Reminder that I don’t like the company’s stance on the matter.
What you have posted is your interpretation of the definition, which has little legal or practical value. A product does not need a successor, superior or otherwise, to become obsolete. Nothing you have posted has any relation to the definition of obsolete, and are mostly word play.
That being said, right to repair needs to become a real thing and companies should be supplying repair manuals for items they consider obsolete.
All i did was a websearch for “Obsolete dictionary meaning”
Its the interpretation of www.merriam-webster.com which in its own words is “an Encyclopaedia Britannica company, America’s leading provider of language information for more than 180 years.”
I get that language is semantics, i use a lot of creative liberties with language all the time but i still think that “Not longer enough profit potential” is not covered under the term “Obsolete” You could argue some doubt but its a cold-hearted business, they don’t get the benefit of doubt. Also my expression doesn’t really need legal or practical value. I am glad to have said what i did.
I certainly don’t agree with the company’s position, but did you read definition 1b? I think you may have stopped reading a little early
I tripple checked before posting. 1b describes technological fashion.
Leg prothesis are not out of fashion for people who need them.
There is no alternative clearly superior v2 product that i could find either.
Reminder that I don’t like the company’s stance on the matter.
What you have posted is your interpretation of the definition, which has little legal or practical value. A product does not need a successor, superior or otherwise, to become obsolete. Nothing you have posted has any relation to the definition of obsolete, and are mostly word play.
That being said, right to repair needs to become a real thing and companies should be supplying repair manuals for items they consider obsolete.
All i did was a websearch for “Obsolete dictionary meaning”
Its the interpretation of www.merriam-webster.com which in its own words is “an Encyclopaedia Britannica company, America’s leading provider of language information for more than 180 years.”
I get that language is semantics, i use a lot of creative liberties with language all the time but i still think that “Not longer enough profit potential” is not covered under the term “Obsolete” You could argue some doubt but its a cold-hearted business, they don’t get the benefit of doubt. Also my expression doesn’t really need legal or practical value. I am glad to have said what i did.