Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

FTC Gives Sony, Microsoft, and Nintendo 30 Days To Get Rid of Illegal Warranty-Void-if-Removed Stickers (vice.com)

Posted by msmash on from the enough-is-enough dept.

Matthew Gault, reporting for Motherboard: The Federal Trade Commission put six companies on notice in early April for illegally telling customers that getting third-party repairs voids the warranty on their electronics. You've seen the stickers before and read the messages buried in end user license agreements. Plastered on the back of my PlayStation 4 is a little sticker that says "warranty void if removed." That's illegal. Motherboard has obtained copies of the letters via a Freedom of Information Act request and has learned the names of the six companies that were warned. They are Sony, Microsoft, Nintendo, Hyundai, HTC, and computer hardware manufacturer ASUS. The letters were sent by Lois Greisman, the FTC's associate director of marketing practices, on April 9; the FTC has given each company 30 days to change its official warranty policies and says that it may take legal action against the companies.

76 of 133 comments (clear)

  1. Excellent! by dhaen · · Score: 2

    Yes!

  2. Fine. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    If I was Sony, I'd remove the sticker and the warranty along with it. If you can't guarantee the hardware hasn't been fucked with, you don't warranty it. Problem solved.

    1. Re:Fine. by nospam007 · · Score: 2

      "If I was Sony, I'd remove the sticker and the warranty along with it. "

      If they remove the sticker, they lost the warranty anyway.

    2. Re:Fine. by JMJimmy · · Score: 4, Informative

      Most Western countries have a minimum warranty period on electronics - the US is one of the few who don't.

    3. Re:Fine. by gravewax · · Score: 1

      If you think they are kicking up a stink about the sticker wait till they try that. That will be a straight to court thing, no warnings as most countries have laws about required consumer warranties.

    4. Re:Fine. by viperidaenz · · Score: 2

      Except that would be illegal.

      The onus is on Sony to prove someone else fucked with it.

    5. Re:Fine. by Darinbob · · Score: 1

      Very often the sticker is used as an excuse. Sorry, but we see you have a known service issue that we normally repair for free, but since it seems you took the device in the past to a repair shop not owned by use, we will refuse to repair it. Too bad you're just one person and signed the arbitration agreement so that you can't sue us.

    6. Re:Fine. by Darinbob · · Score: 1

      Except for the US, which sets the low bar for other countries to leap over.

    7. Re:Fine. by thegarbz · · Score: 3, Interesting

      If I was Sony, I'd remove the sticker and the warranty along with it. If you can't guarantee the hardware hasn't been fucked with, you don't warranty it. Problem solved.

      This is an everyone wins scenario.

      Sony will feel like they did something. Corporationists will cheer at the triumph of corporations over evil governments. Americans will get someone to sue. And the rest of the world with mandatory warranties will be unaffected.

      Have at it.

  3. Who done it? by DigiShaman · · Score: 4, Insightful

    So if someone tampers with the product in an attempt to fix it, then shoves it off to the manufacture, are they still on the hook for warranty repair? It's my understanding that these stickers are validate that the manufacture is the first to make repairs and not having to fix someone else's "fuck ups".

    --
    Life is not for the lazy.
    1. Re: Who done it? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      The manufacturer is off the hook if they prove that third party mods/f-ups caused the issue; otherwise, warranty is still valid. Magnuson Moss exists for this reason, and is the same reason a manufacturer cannot void a warranty due to mods that don't contribute to the problem (e.g. properly installed cone filter), although they'll still try to scare you.

    2. Re:Who done it? by msauve · · Score: 2

      It's not illegal, the article is full of shit.
      br/>And, the FTC didn't say it was illegal, they included it among "questionable practices".

      What is illegal is basing warranty coverage on use of parts specified by trade name, unless replacement of those parts is free under the warranty. So, Ford can't say you have to use their oil and filters when changing oil (they can if they give free oil changes, though), and Hoover can't make you use their vacuum cleaner bags.

      That really doesn't apply to a PS4 - the warranty covers everything that's inside. The sticker thing would be more for something like a computer - where they say you have to buy RAM upgrades from the manufacturer. But still, the manufacturer could say "no upgrades at all," and use a sticker to enforce it. But the sticker itself is just a red flag, it is not itself illegal.

