• kevinsky@feddit.nl
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    52
    ·
    edit-2
    12 hours ago

    It also draws a bunch of negative attention to Samsung for this scummy move. Ideally more media pick this up.

    That samsung doesn’t have a replacement drive in stock is a blatant lie. They just want to sell him one for the inflated price.

    They never used to give you full refunds when these drives lost value over time. And if they did it wasn’t what you paid origionally. Now their price is ballooned and suddenly they are eager to do so.

    It’s extremely clear what Samsung is doing here.

    Edit/Addendum that i take no credit for:

    Evidently it’s against their own warranty terms: https://semiconductor.samsung.com/consumer-storage/support/warranty/

    In the event Samsung determines, in its sole discretion, that the Product suffers from defects in material or workmanship and does not substantially conform to the published specifications under normal use, for as long as You own the Product and during the limited warranty period, and subject to the conditions and exceptions stated in this Agreement, Samsung will, at its option, either: (1) repair or replace the Product with new or refurbished Product of equal or greater capacity and functionality; or (2) refund the then current market value of the Product at the time the warranty claim is made to Samsung if Samsung is unable to repair or replace the Product.

    • Ledivin@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      edit-2
      6 hours 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? Could really go either way.

        • Ledivin@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          26 seconds 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.

      • kevinsky@feddit.nl
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        edit-2
        5 hours ago

        They say that in a paragraph where they attempt to limit their liability, not in the part where they inform you of their actual warranty policy.

        But I guess we’ll find out in time where this ship ultimately runs onto land.

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

      • kevinsky@feddit.nl
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        edit-2
        5 hours ago

        This is obviously more about dust Louis is kicking up than the claim itself.

        But samsung has so much money that it is splashing up against the baseboards in their offices. There really is no reason for them to nickel and dime their customers like this, especially not where they are just straight up morally obliged to replace the product.

        I sincerely hope this affects them more than it would’ve just honoring these warranty claims like they should in the first place.

      • Flagstaff@programming.dev
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        edit-2
        7 hours 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
          10
          ·
          7 hours 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’ed themselves good on that one.

      • Holytimes@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        7 hours 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.