[XPERIA X10 General] 1Learning:
Fraud can also depend on what the store operator tells people - someone mentioned that a store operator told that person that the phone had 2.1 (when it didn't) - depending on the facts of the case, that could be either fraud or negligence depending on intentionality. I'm not sure if it was a Sony store or an AT&T store.

That was what I was thinking of when I wrote fraud - if this happened to enough people, then there could be enough for a class action (the individual could still sue for him/herself regardless of the class action if the fact patterns fit - for example, if the store operator had told the person it was compatible with 2.1, then it was not fraud but if the operator had told the person it had 2.1, then it could be fraud). If people are really interested in pursuing a case and have sufficient resources to do so, there is a strong possibility that there are sufficient legal grounds for a lawsuit. Whether it is winnable or not is a different matter.

Fraud is not limited to what is "on the ad" but also the the way the information is presented (and this is not limited to what is at the store but also to all promotional and relevant materials) - if it is deliberately misleading, then there could also be fraud. So even if the the printed ad itself said 1.6, if the salesperson tells you that it is 2.1 and that he/she assures you of it, and that forms the basis of your purchase, then the salesperson has just defrauded you - and yes, as a representative of the company, the company is liable for the actions of the salesperson when that person acts in furtherance of his/her job capacity even if that person is lying. Of course proving that the salesperson said that is the part of the difficulty. If the salesperson wrote it down, then you have a very strong case...

Now for certain things, the law will say, common sense should have told you not to believe the salesperson - like the salesperson pointing to a red car and telling you that it's yellow (assuming you are not colorblind). But in this instance, there would be no way to find out the OS until after you make the purchase. While some stores do allow you to open the box and play with the model a bit before you purchase, this is not always the case. So you would have to rely, in good faith, upon the information provided to you, even if it was oral, by the salesperson; a salesperson can bend the truth or exaggerate but not outright lie - at that point it is no longer advertisement but fraud.

Also, if SE or its representatives (had) promised future OS updates beyond 2.1 - official SE blog posts do count as they are considered official statements - and failed to deliver then that could be used to show fraud; a consumer could argue that that the consumer looked at the blog posts as part of the informational medium to gain information on the product and since the official statements/blogs are from the company, the company is liable for their own statements. Now they promised 2.1, fine. But if someone was told (officially) that SE would get 2.2 by a SE representative and SE failed to deliver, the fact patterns could be sufficient for a lawsuit, at the very least for that person. Aside from difficulties in proving the case, there is also the question as to what are the damages or remedies the plaintiff seeks? If reasonable, the courts will entertain them (even if unreasonable too I suppose as long as there are sufficient legal grounds to support the case). That is probably why SE quickly recanted the OS update in SE Brazil - it could be used as ammunition for a lawsuit. It is also, as frustrating as it is, probably why they are so vague about updates, etc.

As for lawsuits in general, I was talking primarily private class action suits and individual lawsuits and not Attorney General/state/State suits. But if there are sufficient groundswell, an investigation will generally occur. I haven't done any research on this but there could be grounds for a suit. It is not limited to "necessary" items, I just happened to list those b/c they were the easiest examples to list. As long as the laws have been violated, the Federal or individual state AG's office could pursue a case if they so desire - yes, whether they desire it or not is another matter. But my point was not whether they would pursue a case but whether they could. From a cursory glimpse, it looks like they could. Now whether they would...who knows? It depends on many factors - some political, some social, some economic, etc. Perhaps if enough people complained - legitimately in an informed way, they would.

Of course to continue on a point - universal suffrage was not that important to many people (initially anyway) but to some of the the people it affected, it was very important just as it was to those not affected by it. So to some, not having flash is really important. To others, not so much.

People have different priorities and if people feel so strongly about these issues, then there are options that can be pursued and for those telling people with legitimate complaints to shut up or name calling is not, well, nice nor is it helpful. Part of XDA as a community is also to help one another. One possible option to get 2.2+ is to donate to the XDA Developers and help them along either through knowledge or donations, another is to pursue a case against SE (if the fact patterns fit) and they might decide that rather than have a case and damage their image, they would rather update the OS, another is to write a letter of complaint (an informed one), and so on... Complaining in the proper forum in a proper way can lead to change.