      --
      "National Security is the chief cause of national insecurity." - Celine's First Law
    3. Re:Who done it? by Sloppy · · Score: 2

      So if someone tampers with the product in an attempt to fix it, then shoves it off to the manufacture, are they still on the hook for warranty repair?

      Probably not, because you already framed the situation as the person had tampered with it. On the other hand, if instead of tampering with it, they maintained it or took it out and put it back in again, or did anything else that you can think of that you wouldn't describe as "tampering," then yes, the manufacturer would be liable for repairing their defect.

      Ooohh, did you see what I did there at the end, where I slipped in the word "defect?" That's what you did with "tamper." The fun happens when we combined both forms of bullshit: what happens if the user tampers with an item that has a manufacturer's defect? Now we're really jerking off!

      --
      As copyright owner of this comment, I authorize everyone to defeat any technological measure which limits access to it.
    4. Re:Who done it? by msauve · · Score: 2

      My understanding is that the law is that manufacturers are not allowed to void warranty, or imply that the warranty is voided, by repairs done by an outside party.

      These stickers imply that the warranty is voided and thus run afoul of the law:

      Nope. Try reading the actual act:

      15 U.S. Code  2302(c) Prohibition on conditions for written or implied warranty; waiver by Commission

      No warrantor of a consumer product may condition his written or implied warranty of such product on the consumerâ(TM)s using, in connection with such product, any article or service (other than article or service provided without charge under the terms of the warranty) which is identified by brand, trade, or corporate name;

      ...that one section is what all the bullshit is based on. The rest of the act basically says the warranty must be clearly written.

      Note: a mfgr doesn't have to allow third parties to do repairs (as long as they will do the repair "without charge under the terms of the warranty"). Nothing prevents a mfgr from not allowing opening, tampering with, or modifying a product. Nothing prevents a mfgr from disallowing the use of third party replacement parts (as long as they provide the parts "without charge under the terms of the warranty"). Nothing prevents a car manufacturer from saying the engine warranty is void if you hang fuzzy dice on your mirror. And, no, they don't have to prove that some modification broke things.

      A PS4 comes with a 1 year warranty which covers parts and labor "without charge under the terms of the warranty." They're within their rights, and not in violation of the law, to put a do-no-break sticker on the box.

      --
      "National Security is the chief cause of national insecurity." - Celine's First Law
    5. Re:Who done it? by Sloppy · · Score: 2

      What happens if an unauthorized user sabotages a piece of junk by tampering with it, in order to circumvent a defect that was caused by negligent engineering, and they do it outside of the explicit terms of the illegally-phrased warranty that was written by a shyster who was hired to work as part of the manufacturer's legal team but only got the job due to their fraudulently deceptive resume?

      What if I told you the the piece of junk was sabotage because the user had an urgent need that the device was advertised as being fit to address, but the reason they had that need was to facilitate another activity which had criminal intent?

      Hold it, not so fast. What if I told you their criminal intent, though, had as its victim, a really bad hombre who totally had it coming? But the bad guy's heirs were innocent children?

      Except the innocent children were bastard-born!

      --
      As copyright owner of this comment, I authorize everyone to defeat any technological measure which limits access to it.
    6. Re:Who done it? by omnichad · · Score: 2

      Note: a mfgr doesn't have to allow third parties to do repairs (as long as they will do the repair "without charge under the terms of the warranty").

      Great, but under the tie-in sales provision:

      (c) Prohibition on conditions for written or implied warranty; waiver by CommissionNo warrantor of a consumer product may condition his written or implied warranty of such product on the consumer’s using, in connection with such product, any article or service (other than article or service provided without charge under the terms of the warranty) which is identified by brand, trade, or corporate name;

      This means that if you open up the PS4 and install a bigger hard drive, you have not voided the warranty. Unless the warranty claim is caused by or directly related to the replaced hard drive.

      And any service which opens up the device to clean out dust would also not be a violation (since it's not a service provided without charge under the warranty). Opening the device for visual inspection - again, not a service provided for free under warranty. The sticker implies otherwise.

    7. Re:Who done it? by tlhIngan · · Score: 1

      And any service which opens up the device to clean out dust would also not be a violation (since it's not a service provided without charge under the warranty). Opening the device for visual inspection - again, not a service provided for free under warranty. The sticker implies otherwise.

      Unless the duster or inspector is so inept as to cause damage.

