2006 Epson Ink Cartridge Class Action Lawsuit Settlement
This web site was established to provide information about the settlement of In re Epson Ink Cartridge Cases in Los Angeles County Superior Court, California. On February 7, 2006, the Court entered an Order granting Preliminary Approval of the proposed settlement.
The Court considered final approval of the settlement at a hearing on August 15, 2006.
I just visited the EpsonSettlement.com website and, honestly, I'm pretty skeptical about this whole setup. It reminds me of when Microsoft announced they were ending support for Access—both situations involved some vague messaging that left users scratching their heads. With Epson, they're offering settlement benefits over cartridges apparently shutting down prematurely. I understand their reasoning about protecting printer heads, but why weren't we given clearer upfront information rather than being blindsided and forced into this lengthy class action process?
Frankly, the entire settlement feels like an afterthought—similar to Microsoft’s approach with Access, which essentially forced users into figuring out their own costly migrations. Epson offering a $45 credit sounds generous at first, until you realize it's just store credit, locking us into buying more Epson products. The alternative isn't much better: a smaller cash amount paired with yet another Epson store credit. It feels a bit manipulative, frankly.
Microsoft at least clearly stated the discontinuation date and options available for transition. Here, Epson buries details behind pages of legalese. I shouldn’t have to dig through fine print just to figure out if I'm eligible or how much ink was really wasted. Bottom line—clear communication upfront could've saved everyone a lot of hassle, just like clearer messaging from Microsoft would’ve made moving away from Access smoother. Transparency shouldn’t be this difficult. Jack Brown
Content is from the site's 2006 archived pages.
The documents at this website explain the settlement, who may participate in the benefits to be made available, and the options for class members. Links have been created to the Notice, Claim Form and Instructions, a List of Qualifying Printers, and questions and answers related to the Settlement.
All questions about this Notice, the Class Action, or the Proposed Settlement should be directed to 1-877-506-4031, or write to:
Claims Administrator
c/o Rust Consulting, Inc.
PO Box 1283
Minneapolis MN 55440-1283
What is this lawsuit about?
The Settlement resolves a class action lawsuit filed in California and other state courts. Plaintiffs assert claims against Epson America, Inc. (“EAI”) based on various legal theories, including breach of contract, breach of implied warranties, unjust enrichment, fraudulent concealment, violations of California Business and Professions Code Sections17200, et seq., and violations of the California Consumers Legal Remedies Act, California Civil Code Sections 1750, et seq., relating to the performance and other characteristics of Epson inkjet printer cartridges. Among other things, Plaintiffs allege that Epson inkjet printers and inkjet cartridges indicate that cartridges are “empty” and suspend printer function, even though substantial ink remains. EAI has denied and continues to deny the claims and any wrongdoing, but has decided to settle to avoid the cost and inconvenience of litigation. The Court has not issued any rulings about the validity of the claims.

Who is eligible to participate in this settlement?
The “Settlement Class” certified by the Court for settlement purposes is defined as all persons, sole proprietorships, partnerships, corporations or any other entities located within the 50 United States and the District of Columbia who, on or after April 8, 1999and through May 8, 2006: (i) purchased, leased or otherwise received any Epson inkjet printer (“Epson InkJet Printer”) (specifically including, but not limited to, Epson Stylus printers (desktop and photo models), PictureMate printers and Epson Pro model printers(ProGraphics printers, large format printers and proofing printers) but excluding Epson branded point of sale receipt printers); and who (ii) purchased, utilized or otherwise received any inkjet cartridge for an Epson InkJet Printer (“Epson Ink Cartridge”). A complete list of qualifying printers is available on this website. Excluded from the class are EAI, any person or entities who distribute, sell or service Epson InkJet Printers, and their parents, subsidiaries, affiliates, employees, officers and directors. Also excluded from the class is any judge, justice or judicial officer presiding over this matter and the members of their immediate families and judicial staff. A “Settlement Class Member” means a person and/or entity who falls within the definition of the Settlement Class.
What are the settlement benefits for class members?
Settlement Class Members who have already registered a qualifying printer with EAI, or who register a qualifying printer with EAI by November 13, 2006 will automatically receive a $45 credit to be used in the Epson E-Store for each registered qualifying Epson InkJet Printer. Registered Settlement Class Members are not required to submit a claim to receive the $45 credit. The following printers are eligible for settlement benefits: [list of qualifying printers].
To register a qualifying printer with EAI, go to www.epsonstore.com/benefitsreg and complete all required fields.
