The lawsuit you described in the first question would be without merit. The class action lawsuit stemming from the second would be choc full of merit.

If the fridge is in my house and hammers aren't banned yet then that fridge will not be showing me ads.

▲

duskdozer 3 hours ago | parent | next [-]

It might also not be keeping your food cold, if they build it so that a screen failure bricks the thing

	▲	gentooflux 2 hours ago \| parent [-]
		If a company intentionally spoiled my food out of spite I would sue them. If they did it to all of their customers that becomes class action. They cannot force their customers into a contract which would include allowing them to spoil your food out of spite, that contract would not be legally binding.

▲

fzeroracer 4 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

It would be with merit, because it would be part of the contract you signed when you bought the damn thing. We already live in a world where any attempt to bypass DRM on things you've bought is tantamount to a potential legal battle if they really wanted to be assholes about it. Where you don't really own the things you buy.

▲

gentooflux 4 hours ago | parent [-]

Drm is one thing, taping construction paper over a screen is another. That contract would be unenforceable. Shit is dystopian lately, but you're being hyperbolic.

▲

whynotmaybe 3 hours ago | parent [-]

And what about ads on gas pump?

In many places, you can't legally buy gas outside of a gas pump that have a strong tendency to show more and more ads.

	▲	gentooflux 3 hours ago \| parent [-]
		You don't own the gas pump, and it isn't in your house.