Hello Mr. Obvious Socketpuppet is Obvious.
Some quality argumentative skills being displayed right there. Not my fault he used the int30h account and then got confused about which one he was logged in as. He didn't even last a day. I am here. Waiting for the terms of the bet . Hello Mr. Obvious Socketpuppet is Obvious. I brought the law. Xian already contacted the Missouri's AG office. He will probably also contact a lawyer to get the rest of his money back for the forward contract cancellation via civil court. You should put a little more effort into pretending you are not Endlessa if you want us to take you seriously. BFL was selling forward contracts, not sales of existing goods. Forward contracts cannot be unilaterally canceled just because one party does not want to pay the agreed price anymore. You should probably pick one account and stick with it. I have an account and I am sticking to it.. I am still waiting for the terms of your bet... Hello Mr. Obvious Socketpuppet is Obvious. I brought the law. Xian already contacted the Missouri's AG office. He will probably also contact a lawyer to get the rest of his money back for the forward contract cancellation via civil court. You should put a little more effort into pretending you are not Endlessa if you want us to take you seriously. BFL was selling forward contracts, not sales of existing goods. Forward contracts cannot be unilaterally canceled just because one party does not want to pay the agreed price anymore. You should probably pick one account and stick with it. |
|
|
|
[You can file in your local jurisdiction since Butterfly Labs sells online. Ask for damages of the difference between the market value of your forward contract to purchase BFL equipment and the amount you were refunded. Forward contracts cannot be unilaterally terminated.
There is more to be claimed, actually, because were not talking about an item whose price simply increased over time, but rather means of production -- a tool that can generate revenue. It more akin to failing to deliver a car to a taxi cab licensee. It prevents the buyer from earning. You are correct, loss of revenue is certainly to be considered. He would need to consult a lawyer about it though. Holy crap k9quaint, I'll already went over the facts in UCC for missouri with you. I think you have a bad case of fish memory. drlukacs please go back and read before you run in all cowboy shooting your guns in the air yelling "Yeehaw! look at me I'm making points and stuff!" In the state of Missouri, once you cancel the implied contract and refund the money. All responsibilities of both parties are terminated. The only recourse after that is to PROVE prior breach of contract (before the cancellation). Since the product wasn't delivered yet. The only possible thing he could bring up is the delivery time. With the link I previously gave showing the archived version of the website, It clearly stated that October was the "Currently scheduled" date. This clearly makes the buyer aware that the date is not definitive, unless they lack basic reading comprehension. The final obligation for the seller is to let them know if/when the specification of the product changes, which they did through the forums and with the confirmation of the buyers desire to continue the purchase (the recent dialog that pops up). Now, you can be frustrated and angry and I can understand your emotions. You can't arbitrarily say they did something illegal. I have seen no supporting evidence of your claims. I only see that you are angry and want to hurt them. I'm supportive of expressing your feelings and emotions. I'm not supportive of some distorted, trumped up, vengeful misinformation campaign. I'm supportive of exploring consumer rights, as this is something all buyers should be aware of when purchasing products. I'm not supportive of making crap up because you "feel" like that's what the law should be. * this is not legal advice and should not be taken as such. If you feel you have an actual fact that disproves this is the law, by all means I'd love to explore it. Hello again Mr. Obvious Sockpuppet is Obvious. BFL was selling forward contracts, not sales of existing goods. Forward contracts cannot be unilaterally canceled just because one party does not want to pay the agreed price anymore. BFL can be sued by Xian for the difference between the current value of that contract and the money they refunded to him. Xian should win effortlessly. UCC covers the sale of "future goods" (commonly referred to as pre-orders) as well. your just making things up again. ..bring some supporting law to the table and I'll take a look. If your right, the factual contribution is much appreciated As for your "sock puppet" claim. Firstly, your getting really boring with that. When people speak this way, I start to think of them as the type of person who would appear in a tinfoil hat tell me how microwaves are "mind control" devices. Secondly, my demeanor and approach to discussing this with you is vastly different from Josh's approach (right or wrong, couldn't care less). I feel a touch sad that I need to inform you that there are other people in the world that