I have to respond to this, as it shows very well how misunderstood the role of the Council is. Let's see what Council action resulted in

• It did make the public (more) aware of the issue. By writing about the issue, it made even more people aware what their phones are doing.
• It did get an official Nokia response. Whether it contains something we agree with/like or not is a different matter.
• We did turn some heads. As seen from Peter's post, the way the issue was handled at least made them a little bit more aware how important this question is for the community.
• It did support and advertise solutions to minimize the effect of the software in question. In communications about the issue, we promoted Graham Cobb's NotMyNokia solution.
• The above allowed community members to take necessary action and/or judgement on the issue. This is the most important one.

See what I'm getting at ? We're not an executive power or Supreme Court over Nokia, but sure as hell can make a difference for people in the community (of course, the half empty-half full paradigm applies here, too). In my personal opinion, this was a low-hanging fruit for Nokia to show goodwill and could have come out with a win-win from this situation, but then again, I'm no lawyer and have no idea how this stuff is handled internally. The bottom line is - if there is a single person whom our actions have affected or at least made more enlightened, I say the Council did it's job (even if it was only damage control). We cannot change news from bad to good, but we CAN and do help the community deal with it the best it can. For some people this means nothing (just as some people just don't understand what good are we if we can't provide them with upgrades), and that's something I understand (though I disagree heartily).