• Ledivin@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      edit-2
      2 months ago

      Also in that policy, however:

      IN NO EVENT WILL SAMSUNG’S LIABILITY EXCEED THE AMOUNT PAID BY YOU FOR THE PRODUCT.

      Shitty? Absolutely. Legally sound? Honestly, I don’t think there’s a chance in hell Samsung loses this… but is it worth the negative PR?

        • 0x0@infosec.pub
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          6
          ·
          2 months ago

          I like Rossman but he is in the wrong here unfortunately.

          In any sane country receipt price is what you get back if the issue cant be solved, price matching in reverse isnt a thing.

          On top of that a lot of sellers will try to compensate you in some way, but they really dont have to.

          Should samsung eat the cost of issuing a new disk for goodwill? Sure we think so but that is entirely up how much they value their brand name.

          Except that in this case, the bad PR is manufactured by louis

          • w3dd1e@lemmy.zip
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            2 months ago

            I sort of agree with you on him being wrong but I think this situation is also unique to our current retail environments and laws around that need to be reevaluated.

            I think the ridiculous rise in cost over the 90day warranty period is charting new territory and if we don’t set precedent now, we are hurting ourselves.

            Rossman could have bought 2-3 drives for the amount they are selling for now and that’s ridiculous.

            • 0x0@infosec.pub
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              2
              ·
              2 months ago

              They dont have to replace it under warranty if they are unable to for any reason, cash back is last resolution.

        • Ledivin@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          2 months ago

          It’s basically just a shortcut instead of inserting “up to the amount you paid for the product” in every single place they mention payment, which I assume is many.

          TBH, I think Samsung easily wins this in court, but is it worth the negative press? I’d argue that they’ve already lost more than they ever stood to save, but maybe they’re worried this will turn into a trend that would cost a lot more 🤷‍♂️

      • Flagstaff@programming.dev
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        7
        ·
        2 months ago

        It’s probably because it’s Louis Rossmann against Samsung (both giants in their respective fields)…

        • kieron115@startrek.website
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          11
          ·
          edit-2
          2 months ago

          It’s definitely because of Louis. He’s been doing a lot of work in the right to repair field, as well as this whole fuckin fiasco that Bambu (the 3d printer company) got themselves into by violating the LGPL license with some software. Streisand’d themselves good on that one.

      • Holytimes@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        2 months ago

        Even a small court can have a notable impact when it’s between not able figures.

        This is less about the case and more about the message. Hench why it makes the news.