don't believe in your beliefs. And all of them but the actual "Josh" are not named Josh. Hello Mr. Obvious Socketpuppet is Obvious. BFL was selling forward contracts, not sales of existing goods. Forward contracts cannot be unilaterally canceled just because one party does not want to pay the agreed price anymore. BFL can be sued by Xian for the difference between the current value of that contract and the money they refunded to him. Xian should win effortlessly. Again bring a law to the table and lets take a look at it. . . keep claiming sock puppet, Its arbitrary and pointless. Only serves the purpose of misdirection on your part. If you want to imagine me being Josh, feel free. It doesn't change the discussion at all. Hello Mr. Obvious Socketpuppet is Obvious. I brought the law. Xian already contacted the Missouri's AG office. He will probably also contact a lawyer to get the rest of his money back for the forward contract cancellation via civil court. You should put a little more effort into pretending you are not int30h if you want us to take you seriously. BFL was selling forward contracts, not sales of existing goods. Forward contracts cannot be unilaterally canceled just because one party does not want to pay the agreed price anymore. I will put no effort into proving my identity to you. I do not owe you that. I could care less. Also, I'm not the one who claimed "Implied Contract" and consumer protections in Missouri, you were. I only brought the actual facts and direct law of consumer protections (UCC) to the table, so we could talk about them and how they may or may not apply to what you were talking about. When that didn't pan out for you, you come back with new equally sure argument about "future contracts". I was hoping you would, in turn, do the leg work to show precisely the laws you are talking about. Instead, because I'm almost sure your not going to, I will once again figure out for you what you are talking about, so the community can evaluate the facts and educate our selves on what is and isn't protecting us when we purchase product. To clarify, I'm not fully claiming you are wrong on this. I'm just asking you bring it to the table with some facts, so we discern whether or not this is another statement of how you feel the law should be or if it's an actually applicable argument. In addition, anybody can register a complaint with AG against anybody within their jurisdiction. This is no way a proof of wrong doing. Hello Mr. Obvious Socketpuppet is Obvious. I brought the law. Xian already contacted the Missouri's AG office. He will probably also contact a lawyer to get the rest of his money back for the forward contract cancellation via civil court. You should put a little more effort into pretending you are not int30h if you want us to take you seriously. BFL was selling forward contracts, not sales of existing goods. Forward contracts cannot be unilaterally canceled just because one party does not want to pay the agreed price anymore. You should probably pick one account and stick with it so I don't have to answer you twice. |
|
|
|
Hello Mr. Obvious Socketpuppet is Obvious.
Some quality argumentative skills being displayed right there. Not my fault he used the int30h account and then got confused about which one he was logged in as. He didn't even last a day. I am here. Waiting for the terms of the bet . Hello Mr. Obvious Socketpuppet is Obvious. I brought the law. Xian already contacted the Missouri's AG office. He will probably also contact a lawyer to get the rest of his money back for the forward contract cancellation via civil court. You should put a little more effort into pretending you are not Endlessa if you want us to take you seriously. BFL was selling forward contracts, not sales of existing goods. Forward contracts cannot be unilaterally canceled just because one party does not want to pay the agreed price anymore. You should probably pick one account and stick with it. |
|
|
|
Any of you ever consider that the level of transparency from the OP is a good thing? If he openly shares who he is wouldn't that show some commitment to legitimacy? Just a thought. I'm looking forward to you "hero" folks eatting your words. Nice to see people here are so consumed with anger and paranoia that they can't see straight. Get some fresh air. Espessially you smoothie.
Somebody else posted his contact and account info. Someone else posted his contact information that is all easily found public information. Search his name or whois his website. His information is there for all to see. Sorry, I happen to own a physics book. Whois won't hell the OP break the laws of physics. |
|
|
|
Hello Mr. Obvious Socketpuppet is Obvious.
Some quality argumentative skills being displayed right there. Not my fault he used the int30h account and then got confused about which one he was logged in as. He didn't even last a day. |
|
|
|
[You can file in your local jurisdiction since Butterfly Labs sells online. Ask for damages of the difference between the market value of your forward contract to purchase BFL equipment and the amount you were refunded. Forward contracts cannot be unilaterally terminated.
