Earlier quoted context omitted.
If that's the case, why don't they already do this? It's totally feasible to design a phone that will brick itself when your contract ends. There's no legal impediment to doing it either.
Don't give them the idea. I can imagine the reasoning: "We've had disposable cameras that were never truly the customer's property, may as well extend it to phones." It could be argued that Apple were already doing this. Remember their updates that knowingly slowed down older phones? They claimed it was for performance reasons, but nowhere informed the user of this practice... Src: https://www.techdirt.com/articles/2…
Repairing your smartphone or installing a ROM will now be a crime in Mexico
111–114 of 114 posts
Re: Repairing your smartphone or installing a ROM will now be a crime in Mexico
#112Earlier quoted context omitted.
For the first two years of ownership. https://www.bimmerboost.com/content.php?7348-BMW-ignores-the...
If you want to cherry pick isolated issues in an attempt to downplay how much better performing modern BMW's are overall I can make a huge list of performance cars that have notable issues * E36 M3 upper shock tower cracking * E46 M3 subframe cracking * C6 Z06 valve guides * 996 and 997 Porsche IMS bearings * GT-R transmission failures (had to have mine replaced) * W204 C63 AMG head bolts Happy to provide more exampl…
Re: Repairing your smartphone or installing a ROM will now be a crime in Mexico
#113Earlier quoted context omitted.
In the Norwegian case it turned out refurbishing company was the one printing additional Apple logos on _non Apple_ parts of the display. Its one thing to refurbish a display by gluing replacement glass on original LCD. Its another to then plaster the glass part with Apple logos and fake serial numbers.
>refurbishing company was the one printing additional Apple logos on _non Apple_ parts of the display. Where did you get this? There is no such thing mentioned in the verdict nor any reporting. The closest you can find is one of the prior cases the court references where a fishery tools seller used logos of another company.
The screens were real Apple hardware, with newly reprinted Apple logos by someone in China.
point 20 "Høgsterett legg difor til grunn lagmannsrettens vurdering av at dei innførte skjermane ikkje er originale, at dei påførte varemerka er identiske med Apples registrerte figurmerke, at varemerka ikkje er påførte av Apple, og at dei er dekt over med tusj som let seg fjerne. "
+ the fact he was billed for "Original OEM screens"