> Apple (and other manufacturers) have a big interest to not have people feel that their hardware is shitty. I haven't heard anyone claim Apple does this becau

> Apple (and other manufacturers) have a big interest to not have people feel that their hardware is shitty. I haven't heard anyone claim Apple does this because they have indigestion or really like the smell of landfills. Of course they have interests. They are not, however necessarily legitimate interests, or ones that outweigh the interests of those who purchase their devices. We, as a species, have a lot of history with artifacts we make and trade with one another. And by and large, we've come to the conclusion that if I sell you something, I cease having a legitimate interest in what you do with it. This notion has been blurred by the need for operating system updates (hammers didn't need those) and the proliferation of "cloud"/OPC services. And now we are trying to find the right balance. But there's a pretty good bet that abusing trademark law to control a secondary market with what amounts to literally an engineered legal argument is a pretty good indication that Apple is... getting creative, and I think the fact of the matter is that "we" won't put up with that shit long-term. Most humans value their property rights over HugeCo's reputational concerns. > Inject some reality into your thinking. Physician, heal thyself.