I mean, it seems like Inc's pretty clear in their position that Google could just pay for the technology they infringed ("The company doesn't want to pay Sonos

I mean, it seems like Inc's pretty clear in their position that Google could just pay for the technology they infringed ("The company doesn't want to pay Sonos for technology it copied") rather than backtrack on features they promised their users, and it's a point that stands pretty well on its own without even needing a long article to back it, though this certainly helps their readers with the background behind what's going on. I'm keen on seeing whether Google ends up on the receiving end of a class action suit for disabling features that were sold to customers and then disabled after the fact.