There is more to be claimed, actually, because were not talking about an item whose price simply increased over time, but rather means of production -- a tool that can generate revenue. It more akin to failing to deliver a car to a taxi cab licensee. It prevents the buyer from earning. You are correct, loss of revenue is certainly to be considered. He would need to consult a lawyer about it though. Holy crap k9quaint, I'll already went over the facts in UCC for missouri with you. I think you have a bad case of fish memory. drlukacs please go back and read before you run in all cowboy shooting your guns in the air yelling "Yeehaw! look at me I'm making points and stuff!" In the state of Missouri, once you cancel the implied contract and refund the money. All responsibilities of both parties are terminated. The only recourse after that is to PROVE prior breach of contract (before the cancellation). Since the product wasn't delivered yet. The only possible thing he could bring up is the delivery time. With the link I previously gave showing the archived version of the website, It clearly stated that October was the "Currently scheduled" date. This clearly makes the buyer aware that the date is not definitive, unless they lack basic reading comprehension. The final obligation for the seller is to let them know if/when the specification of the product changes, which they did through the forums and with the confirmation of the buyers desire to continue the purchase (the recent dialog that pops up). Now, you can be frustrated and angry and I can understand your emotions. You can't arbitrarily say they did something illegal. I have seen no supporting evidence of your claims. I only see that you are angry and want to hurt them. I'm supportive of expressing your feelings and emotions. I'm not supportive of some distorted, trumped up, vengeful misinformation campaign. I'm supportive of exploring consumer rights, as this is something all buyers should be aware of when purchasing products. I'm not supportive of making crap up because you "feel" like that's what the law should be. * this is not legal advice and should not be taken as such. If you feel you have an actual fact that disproves this is the law, by all means I'd love to explore it. Hello again Mr. Obvious Sockpuppet is Obvious. BFL was selling forward contracts, not sales of existing goods. Forward contracts cannot be unilaterally canceled just because one party does not want to pay the agreed price anymore. BFL can be sued by Xian for the difference between the current value of that contract and the money they refunded to him. Xian should win effortlessly. UCC covers the sale of "future goods" (commonly referred to as pre-orders) as well. your just making things up again. ..bring some supporting law to the table and I'll take a look. If your right, the factual contribution is much appreciated As for your "sock puppet" claim. Firstly, your getting really boring with that. When people speak this way, I start to think of them as the type of person who would appear in a tinfoil hat tell me how microwaves are "mind control" devices. Secondly, my demeanor and approach to discussing this with you is vastly different from Josh's approach (right or wrong, couldn't care less). I feel a touch sad that I need to inform you that there are other people in the world that don't believe in your beliefs. And all of them but the actual "Josh" are not named Josh. Hello Mr. Obvious Socketpuppet is Obvious. BFL was selling forward contracts, not sales of existing goods. Forward contracts cannot be unilaterally canceled just because one party does not want to pay the agreed price anymore. BFL can be sued by Xian for the difference between the current value of that contract and the money they refunded to him. Xian should win effortlessly. Again bring a law to the table and lets take a look at it. . . keep claiming sock puppet, Its arbitrary and pointless. Only serves the purpose of misdirection on your part. If you want to imagine me being Josh, feel free. It doesn't change the discussion at all. Hello Mr. Obvious Socketpuppet is Obvious. I brought the law. Xian already contacted the Missouri's AG office. He will probably also contact a lawyer to get the rest of his money back for the forward contract cancellation via civil court. You should put a little more effort into pretending you are not int30h if you want us to take you seriously. BFL was selling forward contracts, not sales of existing goods. Forward contracts cannot be unilaterally canceled just because one party does not want to pay the agreed price anymore. |
|
|
|
There's some stirrings over in BFL land that all is not well with the new Jala boards. Wrong mosfets installed or something by the board supplier, but they've only just detected the problem. More delays. And the 7GHash upgrade apparently has been withdrawn, it was a "mistake". AFAIK they still intend to do big singles this week.
Shouldn't take more than a "couple of weeks" to iron out. |
|
|
|
[You can file in your local jurisdiction since Butterfly Labs sells online. Ask for damages of the difference between the market value of your forward contract to purchase BFL equipment and the amount you were refunded. Forward contracts cannot be unilaterally terminated.
