Slashdot Mirror


FTC Warns Manufacturers That 'Warranty Void If Removed' Stickers Break the Law (vice.com)

schwit1 writes: The Federal Trade Commission put six companies on notice today, telling them in a warning letter that their warranty practices violate federal law. If you buy a car with a warranty, take it a repair shop to fix it, then have to return the car to the manufacturer, the car company isn't legally allowed to deny the return because you took your car to another shop. The same is true of any consumer device that costs more than $15, though many manufacturers want you to think otherwise.

Companies such as Sony and Microsoft pepper the edges of their game consoles with warning labels telling customers that breaking the seal voids the warranty. That's illegal. Thanks to the 1975 Magnuson-Moss Warranty Act, no manufacturer is allowed to put repair restrictions on a device it offers a warranty on. Dozens of companies do it anyway, and the FTC has put them on notice. Apple, meanwhile, routinely tells customers not to use third party repair companies, and aftermarket parts regularly break iPhones due to software updates.

143 comments

  1. Secret? Google says not so. by bagofbeans · · Score: 4, Informative

    "The use of" "parts is required to keep your" "manufacturerâ(TM)s warranties and any extended warranties intact"

    https://www.hyundaiusa.com/myhyundai/manuals-and-how-tos/Getfaq?faqId=2&category=Consumer_Awareness

    "This warranty shall not apply if this product" "is used with products not sold or licensed by"

    https://www.nintendo.com/consumer/manuals/warrantytext_us.jsp

    "This warranty does not apply if this product" "has had the warranty seal on the" "altered, defaced, or removed."

    https://www.playstation.com/en-us/support/warranties/ps4/

    1. Re:Secret? Google says not so. by arglebargle_xiv · · Score: 5, Informative
      The comment about Apple also needs rewording:

      aftermarket parts regularly break iPhones due to software updates

      It should say:

      Apple regularly breaks iPhones via software updates if aftermarket parts are detected

      This isn't accidental breakage, this is by design from Apple.

    2. Re:Secret? Google says not so. by cmseagle · · Score: 1

      This isn't accidental breakage, this is by design from Apple.

      Have some kind of information to back that up? Yesterday's Slashdot story on the topic had no information about what exactly caused third party displays to stop working with the latest software update. For all we know, it was a security patch with an unintended side effect.

    3. Re:Secret? Google says not so. by Dread_ed · · Score: 1

      Yeah, right.

      And I tripped and fell getting out of the shower while washing my friend's bondage gear and somehow landed directly on one of those horse-cock shaped mega-dildos that randomly pop up all over the place. And that is why I am sporting these wet red leather chaps, my arms and torso are wrapped in this PVC straight jacket with nipple cutouts, there's a bondage hood covering my head, topped by an adulterated gas mask, the intake hose of which is duct taped to a mason jar full of amyl nitrate, and I have a four foot long museum grade realistic replica of some prehistoric stallion's phallus irretrievably lodged in my colon, Doctor.

      --
      When the only tool you have is a claw hammer every problem starts to look like the back of someone's skull.
  2. I hope they fine Tesla. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

    You cannot take a Tesla to any repair shop you want. You have to take it to Tesla’s shop or else they will void your warranty.

    1. Re:I hope they fine Tesla. by Lab+Rat+Jason · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I'm a big fan of Tesla and what they are doing... but I totally agree with you. They can't be exempted from this just because they make cool stuff.

      --
      Which has more power: the hammer, or the anvil?
    2. Re:I hope they fine Tesla. by CanHasDIY · · Score: 5, Informative

      You agreed to this when you signed for the car. This isn't a warranty issue, it is a contract issue, which is a completely different story. First semester law school.

      And in the second semester, they teach you that you can't contract away legal obligations.

      --
      An enigma, wrapped in a riddle, shrouded in bacon and cheese
    3. Re:I hope they fine Tesla. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      that sort of contract is null and void from the get go. perhaps a first semester law student shouldn't be writing legal documents for Tesla.

      Right now, you wouldn't want to take your Tesla to anyone other than a Tesla mechanic. No mechanic outside of Tesla would know what to do beyond changing wiper blade or tires and even that I suspect would require special training.

    4. Re:I hope they fine Tesla. by adamstew · · Score: 4, Informative

      You can't make a contract that is contrary to law. Just because the contract says "if you tamper with it, it will void the warranty". The law specifically says that it's legal to repair/tamper and it won't void the warranty.

      Let me provide another, more extreme example: You buy a car seat for your new born child. The car seat is wrapped in plastic with a sticker that says by opening the package you agree to the terms and conditions in the enclosed booklet. Inside that booklet it says that the car seat doesn't meet all of the current safety requirements, you agree that you're aware of this, and that you agree to not hold the company liable for any deaths/injuries in conjunction with using the car seat. 3 months later, you get in a minor accident, but because the car seat was defective the restrains broke your child was injured with life-long brain damage. You now have life-long medical expenses to care for your child.

      The company can pull out the shrink wrap agreement, but that would quickly get thrown out as the regulations in place at the time the car seat was sold clearly required specific safety features be included in all car seats. In fact, the agreement in the box specifically states that your company KNEW that the car seats didn't comply. Now your company is responsible for negligence which will triple the damages.

      Basically, if the law says that in order to do business you must do X, then you can't create a contract that says "you agree that we won't do X". If the law says that if you have a warranty, then you must allow people to use 3rd party repair shops and that those won't void the warranty, then you can't create a contract that says otherwise.

      Contracts that are contrary to law aren't valid. This isn't legal advise, i'm not a lawyer, etc. etc.

    5. Re:I hope they fine Tesla. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Run indoors or you'll catch cold little boy

    6. Re: I hope they fine Tesla. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You agree to a lot of things routinely. Check the EULA. You probably agreed to a lot of things you donâ(TM)t understand just by using this website.

      The law is broken. Companies are just legal-spamming us to death hoping we donâ(TM)t have the time to read things. Current estimates are in the order of 60 days per year spent reading EULAs *if* we were actually reading them...nobody has time in the average 100 hour work week to actually do that.

    7. Re:I hope they fine Tesla. by burtosis · · Score: 1

      You might find this channel quite humorous then. At one point he resorts to social engineering to simply be given the privelage of purchasing a few parts.

    8. Re:I hope they fine Tesla. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Uh, yes you can. Whether you can contract away *these* legal "options" might be in doubt (I don't know the answer offhand), but you absolutely contract away legal "options" all the time.

    9. Re: I hope they fine Tesla. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You agree to a lot of things routinely. Check the EULA. You probably agreed to a lot of things you donâ(TM)t understand just by using this website.

      Well, good thing I've read the law then.
      It isn't enforceable and if they don't like it they can refuse to serve the page to me.

