> This court case shows that we kinda now already have one. That's patently wrong. The point of the fine was not that the phones were noticeably slower after t

> This court case shows that we kinda now already have one. That's patently wrong. The point of the fine was not that the phones were noticeably slower after the upgrade. The point of the fine was that the slowness was motivated as a way of inducing forced obsolescence. The manufacturers forced the updates with no rollback mechanism to render phones unusable and thus force their users to purchase replacements. If users could roll back the changes then the manufacturers wouldnt be fined.