There is more to be claimed, actually, because were not talking about an item whose price simply increased over time, but rather means of production -- a tool that can generate revenue. It more akin to failing to deliver a car to a taxi cab licensee. It prevents the buyer from earning. You are correct, loss of revenue is certainly to be considered. He would need to consult a lawyer about it though. Holy crap k9quaint, I'll already went over the facts in UCC for missouri with you. I think you have a bad case of fish memory. drlukacs please go back and read before you run in all cowboy shooting your guns in the air yelling "Yeehaw! look at me I'm making points and stuff!" In the state of Missouri, once you cancel the implied contract and refund the money. All responsibilities of both parties are terminated. The only recourse after that is to PROVE prior breach of contract (before the cancellation). Since the product wasn't delivered yet. The only possible thing he could bring up is the delivery time. With the link I previously gave showing the archived version of the website, It clearly stated that October was the "Currently scheduled" date. This clearly makes the buyer aware that the date is not definitive, unless they lack basic reading comprehension. The final obligation for the seller is to let them know if/when the specification of the product changes, which they did through the forums and with the confirmation of the buyers desire to continue the purchase (the recent dialog that pops up). Now, you can be frustrated and angry and I can understand your emotions. You can't arbitrarily say they did something illegal. I have seen no supporting evidence of your claims. I only see that you are angry and want to hurt them. I'm supportive of expressing your feelings and emotions. I'm not supportive of some distorted, trumped up, vengeful misinformation campaign. I'm supportive of exploring consumer rights, as this is something all buyers should be aware of when purchasing products. I'm not supportive of making crap up because you "feel" like that's what the law should be. * this is not legal advice and should not be taken as such. If you feel you have an actual fact that disproves this is the law, by all means I'd love to explore it. Hello again Mr. Obvious Sockpuppet is Obvious. BFL was selling forward contracts, not sales of existing goods. Forward contracts cannot be unilaterally canceled just because one party does not want to pay the agreed price anymore. BFL can be sued by Xian for the difference between the current value of that contract and the money they refunded to him. Xian should win effortlessly. UCC covers the sale of "future goods" (commonly referred to as pre-orders) as well. your just making things up again. ..bring some supporting law to the table and I'll take a look. If your right, the factual contribution is much appreciated As for your "sock puppet" claim. Firstly, your getting really boring with that. When people speak this way, I start to think of them as the type of person who would appear in a tinfoil hat tell me how microwaves are "mind control" devices. Secondly, my demeanor and approach to discussing this with you is vastly different from Josh's approach (right or wrong, couldn't care less). I feel a touch sad that I need to inform you that there are other people in the world that don't believe in your beliefs. And all of them but the actual "Josh" are not named Josh. Hello Mr. Obvious Socketpuppet is Obvious. BFL was selling forward contracts, not sales of existing goods. Forward contracts cannot be unilaterally canceled just because one party does not want to pay the agreed price anymore. BFL can be sued by Xian for the difference between the current value of that contract and the money they refunded to him. Xian should win effortlessly. |
|
|
|
Remember their new 500gh/s miner will be available for (pre)sale THIS week!
But with a firmware revision and $200 extra you could be looking at 700gh/s!
I am going to giggle a bit when the first one of these melts. |
|
|
|
I am sorry I missed your point
Yep. I don't expect you to understand anything. Over under on when int03h vanishes into the setting sun: 18 days. I'll take the under  You want to bet on that? <EDIT> I don't understand because you don't make any fucking sense.. Go put a bet on a bitcoin betting site. I don't do anything without escrow that involves people who only have posts dated from today.  Of course I don't make sense to you. Nothing I type will ever make sense to you. I am still waiting for your terms to the bet. You now have 17 days left .. tick tock douchebag. Hello Mr. Obvious Socketpuppet is Obvious. BFL was selling forward contracts, not sales of existing goods. Forward contracts cannot be unilaterally canceled just because one party does not want to pay the agreed price anymore. BFL can be sued by Xian for the difference between the current value of that contract and the money they refunded to him. Xian should win effortlessly. |
|
|
|
[You can file in your local jurisdiction since Butterfly Labs sells online. Ask for damages of the difference between the market value of your forward contract to purchase BFL equipment and the amount you were refunded. Forward contracts cannot be unilaterally terminated.
