Digital Convergence In Violation Of Postal Regs?

mfdii writes: "Glenn Powers has been investigating the postal regulations and found that Digital Convergence could very well be in violation of them. Check out his site to get more one this, and file your own complaint with the postal inspectors."

Comments

Information for Form

[kramer]

The form requires the address of digital Convergence, which can easily be found on their web page -- however if you're lazy it's here too:

9101 N Central Expy.
6th Floor
Dallas, TX 75231-5914

further it asks what this is pertaining to -- one of them is "Harassment (goods ordered without consent)" while this sounds right, this pertains to being charged for a product you didn't order instead of receiving a misleading product.

I believe what you would want to enter in the form is "Misrepresentation of Product / Service"

Slow news day...

[American AC in Paris]

This package was in violation of Title 39, Sec. 3009 of the United States Code and constitutes an unfair method of competition and an unfair trade practice in violation of section 45(a)(1) of title 15, as it was not a conspicuously marked free sample nor did it have "attached to it a clear and conspicuous statement informing the recipient that he may treat the merchandise as a gift to him and has the right to retain, use, discard, or dispose of it in any manner he sees fit without any obligation whatsoever to the sender."

Wow.

I mean really, Wow.

All I can say is that if I were Digital Convergence, I'd be shaking in my boots. This guy really has 'em by the short hairs, I tell you what.

</sarcasm>

But really, folks. Anybody remember all the clever little form threats you could send off to spammers, the FBI, CIA, and your grandmother about how spam was illegal by some particular subsection of this particular code that stated that you can't spam a fax machine, so send me my $500 now or I'll sue you?

Yeah. This is exactly that. Only for CueCats that you didn't order.

This isn't news for nerds or stuff that matters. This is harebrained legal manuvering for the sake of being a pain in the ass. Funny how this level of legal nit-picking on the part of some big, mean corporation usually brings forth nasty boos and hisses from the /. Collective...

Re:Another day, another CueCat article.

[thor]

> When is Slashdot going to get a new icon for these stories?

how about a dead horse!?!

thor

Re:Good grief

[Russ Nelson]

Yes, because DC has explicitly said that you are bound to use that free gift ONLY in approved manners. The implication is that if you don't, you have to return it or pay them $20 for a personal developer's license. You got it in the mail as a free gift. Postal laws say that you canNOT be bound in this manner. It's all about freedom. How would you like it if Microsoft could send you a "Free Windows-ME CD" and bind you to either having to install it, return it or pay for it? Oh, gee, all of a sudden it becomes different, eh?

None of this applies to people who asked for them at ratshack, of course.
-russ

Why they are violating the postal regulations...

[dmp]

IANAL but according the the United States Postal Service (USPS) unsolicted merchandise must have:

"attached to it a clear and conspicuous statement informing the recipient that he may treat the merchandise as a gift to him and has the right to retain, use, discard, or dispose of it in any manner he sees fit without any obligation whatsoever to the sender."

This is not the case as Digital Convergence states thatt you are bound by the EULA by: "; (2) using the :CueCat reader . They have further asserted in the EULA:

The :CueCat reader is only on loan to you from Digital:Convergence and may be recalled at any time. Without limiting the foregoing, your possession or control of the :CueCat reader does not transfer any right, title or interest to you in the :CueCat reader.

If you were sent a :CueCat as unsolicted merchandise through the US Mail it is considered a gift and you have the right to retain, use, discard or dispose of the :CueCat in any way you want and you are under *no* obligation to the sender. When you file your complaint with the USPS let them know that the sender(DC) has sent unsolicited merchandise that they claim is not a gift, that they attempted to put restrictions on your use of the item, and have placed you under obligations to them. feel free to use the :CueCat device in anyway you see fit.

dmp

Childish?

[Leto2]

I think I've seen about 20 articles on the Cuecat so far. One thing I don't get.

Why is it that "my" community is always there when it comes to ruining legitimate businesses? As soon as some company comes up with a neat device and accompanying businessmodel (I-Opener, Cuecat), there's a whole bunch of geeks that are ready to ruin the company by finding all kinds of little loopholes in some law.

