Butterfly Labs Forced "On Hold For Refund" for all my Single SC orders

[drlukacs]

Are you finally dropping all pretense of the int30h account?
Compare the following two posts, notice the bizarre use of periods and phraselets instead of sentences.

Why does it matter whether there is one or two username?  What matters is the state of the law as to the obligations of sellers and buyers. It appears that we did find some answers to those questions, and these answers were accepted by your nemesis.

What is the point then in arguing about usernames and identities...?

[Endlessa]

I'm hoping to find a discussion board that I can post on to get some more legal minded people involved.  .and I can return with more opinions . . . .this forum (obviously) make it difficult to have an intelligent conversation about what the factual legal obligations of a company are. .. .like I said it's something that everybody who purchases mining products needs to know. . .

Thanks for your compliments.

I believe there is a thread for legal discussion even on this forum, although there the focus might be more on taxation and regulatory matters, but it may be worth a try.

If you would like to propose a topic title and a place to post it, I can try to act as a moderator, to ensure that only civilized and constructive postings are allowed. I have no problem with anyone disagreeing with a view, but it is distracts from the main issue when people start getting personal and engage in ad hominem attacks.

Sure thing,  let me finish this research and come back with the input from some legal forums, we'll figure out how to address this topic in a constructive manner.   I'll post something this evening and we can make a thread for the content and cross link it

[k9quaint]

I'm hoping to find a discussion board that I can post on to get some more legal minded people involved.  .and I can return with more opinions . . . .this forum (obviously) make it difficult to have an intelligent conversation about what the factual legal obligations of a company are. .. .like I said it's something that everybody who purchases mining products needs to know. . .

Are you finally dropping all pretense of the int30h account?
Compare the following two posts, notice the bizarre use of periods and phraselets instead of sentences.
Here the Endlessa account is upset and lapses into some very strange grammar and formatting.
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=207331.msg2271520#msg2271520
Here int30h is also upset and uses the same weird formatting and grammatical constructs:
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=207331.msg2272747#msg2272747

80 of the last 83 posts by the Endlessa account are in this thread and in the last 24 hours.
58 of the last 58 posts (all of the non-newbie forum posts) by the int30h account are in this thread in the last 24 hours.

When he gets agitated, his mask slips. Like when I was making fun of int30h and the Endlessa account responded with the int30h style of insults to the taunting. OOPS.
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=207331.msg2271207#msg2271207

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dissociative_identity_disorder

No I'm not him. . .but I'm am bored with you

Good. The point of this thread is largely complete.
1) Xian now has the ability to recover the current market value of an early BFL order
2) Xian also now has the relevant sections of UCC & Missouri Consumer Protection Act to go after BFL both in Missouri and the state in which Xian lives.
3) You have been outed as an astro-turfing account trying to deflect any legal discussion and derail the thread. This might signify that someone really hit a nerve over at BFL.

You may continue to post of course, but you have been digging a very deep hole for yourself over the last day.
Welcome to the internet. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dissociative_identity_disorder

[drlukacs]

Good. The point of this thread is largely complete.
1) Xian now has the ability to recover the current market value of an early BFL order
2) Xian also now has the relevant sections of UCC & Missouri Consumer Protection Act to go after BFL both in Missouri and the state in which Xian lives.
3) You have been outed as an astro-turfing account trying to deflect any legal discussion and derail the thread. This might signify that someone really hit a nerve over at BFL.

While I agree with items 1 and 2, with due respect, I disagree with item 3, because such comments do not assist members of the community.

[drlukacs]

Sure thing,  let me finish this research and come back with the input from some legal forums, we'll figure out how to address this topic in a constructive manner.   I'll post something this evening and we can make a thread for the content and cross link it

I look forward to that.

[k9quaint]

Are you finally dropping all pretense of the int30h account?
Compare the following two posts, notice the bizarre use of periods and phraselets instead of sentences.

Why does it matter whether there is one or two username?  What matters is the state of the law as to the obligations of sellers and buyers. It appears that we did find some answers to those questions, and these answers were accepted by your nemesis.

What is the point then in arguing about usernames and identities...?

I was beginning to wonder if you had me on ignore. You certainly ignored the UCC section I posted about the difference between a forward sale contract and normal sale contract.

Why would someone create an alternate account to derail/deflect a thread about the legal remedies Xian has at his disposal? He put over 160 posts into this thead and no other over the last 24 hours. He has enough interest to astro-turf, why and what is that interest?