There is more to be claimed, actually, because were not talking about an item whose price simply increased over time, but rather means of production -- a tool that can generate revenue. It more akin to failing to deliver a car to a taxi cab licensee. It prevents the buyer from earning. You are correct, loss of revenue is certainly to be considered. He would need to consult a lawyer about it though. Holy crap k9quaint, I'll already went over the facts in UCC for missouri with you. I think you have a bad case of fish memory. drlukacs please go back and read before you run in all cowboy shooting your guns in the air yelling "Yeehaw! look at me I'm making points and stuff!" In the state of Missouri, once you cancel the implied contract and refund the money. All responsibilities of both parties are terminated. The only recourse after that is to PROVE prior breach of contract (before the cancellation). Since the product wasn't delivered yet. The only possible thing he could bring up is the delivery time. With the link I previously gave showing the archived version of the website, It clearly stated that October was the "Currently scheduled" date. This clearly makes the buyer aware that the date is not definitive, unless they lack basic reading comprehension. The final obligation for the seller is to let them know if/when the specification of the product changes, which they did through the forums and with the confirmation of the buyers desire to continue the purchase (the recent dialog that pops up). Now, you can be frustrated and angry and I can understand your emotions. You can't arbitrarily say they did something illegal. I have seen no supporting evidence of your claims. I only see that you are angry and want to hurt them. I'm supportive of expressing your feelings and emotions. I'm not supportive of some distorted, trumped up, vengeful misinformation campaign. I'm supportive of exploring consumer rights, as this is something all buyers should be aware of when purchasing products. I'm not supportive of making crap up because you "feel" like that's what the law should be. * this is not legal advice and should not be taken as such. If you feel you have an actual fact that disproves this is the law, by all means I'd love to explore it. Hello again Mr. Obvious Sockpuppet is Obvious. BFL was selling forward contracts, not sales of existing goods. Forward contracts cannot be unilaterally canceled just because one party does not want to pay the agreed price anymore. BFL can be sued by Xian for the difference between the current value of that contract and the money they refunded to him. Xian should win effortlessly. |
|
|
|
[You can file in your local jurisdiction since Butterfly Labs sells online. Ask for damages of the difference between the market value of your forward contract to purchase BFL equipment and the amount you were refunded. Forward contracts cannot be unilaterally terminated.
There is more to be claimed, actually, because were not talking about an item whose price simply increased over time, but rather means of production -- a tool that can generate revenue. It more akin to failing to deliver a car to a taxi cab licensee. It prevents the buyer from earning. You are correct, loss of revenue is certainly to be considered. He would need to consult a lawyer about it though. |
|
|
|
The best thing that Xian can do is follow through with this complaint....!!
These frauds can threaten and pretend to MIS-REPRESENT the law but .... what they have done will cost them dearly !!!
It's out of my hands at the moment, and hoping to hear back from the FTC and Missouri AG sometime soon. Based on information in this thread, I really should look into meeting with a consumer advocacy lawyer next week. You can file in your local jurisdiction since Butterfly Labs sells online. Ask for damages of the difference between the market value of your forward contract to purchase BFL equipment and the amount you were refunded. Forward contracts cannot be unilaterally terminated. |
|
|
|
Josh's Tourette's syndrome is kicking into high gear.
I think Josh might have realized what a blunder it was to unilaterally cancel the contract with Xian. That contract was a forward contract that has appreciated in value (5x the value by some claims) and Xian was only compensated for the face value of the forward contract. The damages would be the difference between the face value and the current market value of the forward contract (roughly $20,000 by some estimates). Xian might also get to subpoena Butterfly's financial records and depose their corporate officers which might yield a ton of juicy tidbits for analysis. Any judge would take this case. Xian owes nottm28 a debt of gratitude for pointing out how much more valuable that contract is now. |
|
|
|
I'll reveal something interesting that I've recently noticed, if it continues for another day or two.
Is it a nip slip? I love nip slips! In the sense it will expose something, yes.  In the sense you will see a live mammalian protuberance, no.  Interested, interested, very interested, very very interested ... suddenly lost interest.  |
|
|
|
I'll reveal something interesting that I've recently noticed, if it continues for another day or two.
Is it a nip slip? I love nip slips! |
|
|
|
um dumb ass you said he had a case base on implied contract.
Implied warranty specifically. He does. .. and then you said yeah that's not true in my next post.
