User:^&*/

Digital Ownership Superact

DISCLAIMER: This article is perphaps more opinionated and it may uses facts (relevant to the violation of consumer right) (however it affects, maybe, a certain community, this isn't owned by me, and neither is this issue relates to me; personally). And may contain grammatical errors.

It also proposes an hypothetical (collection of) acts; the intention of this (hypothetical; collection of) act is help improve for those who tinker on their BOUGHT devices (more information below)

ADDENDUM: The introduction of this paragraph is a piece of my perspective. However this may seems contradictory as stated "neither is this issue relates to me; personally", however its explain the motive behind the proposal act.

---

The Motive

I switched from Apple to Android, since one of its core value of android is rooting; as this decision was due to Apple's infame of banning the ability to root the bootloader (to only be jailbroken; even then around Wednesday 25th February; around the time of writing this article; this have gotten harder or more restrictive). I have gotten a Samsung device, (since it was android), however until few days, I realised, they blocked the bootloader recently in OneUI 8. Nuked It (Note: it does reference other companies doing this dirty trick)

So what?

You may think that this issue isn't major. This I disagree (to an extent; it's not important to a level such as the genocide in Gaza as an example, but I digress). In a common argument, that YOUR device YOU meant to own. The "removal of unlocking the bootloader"; such companies I will predict they will say "its for security reasons" but they and I know its there to just to control YOU. This is perphaps a weak argument as it opinionated. However it can be expanded upon such as "loss" of control to be reinforced.

Another argument is that its an PRIVACY CONCERN! For example, you not allowed to switch OS, if you wanted to. So this limits to the Stock OS, which is proprietary likely, as they pre-installed it. The companies can add malware or more specifically, a subset, which is spyware, such that they can serve ads (most likely). Short argument. I know this can be expanded however this will be keep short.

Final argument (for this subsection) is that this issue may not be affecting YOU but it is indirectly in the near future or now, whether you like it or not. The fact they blocked the bootloader can be suggesting that this could further be re-inforced by other privacy-invasive acts such as Age Verification, and since this benefits the company (liking data collection for M-O-NEY) and the politicians; this allows to sneakily add that abominable feature and takes advantage: by either having dark patterns in the privacy terms and services (such as purposely using weasel words), (most likely) people don't want to read and rather use the device (now) and because its proprietary software, this can go undetected for a while. Additionally, the Age Verification is worsen presented by this video (Note it contains swear words).

So what do you propose?

Before I say "I propose ...", I am not a legal expert nor have the experience in law therefore if the act was applied, this could do more harm than good (despite my intention of this act to help me and others in a privacy-focused way since too many acts are AGAINST privacy, what about acts that GIVES privacy).

Additionally, this proposed act is of course, just an idea, it can be debated to be in a better form, a fairer form or a form that goes against what it was originally meant, whatever it is, as long it forces manufacturers (making hardware and/or software) to allow FULLY-OFFLINE-BOOTLOADER-UNLOCKING option, with HARSH punishments (such as fines since they can pay and further reinforces the idea that the rich gets away but can be included with another punishments so long this a disincentive rather than a gimmick to these multi-billionaire companies)