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

    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 个月前

        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 个月前

          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 个月前

            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
        ·
        edit-2
        2 个月前

        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 🤷‍♂️