      Opening up the unit is fine. Taking a peek inside is fine. But if you cause damage to it (perhaps you're vacuuming the unit to remove dust and knock a few components off), then it's not so fine - if it's traced someone cleaning it, then the warranty is gone for everything that person may have touched.

      Now if you're careful and don't disturb anything, it's considered your warranty is intact. If you don't have a fine touch, perhaps you shouldn't open the stuff lest you cause non-warranty covered damage.

      Though if your unit needs dusting while under warranty, it should probably be exhibiting symptoms that will be fixed under warranty. The risk of doing damage is high enough that I'd wait until the warranty was over anyways. And the sticker may change from "Warranty void if broken, tampered or removed" to "Warning: opening unit may void warranty". The difference is that the first sticker )what you usually get) means your warranty is gone the moment it's broken. The second implies you may lose your warranty if you say, ham-fist a cleaning operation, but is no longer an exclusion item.

    8. Re:Who done it? by omnichad · · Score: 1

      The only thing I'm saying is that the warranty sticker is a lie - not that you can't possibly void your warranty. Everything you said is correct, of course. Most manufacturers do not trace back the cause. They do not even look at the unit if the warranty sticker is not intact unless you sue or threaten to sue, judging by most of what I see on the Internet.

    9. Re:Who done it? by msauve · · Score: 1

      "This means that if you open up the PS4 and install a bigger hard drive, you have not voided the warranty."

      Yes, you have. Sony hasn't said you must use a Sony drive, but they have said that you can't make modifications, which is allowed. You have violated the clearly written warranty terms.

      Neither dust nor opening for inspection are necessary, and either would be tampering. If dust caused a problem, it would be repaired under warranty.

      --
      "National Security is the chief cause of national insecurity." - Celine's First Law
    10. Re:Who done it? by omnichad · · Score: 1

      Replacing one part with an equivalent part does not make it a modification. That's a service using different parts. Otherwise replacing your oil filter in your car with a non-OEM brand would void your warranty.

      Neither dust nor opening for inspection are necessary, and either would be tampering

      That doesn't matter. One, nothing says that a service has to be necessary. And "tampering" is just another word for service.

    11. Re:Who done it? by msauve · · Score: 1

      You're playing sophomoric, sophist word games which would immediately get kicked away from any legal argument. I understand what you'd like to do. I also understand what Sony's perfectly legal warranty terms say, and they don't let you do what you want. Sucks to be you.

      Oh, Sony also doesn't provide a free clean-it-by-putting-it-through-the-washing-machine service, either. And your warranty will be gone if you try.

      --
      "National Security is the chief cause of national insecurity." - Celine's First Law
    12. Re:Who done it? by omnichad · · Score: 1

      Found the Sony employee.

      You really think that replacing a hard drive is a modification in a way that replacing spark plugs or oil filters aren't?

      Getting a console wet would directly damage it and void almost all possible warranty claim, but it's not because it's a service that Sony doesn't offer.

    13. Re:Who done it? by msauve · · Score: 1

      Whoosh. Ignoring the meaning of "modify," you claim replacing a hard drive isn't a modification. Why would you replace one then? Really - unless it's different (more capacity, faster, quieter, ?), why exactly?

      And you really, really, have a hard time with reading comprehension. Using different spark plugs and oil filters is no different - if a manufacturer replaces them free during warranty, they can require you to use whichever ones they want. If you use something else, it's a modification, and you lose warranty coverage if it doesn't allow modifications. So, do you have a point, other than the one on your head?

      --
      "National Security is the chief cause of national insecurity." - Celine's First Law
    14. Re:Who done it? by omnichad · · Score: 1

      So who is playing word games now? You know there are things like case law and guidance by federal agencies, right? Installing RAM in your computer does NOT void your PC warranty. The law does not mean that modifications can void a warranty, because the original product still exists. If the warranty issue is not related to the modification then it's simply not part of the equation.

      The FTC specifically says that aftermarket parts are legal under the act: http://www.semasan.com/semaga/...

      if a manufacturer replaces them free during warranty, they can require you to use whichever ones they want.

      This is an extremely rare situation in practice and doesn't apply to any of the cases being discussed. In the case of a PS4 hard drive, no free replacement is on offer except in the case of a warranty claim. They don't offer free replacements in general (like an imaginary vacuum cleaner that had free replacement bags for life) so it is not covered. Aftermarket parts have been shown to not void warranties in actual court cases, except when the parts or modifications caused the issue in the warranty claim. And that includes upgrades. And generic printer ink. Simply offering free repair is not the same thing as what's mentioned in the act.

