The relevant nutshell, MA vendors can have any posted return policy that they want. But, if the merchandise is defective, it says:
A store, however, cannot use its disclosed policy to refuse the return of defective merchandise. When the item purchased is defective, you can choose a repair, replacement or refund. This right is contained in the Implied Warranty of Merchantability law. Under that law, merchants cannot limit your remedies. In addition, this means that if a merchant chooses an "All Sales Final" return policy, it must disclose that policy without limiting your rights.
So, is a CD that won't work in your computer becuase of copy protective defective? IANAL, but I would think so.
So holds true to a product that lists features on its packaging that it does not meet (so a buggy, unplayable game is defective- assuming it does not work as advertised.)
Finding a merchandise store worker/manager that has a clue/authority to actually obey the law is another matter.
I used to work with Alex. First off, he's more of a Brand Manager/MARketing WEASel than PR.
Second, he's been marketting games and interacting with communities for a long time. (IMO) A lot of why he does community relations is that he likes being part of the community since he's a big gamer himself. I'm unsure if it's even (a big) part of his job description- though that doesn't excuse anything.
I found it quite odd to see his comment. It's not something I'd expect him to write. Though I'm betting Sierra marketting is under a lot of pressure right now with not a lot of resources.
- VU/VUgames has been 'for sale' for almost a year now, and VU hasn't been doing to well. - Sierra has quite a few PC games to market this season (Half-Life 2, Homeworld 2, Lords of the Realm 3, Ground Control 2, War of the Ring) plus their console stuff). I seriously doubt they have either the manpower or the budget to adequately cover all of them. Which isn't something that any dedicated marketting person would be pleased with at all.
I suggest actually reading the article ( http://xxx.lanl.gov/abs/astro-ph/0201018 ) before tearing up the theory.
In an effort to debunk an ill informed back of the napkin calculation and conclusion, here's the meat of the relevant information from the paper:
First, at the time of the Supernova, the center star cluster in question would have been 100pc from the Solar System, with stars as close as 40pc (130 lightyears). At this distance, the radiation that could hurt the biosphere is limited to hard cosmic rays (a primary cosmic ray effect is ozone depletion). Remember that supernovas have a rather different energy output than a healthy star, so what one looks like in visible light compared to what the sun looks like in visible light doesn't tell the whole story.
Second, given the nature of the Local Bubble of space and making a few reasonable assumptions about it, a supernova 40pc away would produce enough cosmic ray energy (to within a factor of 2) to deplete the ozone layer by 20% at the equator and 60% at high latitudes.
This ozone depletion is consistent with the extinction event associated with these supernova.
Slashdot Mirror
A Massachusetts Consumer Guide: Shopping Rights
The relevant nutshell, MA vendors can have any posted return policy that they want. But, if the merchandise is defective, it says:
So, is a CD that won't work in your computer becuase of copy protective defective? IANAL, but I would think so.
So holds true to a product that lists features on its packaging that it does not meet (so a buggy, unplayable game is defective- assuming it does not work as advertised.)
Finding a merchandise store worker/manager that has a clue/authority to actually obey the law is another matter.
I used to work with Alex. First off, he's more of a Brand Manager/MARketing WEASel than PR.
Second, he's been marketting games and interacting with communities for a long time. (IMO) A lot of why he does community relations is that he likes being part of the community since he's a big gamer himself. I'm unsure if it's even (a big) part of his job description- though that doesn't excuse anything.
I found it quite odd to see his comment. It's not something I'd expect him to write. Though I'm betting Sierra marketting is under a lot of pressure right now with not a lot of resources.
- VU/VUgames has been 'for sale' for almost a year now, and VU hasn't been doing to well.
- Sierra has quite a few PC games to market this season (Half-Life 2, Homeworld 2, Lords of the Realm 3, Ground Control 2, War of the Ring) plus their console stuff). I seriously doubt they have either the manpower or the budget to adequately cover all of them. Which isn't something that any dedicated marketting person would be pleased with at all.
From the Archives of Pediatrics and Adolescent Medicine
l l/ poa20075.html
http://archpedi.ama-assn.org/issues/v156n10/rfu
I suggest actually reading the article ( http://xxx.lanl.gov/abs/astro-ph/0201018 ) before tearing up the theory.
In an effort to debunk an ill informed back of the napkin calculation and conclusion, here's the meat of the relevant information from the paper:
First, at the time of the Supernova, the center star cluster in question would have been 100pc from the Solar System, with stars as close as 40pc (130 lightyears). At this distance, the radiation that could hurt the biosphere is limited to hard cosmic rays (a primary cosmic ray effect is ozone depletion). Remember that supernovas have a rather different energy output than a healthy star, so what one looks like in visible light compared to what the sun looks like in visible light doesn't tell the whole story.
Second, given the nature of the Local Bubble of space and making a few reasonable assumptions about it, a supernova 40pc away would produce enough cosmic ray energy (to within a factor of 2) to deplete the ozone layer by 20% at the equator and 60% at high latitudes.
This ozone depletion is consistent with the extinction event associated with these supernova.