Sure they can, perhaps they have to use a solvent to get rid of it. But that is not the point. The point isn't the implementation detail, it's the fact that if someone wanted to make something that is purely bad for consumers they could.

This is what you present as being the incentive. You keep writing that there are bad design choices, things that are done just to introduce bad UX for repair personnel etc. all for the sake of being annoying. But there is no economical incentive for that and the company is a for-profit organisation. You disregard all the other reasons why someone might be done and when presented with a theoretical case that fits your narrative you dismiss it, against your own viewpoint.