Somehow this feels like it could backfire spectacularly.
“Sorry, we can’t ‘sell’ our cars anymore. The law says we have to call them a ‘lease’ and that’ll be be $X,XXX/year”
“Sorry, we can’t ‘sell’ our cars anymore. The law says we have to call them a ‘lease’ and that’ll be be $X,XXX/year”
Wouldn't that be enough reason to take your business elsewhere?
It feels like market forces can push things in either of 2 directions:
(a) People hate practice X, so they shun companies that do it, and enough go to companies who don't do X, which leads to fewer companies doing X
(b) One company gets away with doing X, and despite some complaints, they do just fine – and other companies realize they can get away doing X too, and soon every company is doing it
People always jump to 0% vs 100%. That almost never happens but rather you get some percentage and that is often enough for a law to be considered successful.
Some specialized equipment has few manufacturers.
Arguably this allready happened with computer games.
The result? They will not sell any. There is enough old cars around to sustain the transportation needs of the population for quite a while (certainly until someone decides to make new cars without all this crap).
Citation needed. People just don't care enough about their privacy to change their behaviour. It's been proven over and over unfortunately.
A person who wants the new shiny thing is not going to buy an old secondhand car just because of some abstract privacy concern.
I would though... because even though I love technology, I'm a luddite because modern technology doesn't have innovation, only cheap touchscreens, beta testing by users, and rent-seeking.
If they are only willing to lease the car to me, I will happily take my money elsewhere.