In the alternative, a Settlement Class Member may reject the $45 credit and instead elect, by not later than June 22, 2006 (the “Claims Period”), to receive either: (a) a combination of $25 payable by check and a $20 Epson E-Store credit for each registered printer; or (b) a discount of 25% off Epson E-Store purchases for a total discount of up to $100 with respect to each registered printer.
To obtain the alternative benefit, a Settlement Class Member must complete and mail the enclosed claim form (the “Claim Form”) to the Claims Administrator listed in the Claim Form, postmarked no later than June 22, 2006. Settlement Class Members who have not registered their ownership of a qualifying printer with EAI, or who wish to receive settlement benefits for multiple printers, may do so by submitting a Claim Form within the Claims Period. On the Claim Form, the Settlement Class Member must provide the owner’s name and address, an e-mail address, if any, and the model, serial number, purchase date (month and year) and purchase location of his, her or its qualifying printer. EAI and the Claims Administrator have a right to validate the information provided in any Claim Form or registration.
When will this proposed settlement become final?
A hearing will be held at 10:00 a.m. on August 15, 2006 in Department CCW 322 of the Los Angeles Superior Court, 600 S. Commonwealth Ave., Los Angeles, California 90005, for the purpose of determining whether the proposed Settlement is fair, reasonable and adequate and should be approved by the Court. On the same date or on such other date as the Court may order, a hearing will be held in the same Court to consider the application for an award of attorneys’ fees, costs and incentive awards. Either or both of these hearings may be continued without notice to the class. You are not required to attend this hearing to participate in the Settlement.
How can I receive a Class Notice and Claim Form?
Please refer to the Notice and Claim Form pages of this website for printable copies.



Do I have to participate in this settlement – can I exclude myself?
Any request to be excluded from the Settlement Class must be made in writing and mailed, postage prepaid and postmarked no later than June 7, 2006, to the Claims Administrator. Your request for exclusion must contain: (1) the name of this lawsuit; (2) your full name and current address; and (3) a statement of intention to exclude yourself from this lawsuit.
Can I object to the proposed Settlement Agreement and what is the deadline to object?
Any objections must be made in writing and such objections and proof of Settlement Class Membership must be mailed or delivered to the Clerk of the Court, 600 S. Commonwealth Ave., Los Angeles, CA 90005, the attorneys for Plaintiffs (Gregory E. Keller, Chitwood Harley Harnes LLP, 2300 Promenade II, 1230 Peachtree Street N.E., Atlanta, Georgia 30309, or Brian S. Kabateck, Kabateck Brown Kellner LLP, 350 S. Grand Avenue, 39th Floor, Los Angeles, California 90071), and the attorneys for EAI (Daniel A. Rozansky, Stroock & Stroock & Lavan LLP, 2029 Century Park East, Suite 1800, Los Angeles, CA 90067-3086), postmarked no later than June 23, 2006.
What happens if I remain a class member?
If you are a Settlement Class Member and do not exclude yourself from the Settlement Class, you will be bound by any judgment entered with respect to the Settlement, you will be deemed to have released any and all claims against EAI as set forth in the Notice and you will not be able to file a separate claim against EAI based on the facts and circumstances which are the subject of the release in the Action.
When can I expect to receive my benefits?
Benefits will be available after the Court has given final approval and all appeals have expired.
How do I determine if my printer is covered by this settlement?
Please refer to the List of Qualifying Printers document on this website.
How long do I have to file a Claim Form?
If you submit a claim form, it must be postmarked no later than June 22, 2006.
Do I have to include receipts or other proof with my Claim Form?
No, but you need to follow the instructions and fully complete the claim form.
What happens if I change my address after I mail my Claim Form?
If your address changes after you have submitted a claim form, you may notify the Class Administration in writing at:
Claims Administrator
c/o Rust Consulting, Inc.
PO Box 1283
Minneapolis MN 55440-1283
Can you give me a run down of important dates?
Last Date to send in a request for exclusion
June 7, 2006
Last Day to send in a Claim Form
June 22, 2006
Last Date to file an objection
June 23, 2006
Final Approval Hearing
August 15, 2006
Settlement Update
(June 21, 2006)
The time for the Settlement Fairness Hearing in In Re Epson Ink Cartridge Cases, Judicial Council Coordination Proceeding No. 4347 has been moved to 1 pm on August 15, 2006. The Settlement Notice previously indicated that the hearing time would be 10 am on that same day.
