Planned obsolescence as an unfair commercial practice, is a strategy that, through the intentional engineering of a limited lifespan for goods, exerts profound effects on consumer rights and the equitable balance of the market. The main research question is: what is the legal concept and nature of planned obsolescence, and what are its instances as unfair commercial practices? Employing a comparative-analytical method and relying on library-based resources, this article identifies the approaches of the European Union and the United States legal systems and seeks to analyze the position of the Iranian legal system in confronting this phenomenon. The findings confirm that the European Union, through the adoption of preventive policies (mandatory transparency regarding product durability, the right to repair, and the strengthening of competition), has established a coherent framework. The United States relies primarily on reactive instruments (class actions and anti-fraud rules), the effectiveness of which is limited due to the difficulty of proving producer intent. In Iran, despite fragmented capacities within consumer protection and e-commerce laws, there exists no precise definition of planned obsolescence as an unfair practice, and the weakness of enforcement mechanisms has hindered effective governance against this phenomenon. The comparative analysis suggests that reforms such as the institutionalization of the right to repair, the formulation of transparency standards concerning product durability, and the establishment of collective redress mechanisms can bring the Iranian legal system closer to an efficient global model and establish a fairer balance between the rights of producers and consumers.