So deciding not to implement something is now a crime even if your implementation would be faulty. We can never get out from underneath of this madness until class action suits are eliminated. Let's get crazy...Apple had to remove/disable the able to do blood oxygen capability after the ITC ruling and later chose not to settle (license) with Masimo. Knowing that Apple knew how to implement it, had implemented it and could continue to implement it, if someone had a heart issue that could have been identified by the blood oxygen app should they be able to sue because of Apple's decision to not implement in new watches?
or
Luxury cars typically have more safety features or more advanced ones than basic cars. A manufacturer adds pedestrian sensing with auto-braking to avoid hitting someone who goes in front of or behind the car and collision with them is likely. A person is hit by a car that does not have the pedestrian sensing auto-braking feature. Should the person who was hit be able to sue the auto manufacturer because they chose to exclude this safety feature for whatever reason (price/cost, model differentiation, design limitations, waiting for a major redesign, supply issues, etc). I see no difference.
