>Who initiates it matters because if a TV vendor can arbitrarily brick your TV for something after you've paid cash for it, then that smells of theft. The same thing if a TelCo could or would arbitrarily brick a device I paid for. The distinction is that I'm telling them to do this to my phone.
What happened in south africa:
* TVs are sitting inside a factory
* TVs are owned by samsung
* factory gets robbed
* the owner (samsung) tells the manufacturer (samsung) to brick the devices
I fail to see how it's different than:
* iPhone is sitting in your pocket
* iPhone is owned by you
* you get robbed
* the owner (you) tells the manufacturer (apple) to brick the device
> Should a customer’s TV be incorrectly blocked, the functionality can be reinstated once proof of purchase and a valid TV license is shared to serv.manager@samsung.com or click here for more information
That means the Samsung TV's call home. How do they know when to stop calling home? The answer is they don't. That's one layer of the problem.
The second layer being that they can "incorrectly" brick someone's TV. Remote device administration when done by a TelCo requires a whole ton of validation, your eSIM goes through a fairly extensive validation check when it logs onto a network, which is why it has this capability in the first place. They are not the same thing in this way either. If TelCo's started accidentally bricking peoples phones I think you'd see similar criticism of the practice.
The third layer, as mentioned in other threads, is that most people don't keep receipts. A TelCo knows you went through an activation process with a certain phone number. It's a little easier to target at that point. You don't need to dig up a receipt from months or years ago.
>The second layer being that they can "incorrectly" brick someone's TV.
What gave you that impression? The statement put out by samsung? It's reasonable to think that they keep very good records of where a given TV should be and whether it was at a looted factory. If the TV was blacklisted, it's almost certain to have been looted. The statement is just a CYA to prevent a PR nightmare on the off chance that some TVs make it back into the retail supply chain and into the hands of an unsuspecting buyer. Legally speaking, it's still stolen property and the customer can't keep it, but Samsung doesn't think exercising that right is worth the hassle/negative press.
>The third layer, as mentioned in other threads, is that most people don't keep receipts.
People don't keep receipts for a $1000+ purchase? On the off chance they don't, they can get the retailer to make a copy, with supporting documentation.
>You don't need to dig up a receipt from months or years ago.
This is for devices that were looted weeks before. I see no indications that they're going to use this to do random ownership checks.
What happened in south africa:
* TVs are sitting inside a factory
* TVs are owned by samsung
* factory gets robbed
* the owner (samsung) tells the manufacturer (samsung) to brick the devices
I fail to see how it's different than:
* iPhone is sitting in your pocket
* iPhone is owned by you
* you get robbed
* the owner (you) tells the manufacturer (apple) to brick the device