[k9quaint]

Good. The point of this thread is largely complete.
1) Xian now has the ability to recover the current market value of an early BFL order
2) Xian also now has the relevant sections of UCC & Missouri Consumer Protection Act to go after BFL both in Missouri and the state in which Xian lives.
3) You have been outed as an astro-turfing account trying to deflect any legal discussion and derail the thread. This might signify that someone really hit a nerve over at BFL.

While I agree with items 1 and 2, with due respect, I disagree with item 3, because such comments do not assist members of the community.

Really? You don't care if people lie? Or if they create alternate identities to attack you?
The perverse part of it is, if Endlessa/int30h had just kept quiet, Xian probably would not have discovered the means by which he could extract $20,000 from BFL.

[int03h]

I'm hoping to find a discussion board that I can post on to get some more legal minded people involved.  .and I can return with more opinions . . . .this forum (obviously) make it difficult to have an intelligent conversation about what the factual legal obligations of a company are. .. .like I said it's something that everybody who purchases mining products needs to know. . .

Are you finally dropping all pretense of the int30h account?
Compare the following two posts, notice the bizarre use of periods and phraselets instead of sentences.
Here the Endlessa account is upset and lapses into some very strange grammar and formatting.
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=207331.msg2271520#msg2271520
Here int30h is also upset and uses the same weird formatting and grammatical constructs:
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=207331.msg2272747#msg2272747

80 of the last 83 posts by the Endlessa account are in this thread and in the last 24 hours.
58 of the last 58 posts (all of the non-newbie forum posts) by the int30h account are in this thread in the last 24 hours.

When he gets agitated, his mask slips. Like when I was making fun of int30h and the Endlessa account responded with the int30h style of insults to the taunting. OOPS.
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=207331.msg2271207#msg2271207

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dissociative_identity_disorder

Nope I am still here. Waiting for that bet to be clarified.

[k9quaint]

I'm hoping to find a discussion board that I can post on to get some more legal minded people involved.  .and I can return with more opinions . . . .this forum (obviously) make it difficult to have an intelligent conversation about what the factual legal obligations of a company are. .. .like I said it's something that everybody who purchases mining products needs to know. . .

Are you finally dropping all pretense of the int30h account?
Compare the following two posts, notice the bizarre use of periods and phraselets instead of sentences.
Here the Endlessa account is upset and lapses into some very strange grammar and formatting.
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=207331.msg2271520#msg2271520
Here int30h is also upset and uses the same weird formatting and grammatical constructs:
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=207331.msg2272747#msg2272747

80 of the last 83 posts by the Endlessa account are in this thread and in the last 24 hours.
58 of the last 58 posts (all of the non-newbie forum posts) by the int30h account are in this thread in the last 24 hours.

When he gets agitated, his mask slips. Like when I was making fun of int30h and the Endlessa account responded with the int30h style of insults to the taunting. OOPS.
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=207331.msg2271207#msg2271207

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dissociative_identity_disorder

Nope I am still here. Waiting for that bet to be clarified.

Thanks for helping Xian get his money back. We wouldn't have found it without you.
Clear enough?

[Xian01]

http://siliconangle.com/blog/2013/05/21/butterfly-labs-bitcoin-kerfuffle-is-classic-startup-mistake/

"Butterfly Labs has been plagued with mounting concern from disgruntled customers, which led to company reps delivering harsh rebuttals including Josh Zerlan’s, the company spokesperson, statement on its forum which read “You received no answer because your question was so incredibly stupid that it doesn’t deserve an answer.”

Joining Kristin Feledy in this morning’s NewsDesk is SiliconANGLE Founding Editor Mark “Rizzn” Hopkins, providing his Breaking Analysis on Butterfly Labs’ ASIC Bitcoin mining gears and the harsh statements directed at customers who wanted some answers.

Is there’s more to the delay than just production issues?  Are the mining gears really shipping?

According to Hopkins, the gears are really shipping and he personally knows people who have received their gears.  As far as the outbursts go, it’s not something that happened because of other unknown issues that customers need to worry over.  Hopkins explains that “customer service is not in the repertoire of the Butterfly Labs folks, which is geeks and engineers.” These geeky skills and “social graces don’t usually go hand-in-hand,” says Hopkins.

He also noted that the Butterfly Labs kerfuffle is a classic mistake done by startup entrepreneurs: over-promising and under delivering.  You cannot blame customers for reacting harshly regarding the delays, especially when they’ve already paid for the gear. Unfortunately, as stated earlier, Butterfly Labs’ people weren’t well-prepared to handle disgruntled customers."

