There is not a clearer quote because that's all there is. The specifics are up to interpretation in every situation. It's not about the packaging or manual – ho

There is not a clearer quote because that's all there is. The specifics are up to interpretation in every situation. It's not about the packaging or manual – hopefully any clandestine listening device tells you that it is one on the box. It's about the device itself. Assume you are a visitor somewhere, back at the time when smart TVs where still new and uncommon. You see two things in a room: A regular-looking doll and a TV. A doll is made out of fabric, so a doll cannot transmit your voice. A TV is – that's known to any layperson – a complex technological object that does a lot of stuff with electronics. It's not absolutely far-fetched to assume a probability that it contains a microphone. That's the difference in the eyes of the law. The "smart doll" is in fact not a doll but a microphone-speaker-device concealed in a doll. The TV does not conceal anything, it's just "electronicy" looking. I've never heard of anybody argue that Smart TVs fall under that law even when they were new.