The third option is for manufacturers, such as through the manufacturer’s website, to “make manufacturer or non-manufacturer branded remanufactured cartridges available to purchasers, at least for registered products.”
At the time of this writing, 38,291 devices are under the EPEAT 1.0 registry. There are 163 products registered under EPEAT 2.0, but no printers. All of this underlines how new the EPEAT 2.0 registry is and it’s likely that GEC is still working to register more devices like printers.
Still, the international ITC is skeptical about HP’s adherence to EPEAT 2.0 criteria, especially given that “HP released firmware 2602a/b to eleven printer models on January 29, 2026,” the trade group said in a press release last week. (At least some firmware updates, including for the nearly 9-year-old OfficeJet Pro 7720, appear to have come out in February.)
“HP’s recent behavior is symptomatic of a larger pattern,” the International ITC release said. “HP positions itself as a leader in sustainability, circular business models and responsible product design, but instead of proactively aligning its products and practices with the highest environmental standards like EPEAT 2.0, HP prioritizes profits first and waits until the threat of external scrutiny or non-compliance forces change.”
In an email discussion with Ars Technica, Tricia Judge, executive director and general counsel of Int’l ITC, explained that HP’s firmware update succeeded the launch of the EPEAT 2.0 registry. He explained why the international ITC press release called out HP but not other printer manufacturers:
HP is the only one with lockout chips that are triggered using firmware “upgrades” that claim “security” as justification for their existence. HP is the only company that misleads and disappoints its own customers by staying away from environmentally better competition. Others have made some interesting efforts in the past to create a competitive advantage.
In 2023, the International ITC wrote a letter to GEC requesting that GEC delist at least 101 HP printers from the (original) EPEAT registry, primarily due to dynamic security concerns. GEC rejected the request for international ITC.
The judge said, “EPEAT 1.0 was very basic (no interference with the use of reconditioned cartridges), and HP claimed that its statements (suppressed in its marketing materials and/or on its website) that it did not interfere with the use of reconditioned cartridges was a loophole that the GEC considered acceptable.” “We were trying to close that loophole with EPEAT 2.0. We didn’t get it as well as we hoped, but it’s better.
HP did not respond to Ars Technica’s request for comment on this story.
<a href