Microsoft Mistakenly Sold Fallout 4 For Free On Xbox (polygon.com)

On Thursday the $110 Deluxe Edition Bundle of Fallout 4 appeared in the Xbox store priced at $0.00. The Escapist reports that "The mistake went viral, and there's no telling how people were able to take advantage before the error was corrected..." An anonymous reader shares their report: If you grabbed Fallout 4 for free on Xbox One, it will be disappearing from your account... Microsoft has confirmed that any copies obtained due to the error will have their license revoked, and the games will disappear from the user's Xbox One library.
Now Microsoft is telling affected users that "your free download will no longer work. For the inconvenience we will deposit $10 by the end of June in your Microsoft Account."

Comments

I bought it, it's mine

[Snotnose]

Sorry Microsoft, I paid for it and you don't get to revoke the license. Oh, you made a mistake? Fine, you pay the $60 or whatever the game costs. I bought my copy, it's mine, sod off.

How come I never notice these things in time to take advantage of them? Memorial day weekend I got the urge to get some DLC for Borderlands the Pre Sequel. They had a sale going, all DLC for a good price. But by the time I got my credit card out and went to pay for it the offer had expired. Evidently it was good for 3 days, expired at 5 PM Monday, and I noticed it at 4:59 Monday. Cool tho, figure they'll do it again 4th of July weekend so I'm ready.

Re:Oops, sorry about burning down your village

[Sun]

Regardless, there is no expectation, legal or otherwise, that anyone would honor a mistake of that magnitude.

There is no exception, because this is not an exception. It is the rule. I don't see any way Microsoft is int the legal right on this. Then again, IANAL.

You walk into a (virtual) store. You buy something for the price listed by the store owner. The store owner hands you the product. You leave. End of transaction.

Anything else is Microsoft trying to change a transaction's terms post completion.

The only argument for MS here is the claim that there was no money changing hands in this transaction. The way I see it, this shouldn't matter much, as such offers do, occasionally, come up. Then again, I am given to understand that, in some jurisdictions, a license given without any reward can be revoked without regard to the license's terms (it was a statement about why we should try to pay FOSS developers for their software).

Even if that is the case, and MS is in their right to revoke the license, that is the exception.

Shachar