If it was six months, that would be a very different situation.
I agree... but as it stands today, Amazon could have done this with a 6 months old device that simply did not sell as they wanted.
But the devices being discontinued are from 2012 and earlier, meaning they got at least 14 years of support.
It's not "support", Amazon locks their devices to their sources, once they cut them off the devices are basically useless for the majority of users who are not tech savvy enough
If 14 is not enough, what do you think a reasonable minimum should be?
Again, the law has to define what's "reasonable" (and that is already a very shitty way of defining law but that's how the US does it).
Is it reasonable for Nintendo to say "people did not expect tariff refunds therefore we don't have to give them while WE did collect them"? well, if there is no case law that argues one way or the other, anything can be argued as "reasonable"
This lawsuit would help establish what is legally reasonable and if it does not take place, reasonable is whatever Amazon wants... and you seem to prefer that scenario?