> Yet, it's still vexing to see another example of a company changing the capabilities of its products after people already bought them.
Seems to me, this is the key point. From a user perspective, it's completely mindboggling that after a decade+ of internet-connected devices, legislation still pretends they don't exist.
Of course from a political, "corporate-first" perspective, it's very easy to understand...
> Yet, it's still vexing to see another example of a company changing the capabilities of its products after people already bought them.
Seems to me, this is the key point. From a user perspective, it's completely mindboggling that after a decade+ of internet-connected devices, legislation still pretends they don't exist.
Of course from a political, "corporate-first" perspective, it's very easy to understand...
This kind of thing doesn't seem like it complies with the Texas Deceptive Trade Practices Act.
https://texaslawhelp.org/article/deceptive-trade-practices-a...
It would be interesting to see what a legal expert has to say.
Either way, the right time may be now for Texans to formally request your money back, to preserve your rights regardless of warranty expiration.