[T-Mobile LG G2x] Core Memory:
I phoned them and got a re-evaluation, Korea wasn't mentioned, based on leaving LG out of the boilerplate reply and my explanation that although the complaint appears trivial it isn't and why it isn't. I also said that I didn't like the cherry picking of investigations that superficially appear to be more important than others. As well, I explained that, although it is one cell phone model, the practise of promising upgradeability and upgrades by phone manufacturers and retailers and not providing them is rampant in the cell phone business/industry and that there material damages to Canadian consumers result from that practise. Additionally, I explained how the cell phone manufacturers practise that as a form of "bait and switch", they promise operating system upgrades in their advertising which purchasers rely on when making their purchase decision then the manufacturer doesn't provide the promised upgrade and, instead, offers a newer model which the customer who already purchased a phone from them can buy to get a phone with a newer operating system although the newer phone hardware may not be as or more capable than the phone already owned but which doesn't receive the newer operating system version. There's more that I said but that's enough to understand the seriousness of my complaint.

The Canadian Competition Bureau has sued Rogers, Telus, Bell, and the CWTA, for false advertising so, hopefully, it will take my complaint seriously too: http://mobilesyrup.com/2012/09/14/r...-misleading-ads-for-premium-texting-services/

Here's the Competion Bureau's statement titled "Misleading Advertising and Labelling" http://www.competitionbureau.gc.ca/eic/site/cb-bc.nsf/eng/02776.html

And, their website page explaining the Competition Act's section about "False or Misleading Representations" http://www.competitionbureau.gc.ca/eic/site/cb-bc.nsf/eng/02776.html

Excerpt:

"False or Misleading Representations

The Competition Act provides criminal and civil regimes to address false or misleading representations.

Section 52 of the Act is a criminal provision. It prohibits knowingly or recklessly making, or permitting the making of, a representation to the public, in any form whatever, that is false or misleading in a material respect. Under this provision, it is not necessary to demonstrate that any person was deceived or misled; that any member of the public to whom the representation was made was within Canada; or that the representation was made in a place to which the public had access. Subsection 52(4) directs that the general impression conveyed by a representation, as well as its literal meaning, be taken into account when determining whether or not the representation is false or misleading in a material respect.

Any person who contravenes section 52 is guilty of an offence and liable to a fine of up to $200,000 and/or imprisonment up to one year on summary conviction, or to fines in the discretion of the court and/or imprisonment up to 14 years upon indictment.

Paragraph 74.01(1)(a) of the Act is a civil provision. It prohibits the making, or the permitting of the making, of a representation to the public, in any form whatever, that is false or misleading in a material respect. Under this provision, it is not necessary to demonstrate that any person was deceived or misled; that any member of the public to whom the representation was made was within Canada; or that the representation was made in a place to which the public had access. Subsection 74.03(5) directs that the general impression conveyed by a representation, as well as its literal meaning, be taken into account when determining whether or not the representation is false or misleading in a material respect.

If a court determines that a person has engaged in conduct contrary to paragraph 74.01(1)(a), it may order the person not to engage in such conduct, to publish a corrective notice, to pay an administrative monetary penalty and/or to pay restitution to purchasers. When the court orders the payment of administrative monetary penalties, on first occurrence, individuals are subject to penalties of up to $750,000 and corporations, to penalties of up to $10,000,000. For subsequent orders, the penalties increase to a maximum of $1,000,000 in the case of an individual and $15,000,000 in the case of a corporation. The court also has the power to order interim injunctions to freeze assets in certain cases.

Additional information on Restitution Orders and Interim Injunctions to Freeze Assets

In order to proceed on a criminal track both of the following criteria must be satisfied: (1) there must be clear and compelling evidence suggesting that the accused knowingly or recklessly made a false or misleading representation to the public. An example of such evidence is the continuation of a practice by the accused after complaints have been made by consumers directly to the accused; and (2) the Bureau must also be satisfied that criminal prosecution would be in the public interest. More information on the choice of track is available from the following publication Misleading Representations and Deceptive Marketing Practices: Choice of Criminal or Civil Track Under the Competition Act.

Relevant publications"

More: http://www.competitionbureau.gc.ca/eic/site/cb-bc.nsf/eng/03133.html

Here's the relevant section of the Competition Act, "Misleading Warranties and Gaurantees" http://www.competitionbureau.gc.ca/eic/site/cb-bc.nsf/eng/00525.html

The specific contravention relates to the promise to "maintain" which, in the case of the Canadian LG Optimus 2X is the promise of "upgradeability" made in advertising used by LG and WIND Mobile to promote the sale of that cell phone.

"Misleading Warranties and Guarantees

Paragraph 74.01(1)(c) of the Competition Act is a civil provision. It prohibits the making, or the permitting of the making, to the public, of any materially misleading product warranty or guarantee, or promise to replace, maintain or repair an article. This includes circumstances in which there is no reasonable prospect that the warranty, guarantee or promise will be carried out. Under this provision, it is not necessary to demonstrate that any person was deceived or misled; that any member of the public to whom the representation was made was within Canada; or that the representation was made in a place to which the public had access. Subsection 74.03(5) directs that the general impression conveyed by a representation, as well as its literal meaning, be taken into account when determining whether or not the representation is false or misleading in a material respect.

If a court determines that a person has engaged in conduct contrary to paragraph 74.01(1)(c), it may order the person not to engage in such conduct, to publish a corrective notice and/or to pay an administrative monetary penalty of up to $750,000 in the case of a first time occurrence by an individual and $10,000,000 in the case of a first time occurrence by a corporation. For subsequent orders, the penalties increase to a maximum of $1,000,000 in the case of an individual and $15,000,000 in the case of a corporation.

Relevant publications

Additional Information

Although paragraph 74.01(1)(b) also relates to warranties and guarantees, and is considered in the Performance representations not based on adequate and proper tests section, paragraph 74.01(1)(c) operates where the warranty or guarantee is itself misleading or where there is no reasonable prospect that it will be honoured. It also covers warranties that deceptively reduce a purchaser's usual rights as well as guarantees that are otherwise useless.

Example:

A tire warranty contains the representation "adjustment prices are intended to, but may not in all cases, represent current average selling prices" and, in 85 percent of the cases, the adjustment prices are higher than the average selling prices.

Court actions under this provision and former paragraph 52(1)(c) have rarely occurred."