As K9 politely pointed out you couldn't be more wrong. Consumer protection laws are quite clear and quite old.
Lets ignore for one second all your points except #4 & 5. By your own definition BFL has required customers to wait for an "indefinite" delay (of course if you read the rule you would know that you must provide a definitive delivery date and 2 months or more is not definitve therefore it would fall under the indefinite delay clause). One of the things REQUIRED by the company if the are asking for and receive an indefinite delay is the following.
•a statement that, if the customer agrees to the indefinite delay, the customer may cancel the order any time until you ship.
According to the FTC BFL is breaking their requirements by not TELLING the customer they have the RIGHT cancel an order ANY time until you ship.
There is no room for ambiguity with their statement. BFL MUST TELL the customer they have the right to cancel the order and when the order is cancelled they MUST refund. BFL is not only telling their customer the exact opposite of what the FTC tells them they must say but they are also doing the opposite of what is required by not providing the refund.
Sir, my reading comprehension and understanding of consumer protection laws is OK, yours on the other hand?? IF this ends up with the FTC or the courts BFL doesn't have a leg to stand. Your inability to understand this does not change to facts as they are.
I suppose with this level of incompetence I should probably take the extra time to figure out what rule you're imagining. From the context it sounds like you're talking about 'prompt delivery'. If so then I should point out that this only applies to physical goods existing at the time of sale, and is purely about the delivery of those goods. Even if we go ahead and ignore the nature of a non-developed hardware pre-order... and agree to say this rule applies:
There still wasn't any delay in delivery of the goods. There has been a period of time where the product was not developed. The initial timetable sale stated that it wasn't yet developed and had a very loose estimate (basically 'whenever it gets done')... there has been no delay when we're talking about the sales contract and deliver of the goods. The time table on shipping is still the same 'in order of paid date, starting once we have the hardware to ship'.
Since it was specified at the beginning, within 30 days is in applicable.
But that's just a fun mental exercise. It doesn't matter what you or I or anyone thinks about ftc regulations. Instead of playing games trying to use inapplicable rules... if you're serious about finding a violation you should be looking into forward contract law... because that's what the sales were.