    10. Re:I hope they fine Tesla. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Faggot detected

    11. Re:I hope they fine Tesla. by sexconker · · Score: 1

      LOL, you're an idiot. There's a specific law saying they can't do that kind of crap. Contracts don't trump laws.

    12. Re: I hope they fine Tesla. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You can't make a contract that is contrary to law. Just because the contract says "if you tamper with it, it will void the warranty". The law specifically says that it's legal to repair/tamper and it won't void the warranty.

      Of course you can; tesla and thousands of others do. There will be a boiler plate statement disclaiming that local laws can't remove costumer rights. But then it's up to the consumer to worry about that.

    13. Re:I hope they fine Tesla. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Oh good grief. Any mechanic should be able to do things like change brake pads, add brake fluid, replace struts, change a light bulb, and any number of other standard repairs.

      Tesla body parts are made of aluminum, not unobtainium. Any body shop that can repair the new Ford pickup trucks with aluminum beds probably has the training to repair a Tesla. But since Teslas are an overpriced status symbol as much as anything, I'm sure most Tesla buyers will just go back to Tesla for body repairs; if they can afford the car, then they can afford the Tesla repairs.

      And lots of dealers do collision repairs, and they aren't necessarily overpriced. Off hand I don't know of any reason why "official" Tesla collision repairs would be overpriced either. If insurance is is paying for the repair, the insurance companies set the price, for all practical purposes. They know what the parts prices are, and don't kid yourself, it's factored into your premiums.

      If your'e a lawyer, I hope your legal knowledge is better than your knowledge of cars and car repairs.

    14. Re:I hope they fine Tesla. by Bert64 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      It's extremely common for contracts to contain unenforceable clauses, it's designed to scare people into compliance. Most people don't realise their rights, don't seek an expert opinion (doing so would usually cost more than the dispute is worth), and just comply with the demands blindly.

      --
      http://spamdecoy.net - free throwaway anonymous email - avoid spam!
    15. Re:I hope they fine Tesla. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Wouldn't matter even if Tesla honoured the warranty. The independent repair shop can't fix the car because Tesla won't sell parts.

    16. Re:I hope they fine Tesla. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      God I hope you aren't a lawyer, your ignorance of the law is showing.

    17. Re:I hope they fine Tesla. by Opportunist · · Score: 1

      So they only tell you in the second semester that laws trump contracts?

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
    18. Re: I hope they fine Tesla. by Opportunist · · Score: 1

      And living in a sensible country I can as well, knowing that pretty much all in the EULA is null and void due to being a contract only presented after the deal has been sealed, which is illegal.

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
    19. Re:I hope they fine Tesla. by jabuzz · · Score: 1

      Maybe where you live you contract away your legal rights all the time. However in most sensible legal jurisdictions you simply can't. That is you might sign a contract saying that you do, but the contract is null and void. More specifically the parts saying you have contracted away some legal right are null and void and the rest of the contract stands.

      This is like legal 101 pretty much anywhere in the western world.

    20. Re:I hope they fine Tesla. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's bitztream the autism-hating, custom EpiPen-hating, Musk-hating, Qualcomm-hating, Firefox tabs-hating, Slashdot editors-hating Slashdot troll!

    21. Re:I hope they fine Tesla. by jbengt · · Score: 1

      Maybe where you live you contract away your legal rights all the time. However in most sensible legal jurisdictions you simply can't.

      That, of course, depends on the particulars.
      You have a right to free speech, but non-disclosure agreements are legal and enforceable under normal circumstances (exceptions may include criminal conduct or compelled court testimony)
      You have a right to sue to recover losses, but it's common for people to sign out-of-court settlements that are legal and enforceable, even if they seem unfair to one of the parties. (Unless a court finds some reason for it to be unconscionable, such as a grossly unfair settlement pushed on a vulnerable party by a powerful party who was aware they were screwing them.)
      YMMV, IANAL, etc.

    22. Re:I hope they fine Tesla. by BronsCon · · Score: 2

      Contracts don't trump laws.

      No, only Donald does that.

      --
      APK quotes people (including myself) without context and should not be trusted. Just thought you should know.
    23. Re: I hope they fine Tesla. by mandark1967 · · Score: 1

      The law is broken. Companies are just legal-spamming us to death hoping we donâ(TM)t have the time to read things. Current estimates are in the order of 60 days per year spent reading EULAs *if* we were actually reading them...nobody has time in the average 100 hour work week to actually do that.

      You better hope it's still under warranty

      --
      Sig Follows: "Suppose you were an idiot. And suppose you were a member of Congress. But I repeat myself." -- Mark Twain
    24. Re:I hope they fine Tesla. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Youy do realize that the main reason he has to do this is because he wont play legal hardball with tesla? I mean if he was to go and get a lawyer and take them to court then there would be a legal standing that Tesla would have to argue against, Tesla will continue to do this because no one has pushed the issue and as long as they are a small manufacturer they will be able to skirt under the radar for things like this.

      Once enough people (shops and DIY'ers) get together and can create a class action lawsuit against Tesla's practices then we might see them change but until then they will clearly spit in the face of the law simply because they can and no one will challenge them.

      Now if the FTC takes a look at them and starts throwing some big fines around then you will see things change, but you best believe that things will change. The big automakers will not like the fact that they have to sell parts to the public and Tesla doesn't.

    25. Re:I hope they fine Tesla. by CanHasDIY · · Score: 1

      You have a right to free speech, but non-disclosure agreements are legal and enforceable under normal circumstances (exceptions may include criminal conduct or compelled court testimony)

      My wife once worked at a company where the owner made everyone sign an NDA stating that they would not report him for criminal activity (seriously). It was (obviously) unenforceable.

      --
      An enigma, wrapped in a riddle, shrouded in bacon and cheese
    26. Re:I hope they fine Tesla. by david_thornley · · Score: 1

      Alternatively, they may be completely aware that the clause is unenforceable, and may sign it anyway because it's more expedient to go along with the farce than to point out the unenforceability to the manager who probably doesn't know the law.

      --
      "When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
    27. Re:I hope they fine Tesla. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's extremely common for contracts to contain unenforceable clauses, it's designed to scare people into compliance. Most people don't realise their rights, don't seek an expert opinion (doing so would usually cost more than the dispute is worth), and just comply with the demands blindly.

      The technical term for this is "unethical practice of law". Since the right to ethical practice of law is an universal and inalienable right in any society based on the rule of law, it's always a violation of fundamental rights. Typically that in turn is criminal conduct, or grounds for civil suit, or both.

      For example, in US federal law, infringement of fundamental rights "under the colour of law" - a phrase that necessarily includes contract law - is both criminal conduct and grounds for civil suit.

      Good luck getting anywhere with that. It reminds me of an old joke where God threatens to sue the devil, but can't find anybody to take the case ...

