Point to you, they didn't specify the hardware capabilities. Neither did they say "We'll give you any piece of matter that will connect to our service". They were selling a specific piece of hardware. My happening to know the capabilities of that model shouldn't have anything to do with it. As long as the "new" model (modified only to prevent perfectly legal repurposing of the hardware) has the same specifications as the previous advertising, it will be difficult to claim that they fraudulently sold me hardware diffent from what I paid for. But since their manipulation has been pretty public I would still throw it in as a count. But really, the Terms of Service that they're trying to retroactively apply are in my opinion an actionable cause.
No, the sales material did not in any way require that I sign up for any service. Service was offered as an EXTRA option on the menu. This was their mistake, but they DID MAKE the mistake. Do you think the IRS is gonna let you off on your taxes if you make a mistake? Do you think the lawyers are gonna let you off if you injure someone by mistake? Well, I'm not gonna let a corporation off the hook for making a mistake. It is perfectly morally correct to take them up on a business offer made to the general public. Do you refuse to buy the loss leaders at your grocery store because it would hurt their profits? Now that they've caught their mistake, they have changed the terms of the offer. These terms apply to every future sale of the item. They have every right to change the terms of the offer to whatever they want, BEFORE THE TRANSACTION IS MADE. They do NOT have the right to change the terms of the transaction after it is entered into. That's the ONLY issue I am debating here. --GraySoul
Since their marketing materials didn't mention the requirement of purchasing any service or the exclusion of the use of the device for any purpose at the time I placed my order (and gave a cash deposit) I believe they have a contractual obligation to deliver to me the original design device. Anyone want to join a class-action lawsuit for fraud? Here's a copy of the Email I sent to their developer's corner. "I have a Circuit City receipt for an iOpener purchased under the then-existing sales policy of March 19. I put down a cash deposit to secure this transaction. If I do not receive the product under the terms of sale and with the capabilities then existing, I will be suing you for fraud."
Slashdot Mirror
Point to you, they didn't specify the hardware capabilities. Neither did they say "We'll give you any piece of matter that will connect to our service". They were selling a specific piece of hardware. My happening to know the capabilities of that model shouldn't have anything to do with it. As long as the "new" model (modified only to prevent perfectly legal repurposing of the hardware) has the same specifications as the previous advertising, it will be difficult to claim that they fraudulently sold me hardware diffent from what I paid for. But since their manipulation has been pretty public I would still throw it in as a count. But really, the Terms of Service that they're trying to retroactively apply are in my opinion an actionable cause.
No, the sales material did not in any way require that I sign up for any service. Service was offered as an EXTRA option on the menu. This was their mistake, but they DID MAKE the mistake. Do you think the IRS is gonna let you off on your taxes if you make a mistake? Do you think the lawyers are gonna let you off if you injure someone by mistake? Well, I'm not gonna let a corporation off the hook for making a mistake. It is perfectly morally correct to take them up on a business offer made to the general public. Do you refuse to buy the loss leaders at your grocery store because it would hurt their profits? Now that they've caught their mistake, they have changed the terms of the offer. These terms apply to every future sale of the item. They have every right to change the terms of the offer to whatever they want, BEFORE THE TRANSACTION IS MADE. They do NOT have the right to change the terms of the transaction after it is entered into. That's the ONLY issue I am debating here. --GraySoul
Since their marketing materials didn't mention the requirement of purchasing any service or the exclusion of the use of the device for any purpose at the time I placed my order (and gave a cash deposit) I believe they have a contractual obligation to deliver to me the original design device. Anyone want to join a class-action lawsuit for fraud? Here's a copy of the Email I sent to their developer's corner. "I have a Circuit City receipt for an iOpener purchased under the then-existing sales policy of March 19. I put down a cash deposit to secure this transaction. If I do not receive the product under the terms of sale and with the capabilities then existing, I will be suing you for fraud."