Who is in a better position to know if such a feature doesn't work?

It’s not really related to determination of use value or other qualitative questions. If my blender, or even my blood pressure machines, gets recalled, the company doesn’t break into my house to cut the wires for my safety. How is this not a basic violation of the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act?

Edit: canada and cyprus only is why.

Right. But you own your blender. It's naïve to think you own your phone just because you carry it around.

Is it? That definition of property worked pretty well. Try and take it I’ll hit you, etc. Otherwise why pay for it and why not just take it by force?

Just a matter of time before these companies get too greedy and get hit with violence.

Maybe it shouldn't be, but it is. People are putting microphones in their homes that Amazon controls and that serve no purpose but to let them spend money with Amazon more conveniently. The old definition of property doesn't really capture that does it?