      Sooner or later there will be a massive civil rights movement that will force legal ethics reform from outside the legal profession, since it's clear it won't come from inside the profession. The economic and social harm that is done to society by current legal practice in places like the USA is not something any rational society can tolerate over the long term - and this will eventually drive reform. Economists estimate that half the income of the US legal profession comes from unethical practice of law.

  3. Let's track Hyundai :) by bagofbeans · · Score: 1

    Currently says (my enboldening):

    FAQs

    Why is it important to insist on Hyundai Genuine Parts?

    Choosing Hyundai Genuine Parts offers you better fit, finish, design, quality, safety, structural integrity, and resale value than alternative collision parts. The use of Hyundai Genuine Parts is required to keep your Hyundai manufacturer's warranties and any extended warranties intact. Finally, all new cars leased through Hyundai require that Genuine Parts be used for collision repairs.

    1. Re:Let's track Hyundai :) by CanHasDIY · · Score: 4, Interesting

      I believe in this case, they're inferring that "intact" means "complete" - so technically, if you swap your air cleaner assembly with an aftermarket version, that part would not be considered under warranty any more (even though the rest of the vehicle still is), and thus the warranty is no longer "intact."

      Basically, they're using weasel wording to imply a complete loss of warranty even when that's not the case. Shitty way to treat your customers.

      --
      An enigma, wrapped in a riddle, shrouded in bacon and cheese
    2. Re:Let's track Hyundai :) by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Hmm... The driver is not a Hyundai Genuine Part... Neither are any of the passengers, luggage, etc...

    3. Re:Let's track Hyundai :) by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I believe in this case, they're inferring that "intact" means...

      Who is "they" (they're) here?

      Hyundai might be trying to imply that.

      Or you might infer something from what Hyundai says or writes.

      ...they're using weasel wording to imply...

      Whew. At least you use they're and imply correctly here.

    4. Re:Let's track Hyundai :) by ravenshrike · · Score: 1

      Well, I don't know why you'd go to a Hyundai dealership to get medical attention, but if that's what does it for you go right ahead.

    5. Re:Let's track Hyundai :) by Matt_J_Harris · · Score: 1

      Well, if the parents of the driver were Hyundai employees and were on Hyundai owned premises when the driver was conceived you might consider the driver as being manufactured by Hyundai...

    6. Re:Let's track Hyundai :) by whoever57 · · Score: 2

      It's like they never heard of the Magnuson-Moss Act.

      Or they just hope their customers have never heard of it.

      --
      The real "Libtards" are the Libertarians!
    7. Re:Let's track Hyundai :) by Joe_Dragon · · Score: 1

      and oil changes become Genuine Parts at the dealer only each 3000 miles.

    8. Re:Let's track Hyundai :) by vtcodger · · Score: 1

      "... Finally, all new cars leased through Hyundai require that Genuine Parts be used for collision repairs"

      Never leased a car, but I assume Hyundai actually owns the vehicle. Seems reasonable that they can dictate how it is repaired. No?

      --
      You can't see ANYTHING from a car, You've got to get out of the goddamned contraption and walk...Edward Abbey
    9. Re: Let's track Hyundai :) by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Currently says (my enboldening):

      FAQs

      Why is it important to insist on Hyundai Genuine Parts?

      Choosing Hyundai Genuine Parts offers you better fit, finish, design, quality, safety, structural integrity, and resale value than alternative collision parts. The use of Hyundai Genuine Parts is required to keep your Hyundai manufacturer's warranties and any extended warranties intact. Finally, all new cars leased through Hyundai require that Genuine Parts be used for collision repairs

      Huh? What sticker is being removed to void the warranty? Hyundai let you take your car to any repairer you want, even yourself if you so fell inclined.

      I don't get your point at all.

    10. Re:Let's track Hyundai :) by Bert64 · · Score: 3, Informative

      Similar things happen everywhere there are consumer protection law...
      For instance in europe someone who sells you a product is required to provide a 2 year guarantee, but most manufacturers will loudly advertise a 1 year guarantee and then in small print "your statutory rights are not affected", meaning that the 1 year guarantee is a service provided by the manufacturer and unrelated to the one you get by law. They will then intentionally not train their support staff on the legislation, knowing that most customers are unaware of the law and won't assert their rights. Those who do know their rights usually have to push to be escalated to someone higher up who does understand the law.

      --
      http://spamdecoy.net - free throwaway anonymous email - avoid spam!
    11. Re:Let's track Hyundai :) by whoever57 · · Score: 1

      Wasn't Apple slapped down recently for not honouring the statutory 2-year warranty on electronics?

      --
      The real "Libtards" are the Libertarians!
    12. Re:Let's track Hyundai :) by Mashiki · · Score: 1

      Never leased a car, but I assume Hyundai actually owns the vehicle. Seems reasonable that they can dictate how it is repaired. No?

      Correct. That's the only difference, in the law because they still own the vehicle and expect to get a return after the lease with a post-lease sale. Most auto companies have something of a 2yr "used car warranty" program for those post-lease sales too. There's also a cost advantage, since if the part fails in-warranty or there's a recall it can be written off directly by the company in-house instead of having to get the paperwork from a 3rd party supplier.

      --
      Om, nomnomnom...
    13. Re:Let's track Hyundai :) by Opportunist · · Score: 1

      Well, then it's case closed. I mean, when have you ever felt that you actually own a console (or hell, a game) you bought? DRM is at the point where you should be lucky that it at least plays... at least for the time the maker allows it to, that is.

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
    14. Re:Let's track Hyundai :) by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That's not the same. The "legal warranty" only guarantees that the product was free of defects at the time of sale, meaning it only covers inherent design defects that were already in the product when it was sold. The manufacturer's warranty typically guarantees that the product works as intended for the warranty period, even if parts break.

    15. Re:Let's track Hyundai :) by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If the aftermarket version does not act in the same manner as the original then it can negatively affect the function of the remaining factory parts. I don't think manufacturers are being unfair or weaseling by pointing out the fact that parts are indeed parts of a whole and can influence the performance and reliability of that whole. The use of factory parts makes any negative consequences remain within the domain of the original warranty. A part from someone besides the original manufacturer can open up the argument that the aftermarket part caused a problem. A manufacturer should be able to point that out without accusations of ill behavior.

      Aftermarket parts that no longer work after a software update are an obvious example. It is completely unreasonable to expect a manufacturer to create software updates that would provide function for all or any aftermarket parts.

    16. Re: Let's track Hyundai :) by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You're so full of shit. When an aftermarket part works and a software updates breaks it, it's almost always because the original company went out of their way you break it (through "genuine parts" checks and whatnot

      If my aftermarket mass airflow sensor outputs the exact same waveform as the original, but the original had an added chip whose only function is to say "this is a original part" and then I take my car in, get a pcm flash, and suddenly the car says my mas is bad than YES I can fault that company for writing an update specifically for the purpose of breaking my car

    17. Re:Let's track Hyundai :) by CanHasDIY · · Score: 1

      Nobody likes a pedant.