      No, I'm not going to go research case law for you. Just know that you're wrong and you can find out anywhere you look on the Internet.

    15. Re:Who done it? by BronsCon · · Score: 1

      Replacing a hard drive is "modification" the very same way replacing spark plugs is "modification". That's the point I believe omnichad, with whom I typically do not agree, was making; and he's right.

      If you replace the hard drive (spark plugs), you lose the warranty on the hard drive (spark plugs); unless the hard drive (spark plugs) you installed are what causes a failure elsewhere in the product, the warranty on the remainder of the product remains in-tact.

      --
      APK quotes people (including myself) without context and should not be trusted. Just thought you should know.
    16. Re:Who done it? by msauve · · Score: 1

      "You know there are things like case law... No, I'm not going to go research case law for you."

      So, you can't defend your point. G'bye!

      --
      "National Security is the chief cause of national insecurity." - Celine's First Law
    17. Re:Who done it? by thegarbz · · Score: 1

      Manufacturers are not on the line to fix someone's fuckups. They are on the line to fix manufacturing defects that lead to early failure.

      Neither of those have anything to do with the right to modify equipment, and neither of those typically occur from the simple act of opening the case.

      The manufacturer may want to make the first repair, and more power to them. However someone else making a repair or merely looking under the hood is not grounds for a manufacturer to not offer warranty on their defects.

    18. Re:Who done it? by Holi · · Score: 1

      Tampers?

      It is my property right? When I repair my car am I tampering? When I repair my computer (I probably have far more experience then the tech who would do the warranty repair) am I tampering?

      Tamper,
      interfere with (something) in order to cause damage or make unauthorized alterations.

      Well nothing is unauthorized as I own the product so no, no tampering is done.

      --
      Sorry, teleporters just kill you and then make a copy. A perfect, soul-less copy.
    19. Re:Who done it? by omnichad · · Score: 1

      The real issue is that most case law does involve ruling in favor of the manufacturer. But these cases are all where the problem was actually caused by the modification - which they had to prove. So it covers half of it, but the other half is likely hard to find because defect rates are actually pretty low for the most part.

    20. Re:Who done it? by AmiMoJo · · Score: 1

      This seems like a really poorly designed law.

      In the UK basically it's a warranty issue unless there is some evidence that the user caused the problem. That should be the default assumption, and if the manufacturer thinks you did something to screw it up then they should prove it.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    21. Re:Who done it? by omnichad · · Score: 1

      That's all true under Magnusson-Moss too. Though it's unlikely that the plaintiff will have an expert witness besides the manufacturer or themselves, so the manufacturer's flaky reasoning is often trusted as sufficient evidence.

    22. Re:Who done it? by pnutjam · · Score: 1

      Risk of damage from dusting? That's a little far fetched.

      --
      Cheap storage VM.
    23. Re:Who done it? by crypticedge · · Score: 1

      They are if they get paid for that advice, because then they're still acting as a lawyer while not being actually a lawyer, and that's a crime in every state

    24. Re: Who done it? by Sloppy · · Score: 1

      I would say you would have a close approximation of the truth.

      That's why people are subscribing to my soap opera, biatch!

      --
      As copyright owner of this comment, I authorize everyone to defeat any technological measure which limits access to it.
  4. Re:Establishing the system... by PAjamian · · Score: 2

    Your post would normally be modded funny, but in today's climate I think it wouldn't be wrong to mod this insightful.

    --
    Windows is a bonfire, Linux is the sun. Linux only looks smaller if you lack perspective.
  5. just pull an apple and say repaired is not an appl by Joe_Dragon · · Score: 1

    Louis Rossmann say that apple thinks that an 3rd party repaired apple system is now a pc and not an apple anymore.

  6. Hyundai by Joe_Dragon · · Score: 1

    Hyundai wants to pay $100 min for any dealer work and that's just for an estimate up front (was a few years ago may of went up)

    1. Re:Hyundai by MobyDisk · · Score: 2

      Wow, and you still use that mechanic? I prefer mechanics how diagnose the problem, then charge me only for the fix. And lots of them will waive their labor prices if they fail to fix it.

    2. Re:Hyundai by AvitarX · · Score: 1

      Why would I expect them to use their time for free?