What would you do if you were a company and saw your product ruined by a couple of kiddies who obviously never had anything to do with running a business before? Sit there and watch your dollars go down the drain?

I'm not saying you are doing the wrong thing, after all, there's this subarticle in some subsection of some USPO law that says you're in your right, but imagine Amazon finding some loophole in some law that enables them to ruin other people's businesses, would you agree with Amazon? Or would you despise this company?

Why is it always that "we" are right and "them companies" are wrong when it comes to finding smart ways to do business or break other people's businesses.

There goes my karma, but I had to say it.

Ivo

Re:Ok, you are all getting a bit too lame on this

[Gigs]

Ok Heres the deal! First off lets get the facts:

CueCats were mailed out with Wired and Forbes Magizine.

They contain a license agreement.

The License agreement contains restrictions on the use of the CueCat Hardware. Heres the quote from the License:

you may not decompile, reverse engineer, disassemble, modify, rent, lease, loan, sublicense, distribute or create derivative works based upon the :CRQ software or :CueCat reader in whole or part

Wired / Forbes are not claiming that the device is not a free gift.

Anything you recieve in the mail that you did not order and is not mark as a free gift is not subject to any license or other demands of the sender or manufacturer. Its yours! it belongs to you! You can give it way, sell it, use it to stop a squeek in your car, assign it in your will, hook it up to you computer and figure out what comes out of it when you scan something!

When DC trys to enforce their license on the hardware they are in violation of a Federal Law.

Here is the US Code covering such things:

Sec. 3009. Mailing of unordered merchandise

(a) Except for (1) free samples clearly and conspicuously marked as such, and (2) merchandise mailed by a charitable organization soliciting contributions, the mailing of unordered merchandise or of communications prohibited by subsection (c) of this section constitutes an unfair method of competition and an unfair trade practice in violation of section 45(a)(1) of title 15.

(b) Any merchandise mailed in violation of subsection (a) of this section, or within the exceptions contained therein, may be treated as a gift by the recipient, who shall have the right to retain, use, discard, or dispose of it in any manner he sees fit without any obligation whatsoever to the sender. All such merchandise shall have attached to it a clear and conspicuous statement informing the recipient that he may treat the merchandise as a gift to him and has the right to retain, use, discard, or dispose of it in any manner he sees fit without any obligation whatsoever to the sender.

(c) No mailer of any merchandise mailed in violation of subsection (a) of this section, or within the exceptions contained therein, shall mail to any recipient of such merchandise a bill for such merchandise or any dunning communications.

So heres what that says:
Anything you recieve thats not marked as free belongs to you. You can use it in any of the ways covered in section B. Which basicly says you can do with it as you want.

It also states that is section C that the NO ONE can send you any demands for money or on what you must be allowed to do.

So with that in mind heres how this all works out:
First, the license is "anti-competitive" for these devices when mailed. This is against the law!
Two, If and when DC mails out C&D Letters to those who has recieved this device in the mail, they have violated the law again!
This whole thing may not seem like a big deal, but YOU MUST PROTECT YOUR RIGHTS!!!! These little things are the important ones. The laws in this country are setup to allow us to improve on what we see. They are not setup to guaruntee any corporation income. This kinda thing interfeers with what made this country what it is today.

Almost forgot the AOL CD thing:
The cd you recieve is yours you can use it anyway you want for instance there is a contest going on to see the most original thing you can do with the AOL CD's. The software on that CD is covered differently, to and extent because it is labled as FREE. But the cd still belongs to you.

Re:Unsolicited Hardware?

[sjames]

I recieved one from Wired in the mail. I got another one at radio shack.

The postal service arguement only applies to the ones that are mailed. The ones that RadioShack hands out are free to Linux users because they never agreed to the EULA (since the software couldn't be installed anyway).

Either way you look at it, DC was clueless in their approach, but what they are trying to do is very dangerous to consumer rights (in many cases Citizens' rights). They are attempting to open the door to licensing physical property like intellectual property. If they get their way, then end user mods to purchased goods will be vorboden.