For decades, many consumers have shared a quiet suspicion about modern electronics: devices do not seem to last as long as they used to. Phones slow down after a few years. Batteries stop holding a charge. Laptops become difficult or impossible to repair. Game consoles and accessories eventually fall out of support even if the hardware itself still works.
Some of this change is the natural result of technological progress. Software evolves quickly. Hardware requirements grow. But critics have long argued that something else may also be happening behind the scenes. They believe some products are intentionally designed to wear out earlier than necessary, encouraging consumers to buy replacements sooner than they otherwise would.
This concept is known as planned obsolescence. In recent years it has become a major policy issue in parts of the world. France has taken one of the strongest positions against it, turning the practice into a criminal offense.
The move has sparked debate across Europe, North America, and the technology industry about how long products should last and what responsibilities manufacturers have toward consumers.
What Planned Obsolescence Actually Means
Planned obsolescence refers to the deliberate design of a product with a limited useful life so that it becomes outdated, unusable, or undesirable sooner than necessary.
This can take several forms:
Technical obsolescence – A device may use components that are difficult to repair or replace, such as sealed batteries or proprietary screws.
Software obsolescence – A product may lose software support after a short period, leaving users without security updates or compatibility with new applications.
Perceived obsolescence – Frequent design changes or marketing campaigns encourage consumers to replace products that still function perfectly.
Not all product replacement cycles fall into this category. Technology naturally improves over time, and many devices are replaced simply because better options exist. Planned obsolescence becomes controversial when companies intentionally design products to fail or degrade prematurely.
The idea is not new. Economists and industrial designers have discussed it since the early twentieth century. One of the most frequently cited historical examples is the Phoebus cartel of the 1920s, in which light bulb manufacturers allegedly agreed to shorten the lifespan of bulbs to increase sales.
Whether modern companies engage in similar practices remains a subject of ongoing debate.
France’s Criminal Law Against Planned Obsolescence
France became the first country to criminalize planned obsolescence in 2015 as part of its Energy Transition for Green Growth Act.
Under French law, planned obsolescence is defined as a strategy by which a manufacturer deliberately reduces the lifespan of a product in order to increase its replacement rate.
If a company is found guilty of intentionally designing a product to fail prematurely, it can face significant penalties. These include fines of up to 300,000 euros or up to 5 percent of the company’s annual revenue, along with possible prison sentences for responsible executives.
The law also introduced several consumer protection measures aimed at extending product lifespans. Manufacturers must provide information about the availability of spare parts. Repairability and durability have become important topics in French consumer policy.
In practice, proving deliberate obsolescence is extremely difficult. Regulators must demonstrate that a company intentionally designed a product to fail sooner than necessary, which requires strong evidence about design decisions and engineering choices.
Even so, the law marked an important symbolic shift. It signaled that governments were beginning to treat product durability as a public interest issue rather than simply a market outcome.
The Apple Battery Controversy and European Scrutiny
One of the most visible examples of the debate occurred in 2017 when Apple acknowledged that software updates for certain iPhone models slowed device performance in order to prevent unexpected shutdowns caused by aging batteries.
Apple argued that the change was intended to preserve stability and extend device usability. Critics saw it as evidence that companies could influence hardware lifespan through software.
The controversy triggered investigations in several countries. In France, Apple ultimately agreed to pay a €25 million settlement in 2020 over allegations that consumers were not clearly informed about the performance management feature.
The case did not prove deliberate planned obsolescence under French criminal standards, but it illustrated how software can affect the perceived lifespan of modern electronics.
Europe’s Broader “Right to Repair” Movement
France’s law is part of a larger European effort to promote repairability and product longevity.
The European Union has introduced regulations requiring manufacturers of certain appliances to make spare parts available for several years after purchase. These rules apply to products such as washing machines, refrigerators, televisions, and other household electronics.
France has also introduced a repairability index that scores certain consumer products on how easy they are to repair. The score appears on product packaging and helps consumers compare durability before making a purchase.
This broader movement aims to reduce electronic waste while giving consumers more control over the products they buy.
Why This Matters for Gaming Hardware
For gamers, the lifespan of hardware is a familiar concern. Modern gaming ecosystems rely on a complex chain of devices:
- Consoles and gaming PCs
- Controllers and accessories
- Graphics cards and storage devices
- Smartphones used for companion apps or mobile gaming
When any one of these components fails prematurely, players often face expensive replacements. The rapid pace of hardware innovation also complicates the issue. Graphics cards, for example, may become obsolete not because they fail physically but because new games demand more powerful hardware.