Class Counsel intend to apply to the Court at the Fairness Hearing for an award of attorneys’ fees and costs and expenses in an amount not to exceed $35 million and EAI will not oppose an application by Class Counsel up to this amount. Class Counsel’s papers in support of their application were filed with the Court on June 15, 2006. With the permission of the Court, the date to file the application was continued from June 1, 2006 to June 15, 2006.
IMPORTANT LEGAL NOTICE In Re Epson Ink Cartridge Cases
(Judicial Council Coordination Proceeding No. 4347)
Superior Court of the State of California for the County of Los Angeles
READ THIS NOTICE CAREFULLY.
YOUR LEGALRIGHTS MAY BE AFFECTED.
You may be affected by a proposed settlement of a class action lawsuit about Epson ink cartridges. The Los Angeles Superior Court (the "Court") has prelim inarily approved a proposed settlement (the "Settlement") in a class action entitled In Re Epson Ink- Cartridge Cases (Judicial Council Coordination Proceeding No. 4347) (the "Action”). To leam about the Settlement, please read this notice carefully Information about the Settlement is also available by visiting the website www.epsonsettlement.com or calling the number below.
The Settlement resolves a class action lawsuit filed in California and other state courts. Plaintiffs assert claims against Epson America, Inc. ("EAI”) based on various legal theories, including breach of contract, breach of implied warranties, unjust enrichment, fraudulent concealment, violations of California Business and Professions Code Sections 17200. elseq.. and violations of the California Coasumers Legal Remedies Act, California Civil Code Sections 1750, etseq., relating to the performance and other characteristics of Epson inkjet printer cartridges. Among other things. Plaintiffs allege that Epson inkjet printers and inkjet cartridges indicate that cartridges are “empty" and suspend printer function, even though substantial ink remains. EAI has denied and continues to deny the claims and any wrongdoing, but has decided to settle to avoid the cost and inconvenience of litigation The Court has not issued any rulings about the validity of the claims.
The parties have agreed to settle this lawsuit and provide members of the Settlement Class with certain benefits. Plaintiffs’ counsel believe that the Settlement is fair, reasonable and in the best interests of Settlement Class Members.
Who Is Included In The Settlement?
The "Settlement Class” certified by the Court lor settlement purposes is defined as all persons, sole proprietorships, partnerships, corporations or any other entities located within the 50 United States and the District of Columbia who, on or after April 8, 1999 and through May 8,2006: (i) purchased, leased or otherwise received any Epson inkjet printer (“Epson InkJet Printer") (specifically including, but not limited to, Epson Stylus printers (desktop and photo models), PictureMate printers and Epson Pro model printers (ProGraphics printers, large format printers and proofing printers) but excluding Epson branded point of sale receipt printers); and who (ii) purchased, utilized or otherwise received any inkjet cartridge for an Epson InkJet Printer (“Epson Ink Cartridge"). A complete list of qualifying printers is available at www.epsonsettlement.com. Excluded from the class are EAI, any person or entities who distribute, sell or service Epson InkJet Printers, and their parents, subsidiaries, affiliates, employees, officers and directors. Also excluded from the class is any judge, justice or judicial officer presiding over this matter and the members of their immediate families and judicial staff. A "Settlement Class Member" means a person and/or entity w'ho falls within the definition of the Settlement Class.
What Are The Settlement Benefits?
Settlement Class Members who have already registered a qualifying printer with EAL or who register a qualifying printer with EAI by November 13,2006, will automatically receive a $45 credit to be used in the Epson E-Store for each registered qualifying Epson InkJet Printer. Registered Settlement Class Members are not required to subm it a claim to receive the $45 credit, all required fields.
In the alternative, a Settlement Class Member may reject the $45 credit and instead elect, by not later than June 22,2006 (the “Claims Period”), to receive either, (a) a combination of $25 payable by check and a $20 Epson E-Store credit for each registered printer; or (b) a discount of 25% off Epson E-Store purchases for a total discount of up to $ 100 with respect to each registered printer.
To obtain the alternative benefit, a Settlement Class Member must complete and mail the enclosed claim form (the “Claim Form”) to the Claims Administrator listed in Claim Form, postmarked no later than June 22,2006. Settlement Class Members who have not registered their ownership of a qualifying printer with EAI, or who wish to receive settlement benefits for multiple printers, may do so by submitting a Claim Form within the Claims Period. On the Claim Form, the Settlement Class Member must provide the owner's name and address, an e- mail address, if any, and the model, serial number, purchase date (month and year) and purchase location of his. her or its qualifying printer. EAI and the Claims Adm inistrator have a right to validate the information provided in any Claim Form or registration.