      I've definitely been waived for work that doesn't fix the problem, and received some free diagnostics (even some repairs, such as my AC relay being dead, they looked at it and replaced it with my seat heating relay and told me to buy the part and replace that before winter), but a full AC diagnostic isn't something I'd expect for free anywhere.

      I consider my mechanic very honest and trustworthy, and nit the type to nickel and dime.

      --
      Wow, sent an e-mail as suggested when clicking on "use classic" banner, and got a fast response that addressed my msg
    3. Re:Hyundai by omnichad · · Score: 1

      So what prevents you from getting a free diagnosis and then fixing it yourself? Why should a mechanic provide this free service for you?

    4. Re: Hyundai by omnichad · · Score: 1

      There's a huge difference between tripping a code and knowing the real reason it was tripped. Takes a level of expertise. And there are a lot of issues that involve the interaction of multiple systems or don't involve computer controlled components.

    5. Re: Hyundai by omnichad · · Score: 1

      Yeah, and the last time the ODB scan pointed to an oxygen sensor issue on my old car, it was actually the anti-lock brake system that needed fixed (which just happened to have an oxygen sensor on the failed piece). I had to tell the mechanic the real cause because I had already had the same problem on the other side a few years prior.

    6. Re:Hyundai by Mashiki · · Score: 1

      What's the hourly rate set by your state/province? That's where it starts. Most businesses offer estimates free, most states and provinces have laws requiring estimates to be free as well.

      --
      Om, nomnomnom...
    7. Re: Hyundai by Mashiki · · Score: 1

      That makes no sense, the O2 sensor is in three places(if equipped), exhaust manifold, pre-cat, and post-cat. The ABS system is separate from the engine computer and doesn't share anything with the ABS system itself. The only possible case is where the harness is combined and is shorting out. If that's the case, you're moving from "component failure" to "design failure."

      --
      Om, nomnomnom...
    8. Re: Hyundai by omnichad · · Score: 1

      I finally remembered the details. It was an airflow sensor that was bad, but it tripped the ABS light and the ABS system would only work intermittently until it was fixed. It still made no sense.

    9. Re: Hyundai by Mashiki · · Score: 1

      Could you post your model and year of vehicle? I've never seen that happen, and would like to check the wiring schematic for my own reference(was a mechanic at one point in my life). I do have one for you on the other side though, where a TPS(throttle body) sensor would cause the MAF(manfold air flow) sensor to report low air pressure to the computer causing an engine stall. As the computer would retard the fuel injector at the top of the throttle body. Was on 1993-1995 3.1L GM engines during the hybrid phase between non-fuel injection and full MFI. The TPS sensor reported the throttle plate position when the gas peddle was depressed. That was a very interesting learning experience for me.

      --
      Om, nomnomnom...
  7. Just like Hitler did! by Train0987 · · Score: 1

    hrmmph

  8. Re:Pointless by Faldgan · · Score: 4, Informative

    Even if they remove the stickers, they will just point to the ToS that says if you open your device, you're SoL in terms of warranty. Like Apple does.

    Unfortunately for the manufacturers that part of ToS is not enforcable since it violates the law. Despite having put some writing on their product and documentation and websites, they are legally required to honor that warranty.

    --
    Nathan Brazil?
  9. Re:Pointless by Narcocide · · Score: 1

    That's what I was gonna bring up. How is Apple off the hook here? By the minor semantic difference of using software instead of an actual sticker?

  10. May not be illegal by russotto · · Score: 2

    The relevant law appears to be 15 USC 2302 (c)

    Prohibition on conditions for written or implied warranty; waiver by Commission

    No warrantor of a consumer product may condition his written or implied warranty of such product on the consumerâ(TM)s using, in connection with such product, any article or service (other than article or service provided without charge under the terms of the warranty) which is identified by brand, trade, or corporate name;

    The FTC left out the parenthesized portion in their letter, and it seems to me it's relevant. If repair service is provided without charge under the terms of the warranty, it's exempt from this provision. But I don't know the case law on this.

    1. Re:May not be illegal by viperidaenz · · Score: 1

      I know you're not a lawyer but perhaps you should look up existing case law to find clarification for your interpretation of a law.

      If you break your phone screen by dropping something on it and the manufacturer provides free broken screen replacements, sure, perhaps they can predicate the warranty on using you having them replace your screen for free.

