure how they do it but it is WRONG..

im.away wrote on 5/28/2009, 7:05 PM
Like I said Blink....you have the right, before purchase, to decide whether being forced to buy Epson's ink or not is what you want. Same goes for other manufacturers. If you think that you can buy a certain printer, run aftermarket ink in it without problems and get the quality you want, then buy it.

I just don't get the whole "Oh, I made a bad buying decision here, but it's not my fault, I'd better sue someone." scenario.

Nobody makes you buy anything. If you suck at research, get a mate who does know what they are doing to help you. Somehow, somewhere, the buck should stop with the person who's stupid, not the company that makes the product. Almost makes me want to donate to Epson to help defray their costs if they do end up facing a class action.

As for being "unAmerican", aren't unbridled capitalism, opportunism and corporate misbehaviour about as "American" as you can get?

Imagine how many ink cartridges you could buy for the money that gets wasted employing Lawyers.....

Cheers

Russ
TheHappyFriar wrote on 5/28/2009, 7:14 PM
This is unAmerican!!

lazyness is unamerican, not making $$.

I see NO difference here between SCS *NOT* supporting OSX or Linux with every version of their software. I bought the rights to use it, they should NOT be able to tell me how to use it. If they don't provide a linux binary that works then they SHOULD be sued.

If you make a video you should have NO restrictions on what the end user does with it. They paid. If they want to duplicate it & sell it again, NOTHING should stop them. If they want to take your name off the credits then that should be allowed.

What's the difference? there is none! Solution? Don't buy an epson if you don't want to deal with it! Fool you once shame on epson fool me twice shame on end user!
L8R wrote on 5/28/2009, 7:48 PM
I agree Happy! nicely put!
blink3times wrote on 5/28/2009, 7:58 PM
"Like I said Blink....you have the right, before purchase, to decide whether being forced to buy Epson's ink or not is what you want."

In order for one to be allowed to make a choice, they have to be made aware of all the facts PRIOR to the purchase. Epson doesn't do this. Therefore what you describe is not exactly a CHOICE...is it.
blink3times wrote on 5/28/2009, 8:02 PM
"Right on! Why put my work at risk because of another kind of ink? "

And who's to say that "another kind of ink" wouldn't be better? Just because it says "epson" on the side of the ink cartridge means there is no better???
Steve Mann wrote on 5/28/2009, 8:30 PM
>> And, do they TELL you this in the instructions? Dear user "please go out right away and buy another set of cartridges because the printer will stop printing when any one of them gets low on ink?"

Well, yes, the Epson instructions *do* tell you this.
John_Cline wrote on 5/28/2009, 9:02 PM
It seems like every three weeks or so, the subject of Epson printers comes up and one camp says that they work fine and the other camp says that they are the biggest pieces of junk ever foisted on the unsuspecting printer buying public. I think it's probably somewhere in the middle.
Dach wrote on 5/29/2009, 5:12 AM
I know this is a way crazy approach to this subject, but how about the generic companies (which I have had plenty of success with) step up and make themselves more compatible with Epson printers.

Everyone should know by now that Epson, Canon and HP do not make much of anything on selling their printers. If a company is to function it needs a healthy supply of revenue (ink) or are people ready to start spending 2 or 3 times as much for a general purpose printer.

Well shoot, lets make it simple then. The governments of each respected company will force each manufacture to consolidate into one company, so they then offer only one type of printer... not an AIO, but the ONLY one.

But lets face it... if only Apple would make a printer... then the whole industry would be a better place.

End of rant,

Chad