      --
      An enigma, wrapped in a riddle, shrouded in bacon and cheese
    18. Re:Let's track Hyundai :) by CanHasDIY · · Score: 1

      Look up the Magnusson-Moss (sp?) Warranty Act.

      This has been settled law for over 30 years.

      --
      An enigma, wrapped in a riddle, shrouded in bacon and cheese
  4. They may not be kidding about it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Some companies intentionally design their products to break if disassembled. I wouldn't be surprised if you do void the warranty by causing damage disassembling it.

    1. Re:They may not be kidding about it by shaitand · · Score: 1

      Yes, and in the sane world in which these consumer protections were put in place they'd update the law to fix that loophole and incur treble damages if the manufacturer has included what a reasonable person might conclude to be such components without publicly and freely documenting them.

  5. John Deere tractors by Weaselmancer · · Score: 5, Interesting

    They appear to be an exception to this rule at the moment.

    Here's hoping the FTC takes notice of them, finally.

    --
    Weaselmancer
    rediculous.
    1. Re:John Deere tractors by rahvin112 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      The FTC can't act against John Deere, Congress directly protected their scam by making it exempt to Mangunson.

  6. what about hard drives by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    hard drives have this as well, because (or at least partly) breaking that seal in a non-clean room environment allows dust to get in which will eventually ruin the drive. So if my opening the drive actually causes it harm, its still under warranty now?

    1. Re:what about hard drives by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Hard drives are sealed shut. Only a idiot would try to open them.

    2. Re:what about hard drives by Q-Hack! · · Score: 2

      What is your definition of sealed? My wrist watch is sealed to be water resistant to 300 meters. Yet I am allowed (expected even) to replace my own battery. The manufacture even suggests I replace the o-ring when I do. Yet the warranty is still valid against manufacture defect. Now doing that with a hard drive does seem to present a bit of a conundrum. A company could make the claim that opening a drive in any environment other than a clean room, would damage the drive. Warranties have traditionally never been valid for damage caused by the end user.

      --
      Some days I get the sinking feeling Orwell was an optimist.
    3. Re:what about hard drives by shaitand · · Score: 1

      I would think what would get you (assuming a court didn't label all this standard industry practice in tech) is that the condition is effectively a thinly veiled blanket condition to prevent competition on repairs and components.

      You can't just say cell phones must be worked on in a dry environment and we assume liquid caused micro-shorts if we didn't control that environment. You have to provide solid case specific investigation and rational to prove the damage was caused by the end user. So for your hard drive, they need to prove that the drive failed due to dust contamination not simply work from the assumption a clean room wasn't used for the repair.

    4. Re:what about hard drives by gordguide · · Score: 1

      Somewhat unrelated, but you should look up what "water resistant" means when applied to a wristwatch. I suspect it means something other than what you assume it does. But, moving along ...

      The water resistant watch case and back should not be opened by laymen, simply because they might not re-assemble it correctly and lose that water resistant protection. I recommend you always take a watch to a Jeweler to replace the battery. You're right ... you don't *have to* do it that way, but unless the watch is fairly inexpensive ... well below $100 ... the risk vs reward doesn't really make sense.

      I have some quartz watches that are only certified to be water resistant if sent to the manufacturer for battery replacement. They are expensive (more than $1000) Swiss made brands you would probably recognize. Do I think it necessary? Not really, but the risk of damage to a watch that costs that much if the seal isn't done correctly when opening and resetting the back case, versus the $20 and a week it costs, I won't chance it.

      Lest one thinks this is all a money grab for Jewelers and Watch Brands I had a Swiss Army watch that had the battery replaced by a Jeweler that had water ingress. Because of how I had the battery replaced, I was able to get the Jeweler to replace the watch.

    5. Re:what about hard drives by Opportunist · · Score: 1

      No, because the law recognizes that if you do not have the proper skill or equipment to repair a device and break it in the process of an attempted repair due to faulty equipment (like, say, using a non-clean room), you're allowed to keep both pieces but that's it.

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
    6. Re:what about hard drives by thegarbz · · Score: 1

      Yet the warranty is still valid against manufacture defect.

      Just against a defect. Water ingress however would be no such defect as you replaced a component that prevented water ingress yourself. Now if the manufacturer provided you the o-ring, and you proceeded to get it pressure tested to the manufacturer's specifications after and THEN the watch flooded while you're on a dive, you would have a case for a warranty claim.

    7. Re:what about hard drives by Higaran · · Score: 1

      What part on the inside of a hard driver are you actually going to replace yourself? Only in some extreme cases would someone open up a drive to try to get the data off the platters on to a new drive, where would you even get replacement parts?

  7. Damn Trump and his minions! by mi · · Score: 0

    Who is Ajit Pai's peer at the FTC? We need to start piling up the hate on him too for choosing KKKorporate interests over those of the People!!!

    Oh, wait...

    --
    In Soviet Washington the swamp drains you.
    1. Re:Damn Trump and his minions! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      More like: once this catches Trump's attention (i.e., after a few CEOs raise hell) this guy will be forced out and will be replaced with a more conservative dope (probably someone who's on record as wanting to abolish the FTC)

    2. Re: Damn Trump and his minions! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Thereâ(TM)s a big difference between the FTC an the FCC.

    3. Re:Damn Trump and his minions! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Interestingly enough, the FTC is one agency whose commissioners haven't yet been replaced under the Trump administration: they're both holdovers from Obama.

      Although one of them is currently pending a replacement nomination.

      Be afraid.

    4. Re:Damn Trump and his minions! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      More like: once this catches Trump's attention (i.e., after a few CEOs raise hell) this guy will be forced out and will be replaced with a more conservative dope (probably someone who's on record as wanting to abolish the FTC)

      Just curious, is EVERYTHING Trump's fault in your world?

    5. Re: Damn Trump and his minions! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Nope. But Pai is. I'm guessing that's the point being made here

    6. Re:Damn Trump and his minions! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Who is Ajit Pai's peer at the FTC? We need to start piling up the hate on him too for choosing KKKorporate interests over those of the People!!!

      Oh, wait...

      The person isn't interested in choosing the rights of the people over the gains of the person. Most people want rights because it gives gains for them and choose whatever gives the largest gains.
      Calling for hate means you are a part of the problem not a part of the solution.

    7. Re:Damn Trump and his minions! by Opportunist · · Score: 1

      Not everything. He ain't been in office long enough for that.

      But it's curious, a lot of things that he did backfired badly.

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
  8. Hard Drives by b0bby · · Score: 1

    I can understand the use of these stickers on something like a mechanical hard drive, where opening the cover allows dust in which could damage it. I can't think of many other cases where it's warranted though.