      They can't deny you warranty cover for any issues not relating to the screen if they don't give away free screens and you previously had your screen replaced by a third party.

      That's the thing with laws. They need to not only be read in context with the entire bill/act, but also with all the precedents set by previous judgements that clarify the interpretation.

    2. Re:May not be illegal by Major+Blud · · Score: 1

      Which parenthesized part? The one at the end of 15 USC 2302 (c) ?

      --
      If you post as Anonymous Coward, don't expect a reply.
    3. Re:May not be illegal by omnichad · · Score: 1

      Which only means that the free services are exempted. There are a lot of paid services and product upgrades that are not provided for free by the manufacturer. For example, replacing the hard drive in the PS4 would not void your GPU warranty. Opening up another device to blow out dust on the fan would not void the warranty.

  11. Re: Establishing the system... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Oh you mean that syndrome where you are rightfully afraid that Trump is deranged?

  12. Re:computer hardware manufacturer ASUS by sconeu · · Score: 1

    In that case, Slashdot is dead.

    Well, it probably is anyways, but still...

    --
    General Relativity: Space-time tells matter where to go; Matter tells space-time what shape to be.
  13. A few years ago by pem · · Score: 4, Interesting
    A few years ago I bought a really nice ASUS desktop from Fry's. I scraped off Windows and loaded Linux.

    But after a day and a half, the fan got really loud and stayed that way. (Not the CPU fan; it sounded like the chassis fan was rubbing on something.)

    So I unplugged everything, hefted the desktop up onto the work table, and.... encountered the sticker.

    Rather than opening it up, I took it back to Fry's and told them there was a problem with it. When I entered the store with it, they logged it and gave me a receipt I could use to take it back out of the store when I was finished at the service desk.

    At the service desk, I explained that since the sticker disallowed me from opening the computer up, I was contemplating bring it back for a refund, but that even if I kept it, it needed to be quited down. The dude booted it up, and told me that Linux was unsupported, so of course I couldn't bring it back -- I'd already voided the warranty by scraping Windows off.

    After a couple of minutes of fruitless conversation with him and his boss, I just left (having proof in my pocket that I had taken the machine in). I got Fry's registered agent's information from the secretary of state, and emailed them, explaining that, if I needed to, I would explain to the credit card company that I returned the machine at the store since it was malfunctioning, and then they could sue me in small claims court for whatever damage they claim I did to it. They caved and issued a full refund after a couple of weeks.

    1. Re:A few years ago by Xenolith0 · · Score: 4, Interesting

      I love the amount of effort some people put into returning defective items. Anytime I purchase something that breaks within it's warranty or return period, I'll make a half-hearted attempt to get it fixed through "proper channels". I'll take it back to the store, I'll contact customer service.

      But as soon they tell me, "You have to pay shipping and send it back to us, and if we can confirm it's defective we'll issue a refund.... yada yada yada". Then, then answer is "Nope." And I login into American Express's website, click dispute charge. Done problem solved.

      As a company, you have two options:
      1) Replace the defective item, and get the dead one back to deal with the manufacturer.
      2) Bullshit me, and then you can eat the cost of the dead item and not get it back.

    2. Re:A few years ago by nightfire-unique · · Score: 2

      It's so bizarre.

      My personal rule is pretty simple: treat me with respect and honesty, and honour your committment, and I will remain a fiercely loyal customer. I will spend lots of money with you to the exclusion of your competition, and try my best to convince others to do the same.

      Attempt to screw me, and I'll do exactly the same as above, except the opposite.

      I literally can't fathom why a vendor would choose to gamble that they can screw a customer without consequences.

      --
      A government is a body of people notably ungoverned - AC
    3. Re:A few years ago by pem · · Score: 1
      I'm right there with you. Many credit card companies (and certainly Amex in particular) are awesome.

      But finding a registered agent and emailing them is not a lot of effort; usually about 5 minutes. (If it's a publicly-held company, I just go straight for the general counsel. His name is easy to find, and his email address is usually easy to find, as well, e.g. on a state bar association website.) And then if the thing ever winds up in a lawsuit or arbitration, you have really good evidence, from your efforts at communicating, that you're the good guy.

      So I always consider sending off an email as part (or even just documentation, really) of the half-hearted attempt. As far as keeping products, yeah, that happens sometimes, and that might have happened this time if I didn't happen to have the receipt in my pocket for taking it to the service desk, and no real reason to take it back home with me.

