[parasubvert]

That's a highly creative interpretation of events. The software license agreement usually upfront covers what can or cannot not change. It is pretty rare in most countries to see successful legal action for changed features, but best of luck.

[shakna]

The ACCC is more than happy to explain unenforceable terms, if you'd like to do business with Australia.

Feel free to consult Steam, Google, Meta and others, if a software license is enough to ignore consumer rights.

[parasubvert]

I look forward to them sternly changing Bambu Labs' practices!

[tankenmate]

They will just fine them into oblivion; they are known to fine companies AUD10M to AUD50M for this sort of thing, and from 1st April this year they can now fine up to AUD100M.

Will this mean that Bambu will withdraw from the Australian market? Possibly maybe probably, but the ACCC takes a very hard stance against bait and switch.

[anakaine]

The largest ACCC fine to date for a company undertaking anti consumer practices is $483m against an educational provider for misleading students.

I'd be reasonably happy to lodge a complaint if I could find a version that's reasonably articulated. As a Bambu customer in Australia I switched my printer to local mode and its been great.

[autoexec]

It's a whole lot better than the US, but AUD100M isn't enough to scare a lot of companies. A law with real teeth would go after an increasing percentage of their revenue for each offense.

[marcus_holmes]

As a percentage of global revenue, sure, it's not much. But as a percentage of what that company is likely to make in the Australian market, it can be significant.

[DoesntMatter22]

Australia is a small enough market to not matter much

[ga_to]

Australian customer protection laws were the initial reason why Valve introduced refunds into Steam.

[shakna]

Then why did those company fight, and not just leave...?

Worth pointing out also that the US is the odd one out, here. Europe also enforces consumer rights.

[realusername]

The only place you can change contracts at will on the company side is the US, and even there it probably depends on the state.

This kind of firmware update to remotely disable feature is also illegal in the EU

[bayindirh]

A small, more ethical company filling the void Bambu Lab left can grow much faster and eat into Bambu's market share in a relatively short time.

Yes, it's not as simple as that, but it's not that impossible either.

[josephg]

Taking functionality away from a product after you bought it is a scum move. If the law lets them get away with it, the law should be changed.

When I buy a product, I look at reviews and make my purchasing decision on the features and functionality at the time of sale. If a software update later ruins that, I want the option to get my money back.

[mttpwll]

No, it’s not creative at all, it’s what happened — I have first hand experience to corroborate this.

Regardless, at least in the US, not only are software-based ToS becoming unenforceable, but there’s a large upswing towards “right to repair” legislation, which, I think, is what you’re arguing against here… and I really think you’re going to be on the wrong side of history with your current line of thinking (despite what Bambu Labs does).

[mystraline]

The "agreement" is at best coerced, and under blackmail of hardware you bought and paid for.

At worst, its a fraudulent indefinite rental masquerading as a 'sale'.

And lets discuss 'updates that fuck over your hardware'. In dwcent countries, thats hacking, and a serious criminal charge. But lol, companies are somehow exempt.

[tannertech]

The license agreement being the AGPLv3?