these limitations and exclusions apply to the fullest extent permitted by applicable law.
This is the actually important part. Companies drop unenforceable shit in t&c all the time. It’s just there to intimidate you and force you to give up your rights.
Of course local laws apply, but then you’re relying on specific local or regional laws that somehow invalidate the agreement which probably don’t exist. You’re really in an uphill battle to argue that all of these sections of the warranty - the very thing you’re using to argue you are owed - do not apply to your case.
Your skin in the game is <$500 (for me, this 4TB ssd w/ heatsink is $793 at a local microcenter.) $500 is hardly more than an hour of lawyer time, odds are you’re paying at least $300 just for them to write a cease and desist, and now you’ve got to argue that your lawyer fees should be covered despite an arbitration clause, a jurisdiction clause, and a maximum liability clause. One of the best case scenarios is that you would pony up the cash and they give you a settlement that still doesn’t get you to a point where you have a working product or enough money to buy an identical item after lawyer fees. The worst case scenario is that you get absolutely nothing out of the suit and have to pay for arbitration fees on top of your legal fees.
This is the actually important part. Companies drop unenforceable shit in t&c all the time. It’s just there to intimidate you and force you to give up your rights.
Of course local laws apply, but then you’re relying on specific local or regional laws that somehow invalidate the agreement which probably don’t exist. You’re really in an uphill battle to argue that all of these sections of the warranty - the very thing you’re using to argue you are owed - do not apply to your case.
Your skin in the game is <$500 (for me, this 4TB ssd w/ heatsink is $793 at a local microcenter.) $500 is hardly more than an hour of lawyer time, odds are you’re paying at least $300 just for them to write a cease and desist, and now you’ve got to argue that your lawyer fees should be covered despite an arbitration clause, a jurisdiction clause, and a maximum liability clause. One of the best case scenarios is that you would pony up the cash and they give you a settlement that still doesn’t get you to a point where you have a working product or enough money to buy an identical item after lawyer fees. The worst case scenario is that you get absolutely nothing out of the suit and have to pay for arbitration fees on top of your legal fees.