Reminder that I don’t like the company’s stance on the matter.
What you have posted is your interpretation of the definition, which has little legal or practical value. A product does not need a successor, superior or otherwise, to become obsolete. Nothing you have posted has any relation to the definition of obsolete, and are mostly word play.
That being said, right to repair needs to become a real thing and companies should be supplying repair manuals for items they consider obsolete.
According to the dictionary the company is lying.
I certainly don’t agree with the company’s position, but did you read definition 1b? I think you may have stopped reading a little early
I tripple checked before posting. 1b describes technological fashion.
Leg prothesis are not out of fashion for people who need them.
There is no alternative clearly superior v2 product that i could find either.
Reminder that I don’t like the company’s stance on the matter.
What you have posted is your interpretation of the definition, which has little legal or practical value. A product does not need a successor, superior or otherwise, to become obsolete. Nothing you have posted has any relation to the definition of obsolete, and are mostly word play.
That being said, right to repair needs to become a real thing and companies should be supplying repair manuals for items they consider obsolete.
“No longer useful” according the company, as it doesn’t make them money anymore.
I guess we will see if “there’s no such things as bad publicity” works out for them.