    1. Re:Hard Drives by The+MAZZTer · · Score: 2

      I think the original idea of the stickers was to keep users from mucking around in their own devices trying to fix something and just breaking it worse. So the warranty would be voided in those cases. But I am sure plenty of companies use that excuse to also block third-party repairs since they too would have to break the seal.

    2. Re:Hard Drives by trg83 · · Score: 1

      Maybe a sticker that holds the pin on your grenade in place? :D

    3. Re:Hard Drives by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I think the original idea of the stickers was to keep users from mucking around in their own devices trying to fix something and just breaking it worse. So the warranty would be voided in those cases. But I am sure plenty of companies use that excuse to also block third-party repairs since they too would have to break the seal.

      Think of it this way, you take it to a 3rd party, who sucks at repairs and uses bad parts. This causes more damage to the device. The manufacture's costs to now provide warranty support now is much more costly, and frankly untenable for supporting stuff that they haven't approved.

      This is a case of a good intent from the law (allowing you to repair from anyone) going to a bad extreme and forcing companies to unreasonably support things they shouldn't have to (bad parts, poor work, additional damage that are not their fault) or even encourage outright fraud.

      I'm no fan of companies doing lock-in, but I can fully understand the reasonable requirements they want to impose for warranty repair.

    4. Re:Hard Drives by Luthair · · Score: 1

      I think the HDD company could legitimately point at that as being the cause of a failure. This is true on cars also, massive changes to the engine could void the warranty - or at least put the customer in the position where they'd need a court case where the manufacturer demonstrated that it could be reasonably determined as the cause.

    5. Re:Hard Drives by HornWumpus · · Score: 1

      Kind of hard to see how that works. For repairs they're paying for, sure, they pick the shop. They continue to warranty the parts.

      But for non-warranty work? How is using a rebuilt door handle assembly going to affect the drivetrain? A junkyard fender? An aftermarket bumper cover? (half the value of all body work is bumper covers and paint).

      --
      John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
    6. Re:Hard Drives by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I can understand the use of these stickers on something like a mechanical hard drive, where opening the cover allows dust in which will destroy it. I can't think of many other cases where it's warranted though.

      FTFY, I used to work in HDDs.

    7. Re:Hard Drives by viperidaenz · · Score: 1

      If the manufacturer can determine a bodged repair caused the damage you're claiming under warranty, they don't have to repair it.
      I wouldn't be surprised if they're also allowed to charge you for the time they spent finding that out before they return your unfixed product.

    8. Re:Hard Drives by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I think the primary intent *is* to block repairs by third party companies. I deal with these stickers all the time in the computer world. Everyone's box is *so* special it can't be repaired except by the manufacturer. Sure. Your gigabit switch is so magical inside that someone else can't fix it?

      Remember the capacitor plague? Millions of devices failing that simply need some caps replaced. Oh the number of stickers that have been cruelly violated.

    9. Re:Hard Drives by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Remember the capacitor plague? Millions of devices failing that simply need some caps replaced. Oh the number of stickers that have been cruelly violated.

      Bad example. The capacitor plague was a manufacturing/design flaw and covered under warranty.
      No need to remove the sticker to do a cheap repair since they would cover the cost.
      If the warranty time expired the sticker is pointless anyway and should be removed immediately to not trick anyone in thinking that there still might be warranty on the junk.

      Not that I follow that guideline, warranty stickers are removed and the device is opened, that is just how things work.
      If they didn't want the things to be opened they should have used more epoxy.

    10. Re: Hard Drives by guruevi · · Score: 1

      They'd have to prove the second hand part from the mall shop caused the problems, then you shift liability to the repair shop. The consumer still gets their money back, perhaps from the repair shop. The question is whether the legal hassle is worth the expense.

      --
      Custom electronics and digital signage for your business: www.evcircuits.com
    11. Re:Hard Drives by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Sorry it wasn't worth the time to ship the first gen Apple airports back to Apple. I had the parts on hand or ones close enough it wouldn't matter (higher voltage rating).

    12. Re:Hard Drives by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Maybe a sticker that holds the pin on your grenade in place? :D

      Modern hand grenades actually do have safety clips. A dangling loop of metal that can snag on absolutely anything, think about it.

    13. Re:Hard Drives by GuB-42 · · Score: 2

      I don't know about the US law but warranty normally only covers manufacturing defects.
      If you botch the repair and break the product by doing so, it is not a defect, and I don't see why they should fix your mistakes.

      From what I understand, here is the idea: you break your phone screen, and repair it. Now you notice the new screen causes problems, you can't get warranty because what the seller sold you isn't defective. However, if your screen works well and a memory chip is defective, warranty works, because the problem comes from the original product. That's unless they can prove that the new screen caused the problem.

      Also, what happens if in the process of fixing the memory chip defect, the original manufacturer damage your new screen because it is more fragile? Can they send back the phone with the now fixed chip and damaged screen and you now have to ask for warranty support from the one who sold you the screen...

    14. Re:Hard Drives by gordguide · · Score: 1

      I think the original idea of the stickers was to keep users from mucking around in their own devices trying to fix something and just breaking it worse. So the warranty would be voided in those cases. But I am sure plenty of companies use that excuse to also block third-party repairs since they too would have to break the seal.

      Think of it this way, you take it to a 3rd party, who sucks at repairs and uses bad parts. This causes more damage to the device. The manufacture's costs to now provide warranty support now is much more costly, and frankly untenable for supporting stuff that they haven't approved.

      This is a case of a good intent from the law (allowing you to repair from anyone) going to a bad extreme and forcing companies to unreasonably support things they shouldn't have to (bad parts, poor work, additional damage that are not their fault) or even encourage outright fraud.

      I'm no fan of companies doing lock-in, but I can fully understand the reasonable requirements they want to impose for warranty repair.

      The manufacturer's warranty does not, and is not legally required to, cover damage due to an improper repair by an unrelated entity. The exemption isn't unlimited ... failure unrelated to that improper repair must still be covered ... but I don't think the scenario you propose is a rational excuse for seal break warranty refusal.

    15. Re:Hard Drives by Opportunist · · Score: 1

      Yeah, yeah, grenades are a lot like a marriage.

      Ring gone - house gone

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
  9. I can't agree with this. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I honestly can't agree with this. They're not saying users can't open up devices and try to fix things themselves - nothing wrong with that. They're just saying that attempting to open up and repair yourself or at an unlicensed shop voids the warranty. I don't see how that's unreasonable. No company should be expected to honor a warranty on devices that were broken or improperly repaired by tinkerers who don't know what they're doing.

    1. Re: I can't agree with this. by jgdnavy · · Score: 2

      They aren't. They are required to honor problems not caused by the repairs or modifications.

    2. Re:I can't agree with this. by war4peace · · Score: 1

      So if I buy a device and remove the sticker for aesthetic purpose, is the warranty void?

