Could you read and understand the information behind the link before replying with nonsense?
FYI: there were waterproof phones before replaceable batteries disappeared. Also the Fairphone for example IPS rated for resistant, so not perfect, but it’s possible.
Usually legislation is intentionally vague like that, ultimately courts will decide what that really means in practice.
It will end up being just reasonable. Any person can have a reasonable expectation that they will be able to replace the battery with a reasonable amount of time and effort, with readily available tools, with a reasonable amount of guidance.
If you were a judge would you say that it’s reasonable to expect people to be able to replace soldered components on their phones?
Could you read and understand the information behind the link before replying with nonsense?
FYI: there were waterproof phones before replaceable batteries disappeared. Also the Fairphone for example IPS rated for resistant, so not perfect, but it’s possible.
“User replaceable” just means that they have to make it possible, not easy.
Usually legislation is intentionally vague like that, ultimately courts will decide what that really means in practice.
It will end up being just reasonable. Any person can have a reasonable expectation that they will be able to replace the battery with a reasonable amount of time and effort, with readily available tools, with a reasonable amount of guidance.
If you were a judge would you say that it’s reasonable to expect people to be able to replace soldered components on their phones?
None of that addresses his point that “removable by the user” is not clearly defined. I didn’t see any definition for it in the link you posted.