His post is mostly nonsense, but not entirely. First while the burden of proof is not necessarily on the purchaser, if you have in fact purchased stolen goods, you must still forfeit them to law enforcement. There are no jurisdictions that let you keep stolen goods. In most jurisdictions you then need to get restitution from whomever sold you the device, and they can obviously face charges.

The manufacturer can definitely brick, or do whatever they want. The devices are still their rightful property, this isn't a gray area, they were stolen, no one has rightful claim to them except the owner, who was the manufacturer.

> 1 party has 100% of the information, 1 party has 0% of the information, and the burden is on the party with 0% information. That's absurd.

As I know the law requires you to return stolen goods even if you didn't know they were stolen. So this sounds fair.

> Not support and bricking are two different things.

I wouldn't expect a stolen car to be maintained for me, and I would expect it to be stopped by the police and taken away - which I would consider to be effectively bricking it. This would still, and sadly does regularly happen, even if I didn't know it was stolen when I bought it. It doesn't need to be stolen too, if the owner is in fact still a finance company (for example) and it was sold to me without their agreement - they would be within their rights to take it away, and as I understand it without any police involvement (if it's publicly accessible and they don't use force)