Revision as of 23:10, 18 May 2025

❗Article Status Notice: This Article is a stub

Notice: This Article Requires Additional Expansion

This article is underdeveloped, and needs additional work to meet the wiki's Content Guidelines and be in line with our Mission Statement for comprehensive coverage of consumer protection issues. Issues may include:

This article needs to be expanded to provide meaningful information
This article requires additional verifiable evidence to demonstrate systemic impact
More documentation is needed to establish how this reflects broader consumer protection concerns
The connection between individual incidents and company-wide practices needs to be better established
The article is simply too short, and lacks sufficient content

How you can help:

Add documented examples with verifiable sources
Provide evidence of similar incidents affecting other consumers
Include relevant company policies or communications that demonstrate systemic practices
Link to credible reporting that covers these issues
Flesh out the article with relevant information

This notice will be removed once the article is sufficiently developed. Once you believe the article is ready to have its notice removed, visit the Discord (join here) and post to the #appeals channel, or mention its status on the article's talk page.

Overview

Planned obsolescence is a business strategy where products are intentionally designed to become obsolete, undesirable, or to stop functioning within a predetermined time-frame, forcing consumers to replace them.

The phrase "planned obsolescence" was coined in 1932 by Bernard London, who proposed mandatory product expiration to stimulate Depression-era economies. Brooks Stevens later popularized it in the 1950s, defining it as instilling a desire for newer products "sooner than necessary".

Types of Planned Obsolescence

Contrived Durability: Designing products with inferior materials or components or non repairable parts.

Systemic Obsolescence: Technological incompatibility, such as software updates rendering older devices unusable.

Perceived Obsolescence: Marketing-driven trends that make functional items seem outdated.

Legal Obsolescence: Regulatory bans.

A foundational 1984 Stanford study theorized that monopolists intentionally reduce product durability to maximize profits by forcing repeat purchases. Oligopolists may collude to shorten product lifespans, though outcomes depend on market dynamics.^[1]

Famous Planned Obsolescence Cases

Cases
Year	Company	Product	Details
2017	Apple	iPhones	Apple admitted it had released software updates that could slow down older iPhone models when their batteries degraded. This was allegedly done to prevent unexpected shutdowns caused by aging batteries. This resulted in 3 settlements totaling over USD $600M^[2]
2018	Samsung	Galaxy Note 4	Italy’s antitrust body fined Samsung €5 million regarding software updates that allegedly slowed down certain Galaxy phones.^[3]
2016	HP	Printer	HP released firmware updates for "Dynamic Security", causing printers to show error messages or stop working if a non-HP-branded cartridge was installed. Multiple settlements were reached totaling over USD $5M between 2016 and 2020.^[4]
1925	Associated Electrical Industries(UK), General Electric(US), Osram(GER), Phillips(US), Tungsram(HUN)	Incandescent Light Bulbs	One of the earliest examples of planned obsolescence. On January 15, 1925 corporations based in Europe and the U.S. incorperated a cartel called, Phœbus S.A. Compagnie Industrielle pour le Développement de l'Éclairage, Industrial Company for the Development of Lighting. Until 1939, Phoebus S.A. kept the life-span of light bulbs to 1,000 hours. After the cartel was dissolved the industry continued this practice for years.^[5]

References

REDIRECT Self-destructive design

[1] Bulow, Jeremy (1984). "An Economic Theory of Planned Obsolescence". Stanford Graduate School of Business.

[2] ttps://thehill.com/changing-america/enrichment/science/4153770-apple-to-start-paying-out-claims-in-500m-iphone-slowdown-lawsuit-reports/

[3] ttps://www.theguardian.com/technology/2018/oct/24/apple-samsung-fined-for-slowing-down-phones

[4] ttps://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2024/01/hp-sued-again-for-blocking-third-party-ink-from-printers-accused-of-monopoly/

[5] ttps://law.justia.com/cases/federal/district-courts/FSupp/82/753/1755675/

[1]

[2]

[3]

[4]

[5]

@@ Line 1: / Line 1: @@
 {{StubNotice}}
 =Overview=
-'''Planned obsolescence''' is a form of malicious product design that intentionally shortens the lifespan of a product, often in such a way that it fails soon after the legally mandated warranty period. In recent years, software and firmware updates have increasingly been used to augment planned obsolescence, for example by requiring replacement components to be validated by a whitelist.
+'''Planned obsolescence''' is a business strategy where products are intentionally designed to become obsolete, undesirable, or to stop functioning within a predetermined time-frame, forcing consumers to replace them.
-In most cases of planned obsolescence, the producer of the product uses this malicious effect for one purpose: profit, and it makes quite a bit of sense if we look at it from the company's perspective. Imagine a company like [[wikipedia:Bic_(company)#Pens|Bic]], who makes the Cristal ball point pen (since 1950). Let's imagine this company figured out a way to make a ball point pen that lasts "forever", perhaps someone's lifetime. This consumer never has to buy another pen (unless they lose it or break it), so Bic would make far less profit, and they might even find it hard to keep their employees working, which would cause a large chain reaction of things that need to change.
+   The phrase "planned obsolescence" was coined in 1932 by Bernard London, who proposed mandatory product expiration to stimulate Depression-era economies. Brooks Stevens later popularized it in the 1950s, defining it as instilling a desire for newer products "sooner than necessary".
-However, the above example is for a physical product. The other case we often see, and which is becoming far more relevant in the current day, are electronic products like apps, games, and services. Back in the time of CDs, a game could be purchased once and used again and again. Now, products such as that are far less common, as most electronic companies have strayed to a subscription based service (or free services that implement ads or both). However, it isn't the re-usable copy or the subscription copy that's the problem, it's often how the company goes from point A to point B. They make the physical, one time purchase copy, obsolete, and move to the new form where they can continuously charge the consumer so they make more profit.
+Types of Planned Obsolescence
-It is important to point out that not all cases of planned obsolescence are bad. Companies making a profit isn't bad either, since they tend to pay their employees, which is how many of us make a living. The largest thing is when they take something good and perfectly functional and alter it in some way to make it work worse to encourage or force the consumer to buy their new version. This is what this page focuses on most: malicious planned
+   Contrived Durability: Designing products with inferior materials or components or non repairable parts.
+   Systemic Obsolescence: Technological incompatibility, such as software updates rendering older devices unusable.
+   Perceived Obsolescence: Marketing-driven trends that make functional items seem outdated.
+   Legal Obsolescence: Regulatory bans.
+A foundational 1984 Stanford study theorized that monopolists intentionally reduce product durability to maximize profits by forcing repeat purchases. Oligopolists may collude to shorten product lifespans, though outcomes depend on market dynamics.<ref>{{Cite journal |last=Bulow |first=Jeremy |date=1984 |title=An Economic Theory of Planned Obsolescence |url=https://www.gsb.stanford.edu/faculty-research/working-papers/economic-theory-planned-obsolescence |journal=Stanford Graduate School of Business}}</ref>
 =Famous Planned Obsolescence Cases=

Planned obsolescence: Difference between revisions

Revision as of 23:10, 18 May 2025

Overview

Famous Planned Obsolescence Cases

See Also

References