Still, some design choices have raised concerns among repair advocates. These include sealed components, proprietary connectors, and firmware restrictions that make third party repair difficult. As gaming hardware becomes more integrated and specialized, the question of how long devices should last becomes increasingly relevant.
The Situation in the United States
Unlike France, the United States does not currently have a federal law that criminalizes planned obsolescence.
However, several policy debates are unfolding around similar issues.
Right to Repair Legislation
Many U.S. states have introduced right to repair bills that would require manufacturers to provide spare parts, tools, and documentation necessary for independent repairs.
Supporters include consumer rights organizations, environmental groups, and repair communities. Farmers have also become prominent advocates due to restrictions on repairing modern agricultural equipment.
Technology companies have often resisted these proposals, arguing that unrestricted repair access could create security risks, intellectual property concerns, or safety issues.
In 2023, New York enacted one of the first statewide digital right to repair laws covering certain electronic devices.
Federal Trade Commission Interest
The U.S. Federal Trade Commission has also taken interest in repair restrictions.
In 2021 the FTC released a report titled “Nixing the Fix” which examined whether manufacturers were unfairly limiting consumer repair options. The agency concluded that many repair restrictions lacked clear justification and could harm competition.
While the report did not accuse companies of planned obsolescence directly, it highlighted how repair limitations could shorten product lifespans.
Environmental Concerns and Electronic Waste
Another major driver behind anti obsolescence policies is environmental impact. Electronic waste is one of the fastest growing waste streams in the world. According to the United Nations Global E-Waste Monitor, tens of millions of tons of electronic waste are generated each year.
Many devices contain rare metals and materials that are difficult to recycle. When products fail prematurely or cannot be repaired, they often end up in landfills.
Longer lasting devices reduce the need for constant manufacturing and disposal. For policymakers concerned with sustainability, product durability has become a key part of environmental strategy. France’s law fits into this broader effort to create a more circular economy where products remain useful for longer periods.
Why Many Consumers Thought This Was Already Illegal
For many people, the idea that companies could intentionally design products to fail comes as a surprise. It feels like something that should already violate consumer protection laws.
The reality is more complicated. Most legal systems focus on deception or safety. If a company sells a defective product or misrepresents its capabilities, it can face legal consequences.
But designing a product with a limited lifespan is not automatically illegal. Manufacturers are generally free to balance durability, cost, weight, performance, and aesthetics in whatever way they choose.
As long as the product functions as advertised, courts have historically been reluctant to intervene in design decisions. France’s law attempts to push beyond that boundary by targeting intentional strategies that reduce durability.
Industry Perspective
Manufacturers often argue that shorter product cycles are driven by consumer demand rather than corporate manipulation. Modern technology evolves rapidly. Consumers frequently upgrade devices not because the old ones fail but because new features become available.
Companies also face design tradeoffs. Making devices thinner, lighter, and more powerful can sometimes reduce repairability or long term durability. Sealed batteries, for example, allow manufacturers to design slimmer devices but make battery replacement more difficult.
From the industry’s point of view, many of these decisions reflect engineering constraints rather than deliberate attempts to force product replacement.
What Happens Next
France’s criminal approach to planned obsolescence remains unusual, but it has influenced discussions in other countries. The European Union continues to explore policies that promote longer product lifespans. Repairability labeling and spare part requirements are expanding to additional categories of electronics.
In the United States, the debate has focused more heavily on repair rights than criminal penalties. State level legislation and regulatory actions are gradually shaping how manufacturers handle repairs and parts availability. The outcome will likely shape how future electronics are designed.
A Long Running Question in the Technology Age
Technology moves quickly. For gamers and everyday consumers alike, the pace of hardware change is part of the excitement of the digital world.
But the question of how long devices should last is becoming harder to ignore. France’s decision to criminalize planned obsolescence highlights a growing belief that product durability is not just a technical matter. It is a consumer rights issue, an environmental issue, and increasingly a political one.
Whether other countries adopt similar laws remains to be seen. What is clear is that the conversation around repair, longevity, and responsible design is only beginning.
As electronics become more central to daily life, the expectation that devices should last longer may become just as important as the new features that replace them.