I f you subm it a Claim Form selecting an alternative benefit you cannot later select a di fferent benefit No benefits will be made available until after approval of the Settlement becomes final and non-appealable. Ifvou wish to receive an e-mail or postcard notifying you when settlement benefits are activated, go to www.epsonsettlement.com or contact the Claims Administrator at 1-877-506-4031 to register to receive such notification. Additionally, the Claims Administrator will post a notification at www epsonsett lenient com once settlement benefits are activated.
Settlement Class Members who do not wish to register their ownership of a qualifying printer with EAI may still receive settlement benefits by subm ittrng a Claim Form within the Claims Period. In addition. Settlement Class Members who wish to receive settlement benefits for three or more qualifying printers that are not already registered with EAI mast submit Claim Forms within the Claims Period.
The credits will be provided in the form of a unique code which must be entered at the appropriate location in the E-Store. Any credit or discount for the E-Store will be valid for one year after activation following the effective date of the Settlement and is only valid for a one time use. Any unused portion of a credit or discount will be forfeited. Any credit or discount excludes taxes and shipping if applicable to a purchase. EAI reserves the right to validate any registration of a qualifying printer or Claim Form.
EAI has also agreed to make certain changes to the disclosures on ils website and the packaging, manuals and user interfaces for Epson InkJet Printers and Epson Ink Cartridges prohibiting unfair or deceptive trade practices, breach of contract, fraud, false advertising and m isrepresentation) and which relate to the performance of Epson Ink Cartridges, the interaction of Epson InkJet Pnnters with Epson Ink Cartridges, EATs use of an EPROM chip on Epson Ink Cartridges, the quantity and other characteristics of printed output from Epson Ink Cartridges, the amount of usable ink in Epson Ink Cartridges, the value received from Epson Ink Cartridges when used with Epson InkJet Printers and all claims related in any way to EATs specifications, marketing, sale, warranty and representations regarding the quantity of output, the amount of usable ink and the value received from Epson Ink Cartridges when used with Epson InkJet Pnnters (the “Released Claims”).
This release does not encompass any claims for repair or service of Epson InkJet Pnnters which are currently covered by any express product warranty by EAI, nor does this release encompass any claims against EAI for alleged violations of federal or state antitrust laws prohibiting monopolistic conduct, price fixing agreements and other acts in restraint of trade.
Subject to the scope of the release contained in the foregoing paragraphs, the Released Claims specifically extend to claims that the members of the Settlement Class do not know or suspect to exist in their favor at the time that the Settlement, and the releases contained therein, becomes effective. This Paragraph constitutesa waiver of, without limitation as to any other applicable law. Section 1542 of the California Civil Code, which provides as follows:
A GENERAL RELEASE DOES NOT EXTEND TO CLAIMS WHICH THE CREDITOR DOES NOT KNOW OR Sl'SPECT TO EXIST IN HIS OR HER FAVOR AT THE TIME OF EXECUTINGTHE RELEASE, WHICH IF KNOWN BY HIM OR HER MUST HAVE MATERIALLY AFFECTED HIS OR HER SETTLEMENT WITH THE DEBTOR.
Plaintiffs and each member of the Settlement Class are deemed to understand and acknowledge the significance of this waiver of California Civil Code Section 1542 and/or of any other applicable law relating to limitations on releases. Plaint ills and/or Settlement Class Members or Class Counsel may hereafter discover facts in addition to or different from those which any of them now knows or believes to be true with respect to the subject matter of the Released Claims, but Plaintiffs and each Settlement Class Member, upon the Effective Date, shall have, fully, finally, and forever settled and released any and all Released Claims, known or unknown, suspected or unsuspected, contingent or non-contingent, whether or not concealed or hidden which now exist, or heretofore have existed upon any theory of law or equity now existing or com ing into existence in the future, including, but not limited to, conduct which is negligent, intentional, with or without malice, or a breach of any duty, law or rule, without regard to the subsequent discovery or existence of such different or additional facts. No other action, demand, suit or other claim may be pursued against the Released Parties with respect to the Released Claims by any member of the Settlement Class. Plaintiffs acknowledge, and the Settlement Class Members shall be deemed by operation of the Final Judgment to have acknowledged, that the foregoing waiver was separately bargined for and a matereial element of the Settlement of which this release is part.
