I don't believe they should mandate a specific port, but I do believe they should mandate that any nonstandard port must make a show in a court of law that it's on technical merit, rather than creating interoperability problems for it's own sake.

I believe that in general consumer laws should say that companies cannot create interoperability problems for it's own sake and when doing so must have a salient technical reason, whether the reason is so salient is for a court to decide.

But that is a more specific version of my more general view that I believe that any form of crippleware, defined as companies investing time and resources into generating an inferior quality product should be illegal.

Essentially, I believe that companies can only make a worse product from a consumer perspective, if it were cheaper for them to make that product, they must be legally required to not make a product worse except to cut their own production costs.

Researching and producing their own port when an existing port suffices their needs would fall under this.