      --
      ...gis sdrawkcab (usually not responding to ACs; don't bother posting as AC)
    3. Re:I can't agree with this. by nmb3000 · · Score: 2

      repair yourself

      The right to repair is an important part of ownership. Anything else and you start getting into "implied licensing" territory, which is exactly the bullshit John Deere pulls with their tractors.

      or at an unlicensed shop voids the warranty

      That sounds nice at first glance, but therein lies the problem. All a company like Apple has to do is license zero repair shops and suddenly they have a monopoly on device repairs. They can charge any amount, or outright refuse to repair anything they want.

      No company should be expected to honor a warranty on devices that were broken or improperly repaired by tinkerers who don't know what they're doing.

      Nobody is really saying they should be; however, the onus to prove the item was damaged by a failed repair job is on the warranty provider -- just as it is on them to prove you didn't mistreat it in other ways (drop in the toilet, put in the microwave, etc).

      --
      "What do you despise? By this are you truly known." --Princess Irulan, Manual of Muad'Dib
      /)
    4. Re:I can't agree with this. by Opportunist · · Score: 1

      This is why our law over here recognizes two distinct cases with these stickers: Parts and assembly (more to the point: warranty and guarantees).

      The warranty of parts cannot be voided by removing the stickers (unless you start removing stickers from the parts themselves), but the warranty on the assembly can be voided. Or at least it would be on your to prove now what the CPU cooler was mounted the wrong way after you cooked off your i7. With intact stickers, there is no way the shop can weasel out of paying for it because obviously THEY made an assembly error. With the stickers gone, you have a hard time proving that it wasn't you trying to "improve" something in the way they put it together, botching it and toasting your CPU.

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
  10. What about Security Features? by mykepredko · · Score: 1

    That's great that the stickers are unlawful (as they should be) but what about things like fingerprint scanners on cell phones?

    IIRC, there was an issue with Apple where the iPhone fingerprint lock wouldn't work if it was removed/replaced by a third party. This seems like a reasonable restriction from the customer's perspective.

    1. Re:What about Security Features? by saider · · Score: 2, Informative

      That is likely a security "feature" to prevent an attacker from using a fingerprint "spoofer" to gain access to the device. So they probably signed the hardware so only that specific sensor can work with that particular phone. Allowing the user to pair an unknown sensor would make the signing stuff pointless. If you force people to bring it into an apple store, maybe you can reduce demand for stolen and hacked phones since they wont work.

      That might be their thought process anyway.

      --


      Remember, You are unique...just like everyone else.
    2. Re:What about Security Features? by Ichijo · · Score: 1

      If the screen breaks and you no longer need the fingerprint lock, is there a way to reacquire access to the phone without paying Apple to replace the screen?

      --
      Any sufficiently unpopular but cohesive argument is indistinguishable from trolling.
    3. Re: What about Security Features? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There was an issue where Apple TOTALLY DISABLED THE PHONE after a software update if the fingerprint reader had been replaced by a third party. They should have disabled at most the fingerprint reader.

    4. Re: What about Security Features? by guruevi · · Score: 1

      You have no idea about the security that breaks. Apple doesn't know the difference between a repair and the FBI replacing your security chip.

      Also, a lot of "repairs" get blocked because the components are on lists of stolen equipment, purchasing stolen equipment is still illegal and voids any warranty you may have.

      Building cheap knockoffs of a chip is easy, building good knockoffs that also implement the software and updates correctly is incredibly hard.

      --
      Custom electronics and digital signage for your business: www.evcircuits.com
    5. Re:What about Security Features? by burtosis · · Score: 1

      Nice logic but it disables the button too. There is absolutely no logic in saying disabling a simple button is necessary for security. The phones already have a security feature to disable them if stolen or too many password attempts are used and it dosent require the fingerprint sensor or the home button.

    6. Re: What about Security Features? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Of course. My windows phone will boot connected to a usb dock and let me log on via an external monitor and keyboard. Not sure about phones and androids will vary from maker and model.

    7. Re: What about Security Features? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      >You have no idea about the security that breaks.

      And you do? Hardly. You are either talking out your ass or breaking an NDA. Your move.

    8. Re:What about Security Features? by Opportunist · · Score: 1

      Oh please, their own hardware is so easily fooled that anything you could replace it with can only be an improvement in security.

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
  11. Apple is way past stickers... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Apple doesn't need stickers. They just use glue and impossible manufacturing methods

    1. Re:Apple is way past stickers... by BlueStrat · · Score: 1

      Apple doesn't need stickers. They just use glue and impossible manufacturing methods

      Come suspended in Carbonite like Han Solo they soon shall be, yes.

      Strat

      --
      Progressivism (aka US 'Liberalism'): Ideas so good they need a police/surveillance-state to enforce.
    2. Re:Apple is way past stickers... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Apple doesn't need stickers. They just use glue and impossible manufacturing methods

      It's hardly just Apple. Either the cost of warranties will go up, due to either increased failure rates or certification with third party parts, or they will be mitigated by tamper proofing measures.

    3. Re:Apple is way past stickers... by Mashiki · · Score: 1

      Can already be done with epoxy heat bonding, Ford was famous for doing it with the transaxle computer.

      --
      Om, nomnomnom...
  12. Anyone tell that to John Deere? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Anyone tell that to John Deere?

    https://yro.slashdot.org/story/17/03/22/0535242/why-american-farmers-are-hacking-their-tractors-with-ukrainian-firmware

  13. The issue is moot. by bill.pev · · Score: 1

    Surely just using the device voids the warranty?

  14. Don't worry by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    We won't have Moscow Donnie to kick around much longer.

  15. aftermarket parts regularly break iPhones due to by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Software updates? Hmmm. I wonder really if that is actually true. Who is to say Apple isn't doing something similar to the old DOS days when Microsoft intentionally buggered their code so some apps would not run on other DOSes of the time.

  16. Repair or Replace by pz · · Score: 1

    I remember hearing a looooong time ago that this feature,

    no manufacturer is allowed to put repair restrictions on a device it offers a warranty on

    has been interpreted by the courts to mean that when a manufacturer offers either repair or replacement under warranty, they can't then state "at our option" because it limits the consumer's choices (even though many manufacturers do just that). And thus, that a consumer can, with sufficient motivation and resources, force a manufacturer to exercise the option the consumer wants rather than what the manufacturer selects.

    Can anyone verify that my recollection is accurate?

    --

    Put my fist through my alarm clock with its ding-dong death inside my ear. - The Blackjacks.
    1. Re:Repair or Replace by Xenx · · Score: 1

      I cannot confirm that as a requirement. However, I know I read a warranty recently that said they would repair/replace at their discretion unless you explicitly state you want it repaired. I can't imagine them adding that last part, unless they had to by law or large enough consumer demand.

