Han wrote:

it wouldn't be the first (or last) time a
product or service was kept out of a particular market for
contractual or legal reasons.

Misconception. Or is contractual or legal newspeak for marketing?

If someone controls the rights to sell a product but won't do a deal until
he's paid the amount of money he demands, how is assigning that situation to
contractual or legal reasons a misconception? Ditto with a foreign product
which is kept out because a company is able to persuade the govt. it
violates their patent or copyright or trade dress or whatever but perhaps
really because the foreign company won't cut them in on the action. Or when
someone won't spend the money to jump through various regulatory hoops to be
allowed to sell a product in the U.S. (or anywhere else)--don't all these
answer to the description of either contractual or legal reasons?