No, then you started talking about Missouri state laws and I posted the relevant consumer protection act provisions which BFL is also clearly in violation of. . .after you put me in the position to create the fact based argument for you.. .. not only were you wrong, but you were lazy (I'm apparently your personal wikipedia), so no you don't get to say your had it right all along. . .. .like I told you before. .or at least the thread.. .. .look up "Duke Nukem'' receipt on google.. . . .and in true xian repetitive fashion.. .eat a bag of dicks
You didn't supply any facts, only some vague reference to the UCC. Also, you still don't have an example of a major retailer who charges full price for pre-orders eh? The duke nukem pre-orders were deposits, not full charges (the CC companies would have charged them back after 30 days otherwise). So you default on all arguments. You fell apart rapidly when faced with facts and resorted to angry insults hurled at me. More interesting however is this: When you got really angry at me, you started separating phraselets with 2-5 dots. I checked his post history and int30h places 2-5 dots between his phraselets as well. Nobody else in this thread does that. In fact, it is not a punctuation form at all. More of a typing tic. Very unusual. Did you let something slip while you were angry?Edit: And every single post by int30h that was not in the newbie forum is in this thread. All but 4 of Endlessa's posts that are not in the newbie forum are posts in this thead as well. And when I started making fun of int30h, Endlessa got furious with me and stopped his discussion and switched to insults. Obvious sockpuppet is obvious? |
|
|
|
I am afraid you are incorrect. Contracts of sale cannot be unilaterally cancelled unless the contract explicitly allows for doing so.
Just imagine that we agree today that I would deliver you 10 bushels of wheat in 3 months for a given price. If 2 months later the price goes up, I cannot unilaterally cancel the contract and give you a refund.
As for damages, one can calculate the earning capabilities of the item that was ordered, and one can seek compensation for a reasonable period (few years) of use. It would be several thousand dollars at the very least.
What you've described is in fact a very specific type of sales contract usually called a "forward contract" - If the buyer could produce such a contact then there would be a legitimate case for damages incurred. However, never was any such contract offered by BFL... so I doubt the OP has such. I respectfully disagree with what you say. What is special about a "forward contract" is that the delivery may be well in the future, and in most cases so is the payment. In the case of BFL, they accepted payment now, and promise to deliver. Failure to deliver on time (or within reasonable time) is a breach of contract. For example, if I sell you my car, and you pay me the price, then I cannot unilaterally change my mind, and simply give you back your money. I will also have to pay you all damages that you incurred from my failure to honour the contract. See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Contract#Remedies_for_breach_of_contract and http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Breach_of_contractI step away from the thread for some poker and it asplodes. So much fun. The sale of goods that do not yet exist is a future or forward contract. All future contracts have time value. Earlier in the thread the claim was made by some BFL proponents that Xian's contract could have been sold for 5x what he paid for it. When BFL canceled it without recourse they caused $20,000 damages to Xian. He could take them to court on that basis alone. Misrepresentations about the state of the product + damages + Consumer Protection laws = Judge hearing the case. |
|
|
|
I am clearly very dumb.
Nulla et massa vitae tortor condimentum vestibulum. Keep going.. it only serves to prove my point. agreed k9 has a pretentious over evaluation of his contributions to any given conversation? (yay you dids latins. ..momma's so proud. .validate . . validate. . .validate. ..dead language. . .dead personality) I feel that I put way more into any one of my posts by pasting the output of a lorem ipsum engine than int03h has put into all of his posts together. Back onto a real conversation. I was hoping you could provide an example of a major online retailer that charges the full amount to your credit card (not just an authorization) for a pre-order. Here is my post on the subject (sans nonsense) https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=207331.msg2270904#msg2270904omg you so demonstrated mastery of UCC we shall all bow down to your fact based discussion of reality. . . oh wait. ..you were wrong and redirected. . .well g' luck next time I have not stated anything regarding the Uniform Commercial Code other than I felt a more relevant state statute existed. I posted the relevant statute entitled Missouri Merchandising Practices Act. I post it again http://www.moga.mo.gov/statutes/chapters/chap407.htm. I already posted the part I feel BFL has violated: 407.020. 1. The act, use or employment by any person of any deception, fraud, false pretense, false promise, misrepresentation, unfair practice or the concealment, suppression, or omission of any material fact in connection with the sale or advertisement of any merchandise in trade or commerce or the solicitation of any funds for any charitable purpose, as defined in section 407.453, in or from the state of Missouri, is declared to be an unlawful practice.You failed to address that Missouri statute. You said that all retailers charge full price for pre-orders, I posted several counter examples of major online retailers never charge full price for pre-orders. They only authorize. They only charge when the item ships. You have not addressed this either. |
|
|
|
oh oh oh. . .wait. . I forgot one thing. . . eat a bag of dicks
See, I don't think that helps and allows others to belay a decent answer to the fact that xian brought this upon himself... His actions did result in his order being canceled. No one is contesting that (at least not seriously). There is really no precedent since most online retailers do not engage in the sort of activity that BFL has engaged in. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
