There's a 140+ page document from the FCC on how they plan to interpret and enforce Ray Baum's and Kari's Law which discusses a lot of this. IIRC, and, not being a lawyer, it said that it wouldn't bother with the stickers due to the burden. It also made a point that if the phone were capable of placing a call, that it should be expected that the device can call 911. To me that says an E911 disclaimer is not sufficient to prevent a 911 call from being routed to a national centre or some other PSAP, but, I don't really know. There was not a point there that said, "If you can comply with this now, you must make changes" that I saw clearly. There are those that say systems must do these things and those which changed substansively past a point or which require money to be spent to implement need to . More or less it is pretty hazy but I did get out of it that if my softphone client has a 9 and a 1 on it that pressing the right combination of those should do something. Perhaps we can go back to rotary phones where we can put the lock on the 9.

At some point, some ruling body had said those stickers were non-compliant and meaningless. So I think the assumption is that they still see it that way. I think it was the FCC, but not sure. I think to them if it's on a desk and is shaped like a phone, it better work properly for 911.