    2. Re:Repair or Replace by Sir+Holo · · Score: 1

      . . . I read a warranty recently that said they would repair/replace at their discretion unless you explicitly state you want it repaired. I can't imagine them adding that last part, unless they had to by law or large enough consumer demand.

      Perhaps it gives the manufacturer an out by having either 'Their Discretion' or 'Repair', which together make an "A or A -type of choice". Just guessing.

    3. Re:Repair or Replace by Xenx · · Score: 1

      A company saying they'll repair or replace at their discretion means they'll pick the cheapest option to get you a working product back. A company that says that, but then offers to let you request a repair, means they'll pick the cheaper option unless you stipulate repair. A company usually won't blatantly offer the more expensive option like that, without a reason. That reason might be due to regulations as had been suggested above. It could also be that they get enough feedback from consumers that it's in their best interest to offer the option.

    4. Re:Repair or Replace by jbengt · · Score: 1

      Or it could be because the expensive part they're replacing is "no longer in stock" and the warranty lets them use cheaper replacement parts.

    5. Re:Repair or Replace by Sir+Holo · · Score: 1

      Or it could be because the expensive part they're replacing is "no longer in stock" and the warranty lets them use cheaper replacement parts.

      Or unsold overstock running up to a new 'improved' product launch. Or for some time after, since 3-yr warranties are out there.

  17. end of the summary is backwards... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Insightful

    aftermarket parts regularly break iPhones due to software updates.

    should read

    "software updates regularly break iphones with aftermarket parts"

  18. MOD PARENT UP! by Brett+Buck · · Score: 1

    Exactly on point

  19. Correction by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    To be clear, the apple products that get repaired by third party companies get broken by Apple updates that target the fixes.

  20. How did Magnuson-Moss get passed, anyway? by swb · · Score: 1

    It seems like exactly the kind of legislation that would never get passed in almost any era and would have been heavily lobbied against by nearly every US manufacturer. In 1975, the lack of easy access to data on pending bills, etc, also seems like it would have been easier to quietly kill a bill like this.

    It also seems like the kind of bill that companies almost could have rallied their employee unions' to oppose, too. "This bill will cost us millions and we will be forced to cut jobs."

    I suppose to corollary question is -- how come it hasn't been repealed or (repeatedly) gutted with exceptions for specific industries, especially automotive or other industries that got beat up by foreign manufacturers?

    1. Re:How did Magnuson-Moss get passed, anyway? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It seems like exactly the kind of legislation that would never get passed in almost any era and would have been heavily lobbied against by nearly every US manufacturer. In 1975, the lack of easy access to data on pending bills, etc, also seems like it would have been easier to quietly kill a bill like this.

      It also seems like the kind of bill that companies almost could have rallied their employee unions' to oppose, too. "This bill will cost us millions and we will be forced to cut jobs."

      I suppose to corollary question is -- how come it hasn't been repealed or (repeatedly) gutted with exceptions for specific industries, especially automotive or other industries that got beat up by foreign manufacturers?

      It represents a kind of base-standard in the marketplace.

      To remove it or cut exceptions in even one place would remove consumer confidence across the board in all markets.

      Right now, you can walk into a grocery store and expect that every food product is generally edible and fit for human consumption.
      Note: Even PET FOOD is required to be fit for human consumption, because sometimes people on hard times will eat it.

      Add just one notice, "Some food products in this store may not be fit for human consumption."
      Suddenly, EVERY SINGLE ITEM ON EVERY SHELF requires investigation and vetting.

      This is basically what Magnuson-Moss is preventing across all markets.
      It enables economic activity by reducing consumer burden.

    2. Re:How did Magnuson-Moss get passed, anyway? by swb · · Score: 2

      I'm not denying its value, but I don't grok your explanation.

      We expect the items in the grocery store to be safe to eat thanks to the Pure Food and Drug act (among others) that long predated Magnuson-Moss. It's not like we didn't have a consumer market before it was passed, either.

      It seems like exactly the kind of law that would have been blocked as too much regulation and burdensome on manufacturers without really any effect on the market, or with whatever disparate effects it had before.

      I'm not knocking it, it's obviously a cornerstone of consumer rights, but it's such a cornerstone I'm mystified that it made it into law.

    3. Re: How did Magnuson-Moss get passed, anyway? by guruevi · · Score: 1

      The 70s were far from anti-regulations. Regulations were passed as people demanded them with a booming consumption industry more and more companies were selling broken products with shrink-wrap contracts that removed all protections.

      Here is a good history:
      https://law.lclark.edu/live/fi...

      --
      Custom electronics and digital signage for your business: www.evcircuits.com
  21. FTFY by jenningsthecat · · Score: 0

    ... aftermarket parts regularly break iPhones due to software updates

    Software updates regularly break iPhones that contain aftermarket parts.

    If the aftermarket part worked with a previous version of the OS, there's no excuse for it NOT working with a newer version. I'm pretty sure Apple breaks far more phones than aftemarket parts do.

    --
    'The Economy' is a giant Ponzi scheme whose most pitiable suckers are the youngest among us and the yet-unborn.
    1. Re:FTFY by flink · · Score: 2

      Software updates regularly break iPhones that contain aftermarket parts.

      If the aftermarket part worked with a previous version of the OS, there's no excuse for it NOT working with a newer version. I'm pretty sure Apple breaks far more phones than aftemarket parts do.

      There are plenty of non-nefarious reasons why a software update might cause an aftermarket component to fail. For example - Apple specs an I/O chip for the screen digitizer that can respond to an interrupt in 10ms. However, currently there is some slow microcode in the I/O pipeline and the observed timing is more like 30ms.

      Aftermarket manufacturers use the observed timings (because they don't have access to the design documents), and produce a replacement screen with an interrupt response tolerance of 20ms.

      Later, Apple optimizes some code and now their I/O pipeline sends an interrupt every 15ms and includes it as part of a iOS update. This is well within the tolerances of the OEM part, but the aftermarket part starts behaving erratically.

  22. Would not hold under trial by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    IANAL but I don't believe the FTC's argument would hold up under trial. It's a nice thought and the FTC really wants to push the idea, but reading the bill there appears to be enough loopholes to allow this as a legal practice. Read the whole law and it becomes apparent that there are plenty of provisions to protect manufacturers as well as consumers. I started pasting relevant sections, but there's just too much and it'd be easier if everyone just educated themselves by reading the law in it's entirety.

  23. No warranties for you by pak9rabid · · Score: 1

    Mfg Response: Fine, we just won't offer warranties at all then.

    1. Re:No warranties for you by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Other jurisdictions simply require a standard warranty for essentially all consumer goods. Mfgs might be interested in avoiding that in the US.

    2. Re:No warranties for you by Zaelath · · Score: 1

      Lots of things have implied/mandatory warranties, which may exceed those offered by the manufacturer.