The Settlement Hearing
A hearing will be held at 10:00 am. on August 15,2006 in Department CCW 322 of the Los Angeles Superior Court, 600 S. Commonwealth Ave., Los Angeles, California 90005, for the purpose of determining whether the proposed Settlement is fair, reasonable and adequate and should be approved by the Court. On the same date or on such other date as the Court may order, a hearing will be held in the same Court to consider the application for an award of attorneys' fees, costs and incentive awards. Either or both of these hearings may be continued without notice to the class. You are not required to attend this hearing to participate in the Settlement.
Any objections must be made in writing and such objections and proof of Settlement Class membership must be mailed or delivered to the Clerk of the Court at the above address, the attorneys for Plaintiffs (Gregory' E. Keller, Chitwood Harley I lames LLP, 2300 lYomenade II, 1230 Peachtree Street N.E., Atlanta. Georgia 30309, or Brian S. Kabateck, Kabateck Brown Kellner LLP, 350 S. Grand Avenue. 39th Floor, Los Angeles, California 90071), and the attorneys for EAI (Daniel A. Rozansky, Stroock & Stroock & Lavan LLP, 2029 Century Park East, Suite 1800, Los Angeles, CA 90067-3086), postmarked no later than June 23,2006. Any request to be excluded from the Settlement Class must be made in writing and mailed, postage prepaid and postmarked no later than June 7, 2006, to the Claims Administrator. Your request for exclusion must contain: (1) the name of this lawsuit. (2) your full name and current address; and (3) a statement of intention to exclude yourself from this lawsuit.
If the Court approves the Settlement, a judgment will be entered dism issing with prejudice and fully and finally settling the Action as to all Settlement Class Members, except those who properly and timely request exclusion from the Settlement Class in the manner described above.
This Notice is a summary and does not describe all of the details of the proposed Settlement or the Action. For additional details, you may inspect the Court's files, including the Settlement Agreement, at the office of the Clerk of the Los Angeles Superior Court, 600 S. Commonwealth Ave., Los Angeles, CA 90005 during the Court's regular business hours.
DO NOT CALL THE COURT REGARDING THIS NOTICE.
List of Qualifying EPSON Inkjet Printer Models
If you bought leased or received an Epson Inkjet printer between April 8.1999 and May 8, 2006
and your Epson printer is one of the models listed below, you are a potential class member
Epson Stylus C40UX Epson Stylus C42UX Epson Stylus C44UX Epson Stylus C60 Epson Stylus C62 Epson Stylus C64 Epson Stylus C66 Eof.cn Stylus C68 Epson Stylus C80 Epson Stylus C80N ' Epson Stylus C80WN Epson Stylus C82 Epson Stylus C82N Epson Stylus C82WN Epson Stylus C84 Epson Stylus C84N ' Epson Stylus C84WN Epson Stylus C86 Epson Stylus G88 | Epson Stylus Color 300 Epson Stylus Color 3000 Epson Stylus Color 400 Epson Stylus Color 440 Epson Stylus Color 480 Epson Stylus Cotor 480 SX~ Epson Stylus Color 480 SXU Epson Stylus Color 580 Epson Stylus Color 600 Epson Stylus Color 640 Epson Stylus Color 660 Epson Stylus Color 670 Epson Stylus Color 740 Epson Stylus Color 740i Epson Stylus Color 760 Epson Stylus Color 777 Epson Stylus Color 777i ' Epson Stylus Color 8 CUBE Epson Stylus Color 800 Epson Stylus Color 350
Epson Stylus Color 8S0N Epson Stylus Color 860 Epson Stylus Color 880 Epson Stylus Color 880i Epson Stylus Cotor 900 ' Epson Sty lus Color 90CX3 Epson Stylus Color 9O0N Epson Stylus Cotor 980 Epson Stylus Color 980N Epson Stylus Color 1160 Epson Stylus Cotor 1520 Epson Stylus Photo EX Epson Stylus Photo 700 Epson Stylus phcto 750 Epson Stylus Photo 780 Epson Stylus Photo 785EPX Epson Stylus Photo 820 Epson Stylus Photo 825 Epson Stylus Photo 870 ' Epson Stylus Photo 875DC Epson Stylus Photo 875DCS Epson Stylus Photo 890 Epson Stylus Photo 900 Epson Stylus Photo 925 Epfon Stylus Photo 930 Epson Stylus Photo 1200 Epson Stylus Photo 1270 Epson Stylus Photo 1280 ’ Epson Stylus Photo 2000P Epson Stylus Photo 2200 Epson Stylus Photo R200 Epson Stylus Photo R220 Ep'oon Stylus Photo R300 ’ Epson Stylus Photo R300M Epson Stylus Photo R320 Epson Stylus Photo R340 ' Epson Stylus Photo R800 Epson Stylus Photo R1800 Epson Stylus Photo R24C0