    4. Re:A few years ago by karlandtanya · · Score: 1

      No.
      Your contract is with the seller. Their supplier is their problem.

      --
      "Reality is that which, when you stop believing in it, doesn't go away." - Philip K. Dick
    5. Re: A few years ago by houghi · · Score: 1

      Why not go to the store. If it isfrom a website, it is not unreasonable for them to ask you pay shopment.
      And if it is so easy to block payment, why do it only with broken items?

      --
      Don't fight for your country, if your country does not fight for you.
    6. Re:A few years ago by AmiMoJo · · Score: 2

      I literally can't fathom why a vendor would choose to gamble that they can screw a customer without consequences.

      Because on balance screwing the customer is more profitable, at least in the short term.

      Retailer notices they are seeing a lot of returns that cost them money to process. Someone is charged with reducing returns. They do so by making the return process too difficult for most people to bother with. The few that end up costing them more don't outweigh the majority who just give up and get robbed.

      The manager who instigates this gets their bonus and then moves on. Five years down the line sales are lagging and they have a reputation for difficult returns. A different manager is charged with fixing this, so introduces an easy return policy.

      The cycle repeats.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
  14. Re:computer hardware manufacturer ASUS by DontBeAMoran · · Score: 1

    Isn't that a quote from Motherboard? Granted it makes even less sense for them to specify this, but at least blame the correct website.

    --
    #DeleteFacebook
  15. Great, but... by Lucas123 · · Score: 1

    When are they going to get around to my mattress tags? I can't stand those things!

    1. Re:Great, but... by Joe_Dragon · · Score: 1

      Don't drop the soap
      https://www.youtube.com/watch?...

  16. you changed the oil not at the dealer or went 3001 by Joe_Dragon · · Score: 1

    you changed the oil not at the dealer or went 3001+ miles with out changing it.

  17. Re:what a loser by burtosis · · Score: 2

    He must be a coding genius to mechanically obstruct the fan with linux. Maybe he should have tried to losen it up with free BSD.

  18. Seemed reasonable to me? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Didn't this sticker protect both the consumer and manufacture? I mean you could prove you never tampered with the product, and the manufacture had proof you did not too. Given a easy approval of warranty claim and this appears to be going away? I guess other means can be done to detect tampering which are being used today.

  19. Re: what a loser by Bing+Tsher+E · · Score: 1

    You can install an unsupported OS on certain Apple hardware that makes the cooling fans run at full tilt all the time, because the unsupported OS doesn't manage the cooling system the way Apple's designers expected. The hardware doesn't find itself being managed so it goes to the safe default of full-bore maximum cooling.

  20. Re: what a loser by pem · · Score: 1
    Yeah, but that's not what was going on. LM Sensors indiicated no problems whatsoever, and it wasn't an RPM issue, and was the chassis fan, not the CPU fan.

    In any case, I'm much happier with the Lenovo replacement I bought (which didn't have the sticker).

  21. Re:what a loser by pem · · Score: 1

    Is that you, Mr. Gates? Great! Maybe you can use Bing tell me where in my town I can buy a computer that doesn't have your crap pre-installed!

  22. Re:Establishing the system... by Darinbob · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Funny jokes are often insightful.

  23. Re:you changed the oil not at the dealer or went 3 by fido_dogstoyevsky · · Score: 1

    you changed the oil not at the dealer...

    Changing the oil not at the dealer is not enough to void a warranty*. In some other parts of the world.

    *Does, however, have to be changed by a qualified mechanic.

    --
    It's NOT a conspiracy... it's a plot.
  24. Re: Establishing the system... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    So you weren't worried when Obama and Hillary were destabilizing the entire middle east worse then Bush did?

  25. Re:Establishing the system... by Truekaiser · · Score: 1

    Trump derangement syndrome symptom 2.
    Blaming the status quo on him as if it was an aberration.

  26. Four-step test of Central Hudson (1980) by tepples · · Score: 1

    Google Search for commercial speech returned the Wikipedia article "Commercial speech" that led me to Central Hudson Gas & Electric Corp. v. Public Service Commission, 447 U.S. 557 (1980), which instituted a four-step test to determine whether regulation of commercial speech is constitutional. In particular, commercial speech is protected only when it is not misleading.