IANAL though, so I am unsure how well they legally described that requirement.
Indian courts are notoriously inefficient. “Better” would take a decade to define through case law. Anyone who can afford that is better served removing physical ports.
In any case, I see no evidence of this in current releases [1].
No, there's no way for a startup selling handheld mobile phones, tablets, digital cameras, headphones, headsets, handheld videogame consoles, portable speakers, e-readers, keyboards, mice, portable navigation systems, earbuds or laptops to invent their own shiny new connector for charging without providing support for USB-C at the same time.
What exactly is lost if a startup is not able to shove their proprietary connector instead of using the standard? A startup selling floor lamps can't sell their own proprietary power plug and outlet either.
I know that historically most chargers are just a way to hide the true total cost of ownership. But the electronics industry is now shifting towards innovating in more areas than just shrinking the digital parts. Consumer electronics are a big part of how new stuff gets funded.
> A startup selling floor lamps can't sell their own proprietary power plug and outlet either.
Nobody forbids them from doing that.
What's the definition of "better". If Lightning is worse, then based on which criteria?
Based on "It’s not USB".