Epson 1000ICS Epson Stylus Scan 2030 Epson Stylus Scan 2500 Epson Stylus Scan 2500 Pro Epson Stylus CX1500/ Epson Stylus CX3200 Epson Stylus CX3800 Epson Stylus CX3810 Epson Stylus CX4200 Epson Stylus CX4600 Epson Stylus CX4800 Epson Stylus CX5200 Epson Stylus CX5400 Epson Stylus CX5800F Epson Stylus CX6400 Epson Stylus CX6600 Epson Stylus CX7800 Epson Stylus Photo RX5CO Epson Stylus Photo RX600 Epson Stylus Photo RX620 Epson Stylus Photo RX700 Epson Picturemate Epson P'cturemate Deluxe Epson PctureMate Express Epson Stylus Pro 4000 Epson Stylus Pro 4800 Epson Stylus Pro 5000 Epson Stylus Pro 55
Lead Counsel to the Class
Kabateck Brown Kellner LLP www.kbklawyers.com
Chitwood Harley Harnes LLP www.chitwoodlaw.com
Other Class Counsel
The Ball Law Firm, LLP www.balllawllp.com
Duane Morris LLP www.duanemorris.com
McNicholas & McNicholas, LLP www.mcnicholaslaw.com
Dobrowski, L.L.P. www.dobrowski.com
Jacobson, Russell, Saltz & Fingerman, LLP www.jrsfllp.com
PRINTER FORUM COMMENTS
In Re Epson Ink Cartridge Class Action Cases
Discussion in 'Epson' started by Mike, Apr 13, 200
( Judicial Council Coordination Proceeding No. 4347)
Superior Court of the State of California for the County of Los Angeles
A notice of settlement of a class action lawsuit about Epson ink cartridges has been preliminarily approved. Information about the settlement is available at www.epsonsettlement.com .
This settlement relates to certain qualifying printers listed on the above website which were purchased on or after April 8, 1999 and through May 8, 2006. Epson allegedly in those printers had the ink levels indicate empty while there was available ink in the cartridges. For the terms of the settlement and whether you may participate in the class action settlement check the www.epsonsettlement.com website.
Mike, Apr 13, 2006
+++
I am really surprised Epson rolled over on this one, as there are very valid technical reasons to give an ink message before the ink actually runs out. If the ink was allowed to run out there would be a risk of damage to the rather expensive printheads.
What is next, threatening to sue auto manufacturers because there is still gas left when the needle registers empty?
- Bob Headrick, MS MVP Printing/Imaging
+++
I suppose the question is, how much ink was still in the cartridge when
it read "empty". If there was still 25% then I'd be quite upset and can
see just cause for a class action suit. We're not talking about a $3
dollar cartridge. Usually a set will cost nearly as much as the printer.
-Taliesyn, Apr 14, 2006
+++
It may be true, but it's not acceptible from customer's point of view: you
can't FORCE customer to throw away 1/4 or more of the expensive ink. They
probably would not have got into this trouble if they do not FORCE the
printer to shut down. Instead, they can just simply give a warning. Some
customer may ignore the warning and just continue to print, and cause damage
to the printer. Then it's the customer's problem.
Don't see what's the point here: The engine doesn't shut down as long as you still have gas in the tank, no matter the needle register empty or not.
Besides you are not FORCED to throw away the gas that's left.
On the other hand, they may get sued if there is no gas in the tank while
the needle registers full (or npn-empty), -:).
ZR, Apr 14, 2006
+++
I'd be happy if Epson was forced to re-issue software that would give an honest picture of ink usage, along with a message when it was absolutely necessary to change the cartridge.
HankG, Apr 14, 2006
+++
I'd be satisfied with that end, but Epson must be thinking it's cheaper for them to pay out a pittance amount per printer than to have lawsuits coming in for ruined printers due to ink running out and ruining the head with revamped software that allows more ink to be used. I agree with Bob Headrick's observation in that keeping a high safety net of ink allows Epson to avoid that consequence.
At this point though Epson will have to rethink what margin of unused ink will need to remain in the cartridge when the printer refuses to print.
