The customer can still choose to buy a whole new set of headphones if their case fails or gets lost, if that's really the experience they want. Offering a replacement doesn't change that.
No intelligent or sane person would enter into a contract that is nothing but downside for them. In what situation would someone want to be obligated to buy a whole new set of headphones because they can't charge their current set anymore due to a missing/broken case?
> Because it's destroying the planet creating mountains of ewaste. And because as a consumer, I don't want to spend a week doing research on every product to make sure they aren't abusing my rights in some confusing way that only shows up years down the line.
We shouldn’t make an entire population hunt through fine print, or research every situation that might come up with a product over the lifetime of ownership, to protect themselves from a practice that seeks to enrich companies while offering no defensible improvement to the product.
Can you name even one way locking down a charging case makes the product better?
Consenting adults can use contracts and agreements to restrict their later choices. Eg a farmer and a super market can contract today to trade potatoes next year.
Strictly speaking, entering that contract takes away a choice in the future.
Or a car company might offer today to buy back your car in the future for a given price. If you ban that contract, they can still choose to buy back that car in the future, but the customer cannot rely on it today.
Your argument only makes sense in markets with high competition and high information. But those aren't the conditions of the markets today.
You're acting like there is a company that actually provides the things people are complaining about. But people are complaining because they can't buy what they want. So stop arguing in bad faith.
> Eg a farmer and a super market can contract today to trade potatoes next year.
So imagine I have a contract to buy potatoes next year and they all are rotten. You're arguing "well the contract didn't specify that they wouldn't be rotten." What a shitty thing and of course the seller will be sued. There's implicit parts to the contract. Even if you hid in the contract "might be rotten" it's clear that's not in good faith. That has big externalities as people no longer trust potatoes. Which is exactly what we're seeing happening in tech...