      In the US it's a mess of state-based law, in Australia it's federal and Apple was shocked to discover that a 1 year warranty on a "premium priced" item wasn't sufficient.

      One option is winding up the business if you have a lot of unaffordable warranty claims in your foreseeable future... works well for a used car yard, not so well for Apple.

    3. Re:No warranties for you by Opportunist · · Score: 1

      No problem. Unless you want to sell anything over here in Europe because simply saying "selling this as-is, no warranty, if you break it, you get to keep both parts and that's that" works for software, but nothing else.

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
  24. I've rn into this with an xbox one by sims+2 · · Score: 1

    Had a damaged disc drive from a drop and wouldn't read games so I took it to a local repair shop.
    Local repair shop couldn't get the parts required to fix it.
    Subsequently discovered fall damage was covered by warranty sent the Xbox one to Microsoft and was informed that they would not repair it at any price because the sticker had been removed by the local repair shop to inspect the damage.

    Iirc ended having to mail it off to a professional place in Texas who was able to fix it for about $179

    --
    Minimum threshold fixed. Thanks!
    1. Re:I've rn into this with an xbox one by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      And that is illegal. You should, at the very least, file a complaint with the FTC. They don't have a specific category on their complaint form (https://www.ftccomplaintassistant.gov/) for Magnuson-Moss violations, but you can still file one.

      If you're in a state that has a small claims court and you're not past the statute of limitations, consider suing MS. They're unlikely to fight it, you'll probably get your $179 and court costs back. Yes, it's too small to hire a lawyer unless you want to bring a class action, but in some states small claims doesn't even allow lawyers, you'd be on a somewhat even footing with MS.

    2. Re:I've rn into this with an xbox one by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Microsoft does this to protect digital rights in preventing anyone from installing a mod chip that bypasses that security. Microsoft has to balance the producers of games with the people that purchase the Xbox. If Microsoft could not protect the games from being copied, there would be no game makers, and ultimately the Xbox would fail as a game platform.

      So I do see that Microsoft does not want you to open it up at all. But I like being able to repair the thing either myself or have someone else repair it for me when the thing breaks. Every Xbox will break one day, given enough time.

    3. Re:I've rn into this with an xbox one by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Frequently (read typically) they don't bother to show and you will win by default. Getting the remedy can be a chore but you will have the court order in hand to enforce.

  25. and aftermarket parts regularly break iPhones due by HiThere · · Score: 1

    Please rephrase "and aftermarket parts regularly break iPhones due to software updates" to "IPhone software upgrades regularly break aftermarket parts".

    --

    I think we've pushed this "anyone can grow up to be president" thing too far.
  26. Yet... by duke_cheetah2003 · · Score: 0

    People keep buying these products from these obviously shady companies. Yes I'm talking about you Apple. You are a shady company.

    You may have fooled the sheeple with your flashy ads and catchy marketing, but you're peddling garbage that breaks easily, can't be serviced by design and generally is inferior products at a premium price.

    There was a time when I had some shreds of sympathy for people who purchased Apple gear and thought they were buying premium hardware but were really getting substandard crap at a vastly inflated price. No sympathy left. You made that choice, you live with it.

    I won't even go into console gaming machines that stick these stickers to their trash. But, on a more humorous side, I am exceptionally amused by SODIMM's I get from discarded laptops that have 'warranty void if removed' sticker on them.. like there's any way to 'service' a SODIMM. LOL.

    Will humanity learn that a disposable ecosystem for our gadgets is really f'ing stupid and braindead? Probably not.

    Make a stand, make a choice. Buy products that are not only built well from the start, but are very serviceable, with replaceable parts made easy and simple even for the non-technician. Dell was one of these companies, but I dunno, some of their newer laptops seem to be adopting the 'use it until it doesn't work then throw it away' motto. As long as consumers keep buying the disposable gadgets, companies will keep making them. Stop buying that crap.

  27. Two words, Disk Drives by Wizardess · · Score: 1

    There are items which when opened in improperly equipped repair shops should not be covered by warranties. Disk drives and CPUs come to mind. If I open a rotating platters disk drive looking for what is wrong the dust and debris that invades the drive renders it's operation extremely iffy. Such warranty seal breakage should be exempt. If somebody asks a third party to repair it then the third party should warrant the repair.

    On the other hand opening the back of a TV set exposes nothing to dust or dirt damage that is exceptionally vulnerable. So if Hapless Harry opens the case, looks around, decides he is out of his depth, closes the case, and sends it for warranty repair it should be covered seals notwithstanding. But if he decaps some of those pretty rectangular thinguses inside, he's on his own.

    {^_^}

    1. Re:Two words, Disk Drives by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Says you

    2. Re:Two words, Disk Drives by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If I open a rotating platters disk drive looking for what is wrong the dust and debris that invades the drive renders it's operation extremely iffy. Such warranty seal breakage should be exempt.

      There's no need for such an exemption a manufacturer's warranty because that is clearly damage, not a manufacturing defect. If a repair shop damages an item then it's covered under the repairer's warranty, not the manufacturer's one.

  28. This is interfering with the freedom of contracts by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The sticker "warranty void if opened" means one thing:

    The manufacturer offers a warranty on their product as long as the product is not opened.

    Simple as that. Every customer has the right to not buy the product if they don't agree with these terms or simply ignore the contract and rip off the sticker.

    Tampering with a product willy-nilly under the hood has of course a high risk of damaging it and so is using replacement parts of bad quality. That is obvious. No manufacturer can warrant their products to be free from manufacturing defects if that warranty has to include damage by willfull tampering, neglect and exchanging critical parts with substandard replacements.

    With the hundreds of components in every complex consumer item, it is insane to demand the manufacturer warrants each of them individually or employ a detective agency to determine if every single chip, program, circuit, wheel, pulley, lever and wire is in the configuration it left the factory, ie is a manufacturing defect.

    Of course a manufacturer can offer warranty that covers a ton of possible abuse and a detective agency to tell aftermarket tuning from manufacturing defect, but it is completely obvious that this is far more expensive. So they don't offer it for the same price, and instead offer the standard warranty "we guarantee X if you don't do Y and don't peel off that sticker".

    Why is it so hard to have a freedom to enter contracts and a freedom of association for people?

  29. FWIW - nobody ever told me.... by bscott · · Score: 1

    Back in the 90s I worked as a field tech for PC hardware - everything from printers to laptops to monitors. Name brands like Dell, HP, Apple, and so on. I had manufacturer training courses and was supplied with the special tools, and special phone numbers for support.

    I was never told to look for those stickers, which often appeared across seams you'd open if you needed to access the devices. They were never mentioned once. I also did not have any way to even get hold of them if I wanted to replace one after destroying it myself during authorized warranty service.

    So, there's that.

    --
    Perfectly Normal Industries