El 10/08/14 a las 14:10, Ted Roche escibió:
On Sun, Aug 10, 2014 at 12:09 PM, Ricardo Aráoz <ricar...@gmail.com> wrote:
El 09/08/14 a las 22:21, Ted Roche escibió:
LOL
Don't know much about your legislation but, doesn't it require that both
parties must "know" about the agreement before entering one? If the
"agreement" was inside the box then you had no way of knowing about it
until *after* you purchased it, so you wouldn't be bound by it.
Well, there is the law, and there is reality. I bought it from an online
vendor. That vendors terms of service may say, "You agree to be bound by
the terms of whatever we sell." Would that be morally right? I don't think
so. But if either *HUGE* company (Amazon or AT&T) decided it was worth
fighting about, they have buildings full of lawyers they could throw at a
case, while I had trouble scraping up $48 to buy their phone. I surely
could not afford to spend the money to have the issue debated in court.
So, if either of them decided to press the issue, I would probably knuckle
under and buy their lousy service.
I just have to depend on you guys not to tell anyone else... :)
Oh sorry! I wasn't supposed to tell? Sorry mate I blew it. ;-P
So the "land of the free" is actually the "land of the rich" and if you
have no money you won't get justice?
Nice to know, I'll try to skip that part of the planet.
_______________________________________________
Post Messages to: ProFox@leafe.com
Subscription Maintenance: http://mail.leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profox
OT-free version of this list: http://mail.leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profoxtech
Searchable Archive: http://leafe.com/archives/search/profox
This message: http://leafe.com/archives/byMID/profox/53e7b4ed.3090...@gmail.com
** All postings, unless explicitly stated otherwise, are the opinions of the
author, and do not constitute legal or medical advice. This statement is added
to the messages for those lawyers who are too stupid to see the obvious.
