Now you are changing your argument. Today I have repaired an iPhone with exactly the fault described here. The owner offended the terms of Apples license certainly. You claimed the phone was broken and fit only for spares.
If you knew that at the time then you have been disingenuous.
I expect you just did not know.
The point is that if you give a kid a gadget like an iPhone, they will play with it and luckily, there are people around who will fix it. If it wasn't for the fact that Apple won't sign perfectly reasonable combinations of their own software, ITunes could just restore it.
Since they have carefully organised the phone to be unrestorable it is not surprising that people have to bypass Itunes to fix the thing.
Selling phones to children and expecting their parents to buy a new one when the child does exactly what you would expect them to do makes the terms of their eula unreasonable and thereby in ciivilised jurisdictions, unenforceable.
It is ironic that in the land of the free we are seeing, in the form of the recent copyright rulings, attempts to restrict the freedom of the people to tinker with stuff they own.