Perhaps instead of a complete print stoppage at the constant red light a warning should be issued that printing further will cause the head to burn up should the ink run out.
Jan Alter, Apr 14, 2006

More Background On EpsonSettlement.com
EpsonSettlement.com is a historically significant legal information website tied to a major early-2000s consumer class action lawsuit involving printer technology, corporate transparency, and consumer rights. While today it exists primarily as an archived educational resource, the site once served as the official online hub for one of the most widely discussed ink cartridge lawsuits of its time: In re Epson Ink Cartridge Cases.
The website reflects a unique intersection of technology, law, and consumer advocacy during a period when digital products—especially printers and consumables like ink cartridges—were becoming ubiquitous in homes and businesses. It also captures a transitional era of the internet, when standalone informational websites were created to disseminate official legal notices and guide consumers through complex settlement processes.
Ownership, Administration, and Purpose
EpsonSettlement.com was not owned or operated by Epson America, Inc. itself. Instead, it functioned as the official court-authorized settlement website, administered by a third-party claims administrator—most notably firms such as Rust Consulting, Inc.—which specialize in handling large-scale consumer settlements.
The purpose of the site was highly specific:
- To inform eligible consumers about the class action lawsuit
- To explain the terms of the proposed settlement
- To provide access to claim forms, notices, and eligibility criteria
- To outline key legal deadlines and procedural rights
This structure was typical of early class action settlement websites, which often prioritized clarity of legal compliance over user experience or design aesthetics.
Historical Background of the Lawsuit
The lawsuit at the heart of EpsonSettlement.com, In re Epson Ink Cartridge Cases, emerged in the early 2000s amid growing consumer frustration with printer manufacturers. At the time, Epson printers—particularly models within the Stylus and Photo series—were widely used across the United States.
The central allegation was that Epson inkjet printers were programmed to signal that cartridges were “empty” and stop printing even when a measurable amount of ink remained inside. Plaintiffs argued that this constituted:
- Fraudulent concealment
- Breach of implied warranties
- False advertising
- Violations of California consumer protection laws
Epson, while denying wrongdoing, agreed to settle the case to avoid prolonged litigation and associated costs. This is a common outcome in large-scale class actions, where companies weigh reputational risk and legal expenses against the cost of settlement.
Timeline and Legal Milestones
The Epson settlement followed a structured legal timeline typical of class action proceedings:
- April 8, 1999 – May 8, 2006: Eligibility window for affected purchases
- February 7, 2006: Preliminary approval of the settlement
- June 2006: Deadlines for exclusion requests, claim submissions, and objections
- August 15, 2006: Final approval hearing in Los Angeles Superior Court
These milestones were prominently featured on EpsonSettlement.com, ensuring that class members could understand their rights and responsibilities within strict legal timeframes.
The case was overseen by the Superior Court of California in Los Angeles County, a jurisdiction known for handling complex coordinated proceedings.
Eligibility and Scope of the Settlement Class
The settlement applied broadly to individuals and entities across the United States who:
- Purchased or used Epson inkjet printers
- Used Epson-branded ink cartridges
- Did so within the defined eligibility window
This included consumers, small businesses, and even corporate entities, reflecting the widespread adoption of Epson printing technology during that era.
Excluded from the settlement class were:
- Epson and its affiliates
- Distributors and service providers
- Judicial personnel connected to the case
The breadth of eligibility contributed to the case’s scale and visibility, as millions of consumers potentially qualified.
Settlement Benefits and Compensation Structure
One of the most discussed aspects of the Epson settlement—and a major focus of the website—was the structure of compensation.
Eligible participants were offered several options:
- A $45 credit for Epson’s online store per registered printer
- An alternative option combining cash and store credit
- A percentage discount on future Epson purchases
While these benefits appeared straightforward, they sparked criticism among consumers. Many argued that:
- Store credits effectively locked recipients into purchasing more Epson products
- Cash alternatives were relatively modest
- The compensation did not fully reflect perceived losses
Despite these criticisms, the settlement was ultimately approved as “fair, reasonable, and adequate” under legal standards.
Website Structure and User Experience
EpsonSettlement.com was designed with a functional, information-first approach typical of early legal websites. Its key sections included:
- Notice of Settlement
- Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs)
- Claim Forms and Instructions
- List of Qualifying Printers
- Important Dates and Deadlines
Unlike modern websites, it lacked interactive tools, responsive design, or visual storytelling. Instead, it relied heavily on dense legal text and downloadable documents.
This design reflects the internet norms of the mid-2000s, when usability standards were still evolving and legal compliance took precedence over user engagement.
Role in Consumer Awareness and Advocacy
The Epson case—and by extension EpsonSettlement.com—played a meaningful role in shaping consumer awareness around planned obsolescence and product transparency.
The lawsuit highlighted concerns that would later become central to discussions about:
- Proprietary consumables (e.g., ink cartridges, razor blades)
- Software-imposed limitations on hardware
- The right to repair and use purchased products fully
In this sense, the case contributed to a broader cultural shift in how consumers evaluate technology companies and their practices.
Public Reaction and Community Discussion
Public reaction to the Epson settlement was mixed, as reflected in online forums and early tech communities.
Some users supported Epson’s design choices, noting that:
- Preventing cartridges from fully emptying protected print heads
- Hardware damage could result if ink ran completely dry
Others criticized the company, arguing that:
- Consumers should have control over how much ink they use
- Printers should warn, not force shutdowns
- Transparency about ink usage was insufficient
This debate underscored a fundamental tension between engineering decisions and consumer expectations—a theme that persists in modern technology disputes.
Legal and Industry Impact
The Epson settlement had ripple effects across the printing industry and beyond.
Key impacts included:
- Increased scrutiny of consumable-based business models
- Greater emphasis on disclosure in product marketing
- Changes to how companies communicate limitations in user interfaces and packaging
Epson itself agreed to modify certain disclosures related to:
- Ink cartridge functionality
- Estimated ink usage
- Printer behavior when ink levels are low
These changes represented a shift toward greater transparency, even as debates about fairness continued.
Educational Use and Archival Status
Today, EpsonSettlement.com survives largely as an archived resource used in academic and legal education contexts. It has been preserved as part of coursework examining consumer protection, regulatory frameworks, and the evolution of digital commerce.
The site offers a snapshot of:
- Early internet-based legal communication
- Class action settlement processes
- Consumer technology controversies of the 2000s
Its continued availability underscores the importance of preserving digital artifacts that document significant legal and cultural developments.
Comparison to Modern Settlement Websites
Modern class action settlement websites differ significantly from EpsonSettlement.com in several ways:
- Improved user interface and mobile compatibility
- Interactive eligibility checkers
- Digital claim submission systems
- Clearer summaries and visual aids
However, the core purpose remains unchanged: to inform, guide, and process claims for affected consumers.
EpsonSettlement.com represents an early iteration of this model, offering valuable insight into how these systems have evolved.
Cultural and Technological Significance
Beyond its legal function, EpsonSettlement.com occupies a notable place in the history of consumer technology.
It illustrates:
- The growing pains of integrating software controls into physical products
- The challenges of balancing corporate interests with user rights
- The role of the legal system in mediating technological disputes
The case also foreshadowed future controversies involving companies like Apple Inc. and others, where questions of control, transparency, and consumer autonomy remain central.
Insights and Lasting Lessons
Several key lessons emerge from examining EpsonSettlement.com and the underlying lawsuit:
- Transparency is critical: Consumers expect clear communication about product limitations.
- Design decisions have legal implications: Engineering choices can lead to regulatory scrutiny.
- Settlement structures matter: Compensation perceived as restrictive can generate backlash.
- Digital communication evolves: Early websites laid the groundwork for modern user-centric platforms.
These insights continue to influence both legal frameworks and corporate practices today.
~~~
EpsonSettlement.com stands as more than just a settlement website—it is a historical artifact that captures a pivotal moment in the relationship between consumers and technology companies.
By documenting the details of the Epson ink cartridge lawsuit, the site provides valuable insight into:
- The mechanics of class action litigation
- The evolution of consumer protection in the digital age
- The ongoing tension between innovation and accountability
While its design and functionality may feel dated, its significance remains relevant. The issues it addressed—transparency, fairness, and consumer rights—are still at the forefront of modern technological discourse.
THIS SITE IS NOT OPERATED BY EPSON AMERICA, INC. THIS CLASS ACTION SETTLEMENT IS SUPERVISED BY THE COURT AND IS ADMINISTERED BY A CLAIMS ADMINISTRATION FIRM THAT HANDLES ALL ASPECTS OF CLAIM PROCESSING. THIS IS THE ONLY AUTHORIZED WEB SITE FOR THIS SETTLEMENT. PLEASE DO NOT RELY UPON OTHER SITES THAT SET OUT DIFFERENT AND UNAUTHORIZED INFORMATION.