---
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=114329.msg2277148#msg2277148

"Describing BFL's pyramid scam as a "kerfuffle" is itself a "kerfuffle". The notion that they're just incompetent, but well meaning or trustworthy is SO last year. What was that 2012 drop dead date for chip delivery again?

The article linked above also dismisses BFL reps' lack of social graces as a by-product of their nerdiness and tech savvy nature, yet it's been proven again and again that their Chief Operating Officer knows next to nothing about chip production, product design, chip cooling, power consumption, or a multitude of other elements essential to the production of a product as technically challenging as an ASIC mining device. This is why BFL has outsourced nearly everything, supposedly to people that DO know this stuff. So what is it that BFL people do all day again? ...and why can't they treat investors with the respect they deserve?"

[k9quaint]

To summarize the legal position of Xian:

The contract that Xian and BFL entered into was not a normal sale, nor was it a pre-order. Pre-orders involve either deposits or credit-card authorizations, but not the full amount (at least according to Amazon, Barnes & Noble, Ebay, Newegg, Best Buy, and Apple). If you order something that is not in stock, the online retailer will not charge your credit card until they ship the product. The contract entered into with BFL was called a foward sale.

An example of a forward sale is a farmer agreeing to sell soybeans a year from now to ADM for $540 a ton. Suppose that when the soybeans are finally ready the market price for soybeans is $800 a ton. The farmer is still obligated to sell them to ADM for $540. The farmer cannot legally unilaterally void the contract then refund the $540 to ADM and turn around and sell his soybeans to someone else for $800.

However, this is precisely what BFL did. They agreed to a contract to sell a specified amount of future units for a specified price. The market price of the contract rose five-fold. BFL then canceled the contract without compensating Xian for the fair market value. Finally, they turned around and sold the merchandise that Xian had rights to for more money to someone else (again via forward sale, but for a higher price than Xian paid).

Moreover, BFL does not support purchase of their products with credit cards. Why? For the simple reason that the credit card companies would not let them have pre-orders longer than 30 days, would not let them charge the full amount without delivery of product, and will come after them with lots of lawyers if they tried to do so.

[nottm28]

What is the point then in arguing about usernames and identities...?

That's what these people do here...

[Malawi]

To summarize the legal position of Xian:

The contract that Xian and BFL entered into was not a normal sale, nor was it a pre-order. Pre-orders involve either deposits or credit-card authorizations, but not the full amount (at least according to Amazon, Barnes & Noble, Ebay, Newegg, Best Buy, and Apple). If you order something that is not in stock, the online retailer will not charge your credit card until they ship the product. The contract entered into with BFL was called a foward sale.

An example of a forward sale is a farmer agreeing to sell soybeans a year from now to ADM for $540 a ton. Suppose that when the soybeans are finally ready the market price for soybeans is $800 a ton. The farmer is still obligated to sell them to ADM for $540. The farmer cannot legally unilaterally void the contract then refund the $540 to ADM and turn around and sell his soybeans to someone else for $800.

However, this is precisely what BFL did. They agreed to a contract to sell a specified amount of future units for a specified price. The market price of the contract rose five-fold. BFL then canceled the contract without compensating Xian for the fair market value. Finally, they turned around and sold the merchandise that Xian had rights to for more money to someone else (again via forward sale, but for a higher price than Xian paid).

Moreover, BFL does not support purchase of their products with credit cards. Why? For the simple reason that the credit card companies would not let them have pre-orders longer than 30 days, would not let them charge the full amount without delivery of product, and will come after them with lots of lawyers if they tried to do so.

Not sure how it used to be, but AFAIK they accept CC now.

[k9quaint]

To summarize the legal position of Xian:

The contract that Xian and BFL entered into was not a normal sale, nor was it a pre-order. Pre-orders involve either deposits or credit-card authorizations, but not the full amount (at least according to Amazon, Barnes & Noble, Ebay, Newegg, Best Buy, and Apple). If you order something that is not in stock, the online retailer will not charge your credit card until they ship the product. The contract entered into with BFL was called a foward sale.

An example of a forward sale is a farmer agreeing to sell soybeans a year from now to ADM for $540 a ton. Suppose that when the soybeans are finally ready the market price for soybeans is $800 a ton. The farmer is still obligated to sell them to ADM for $540. The farmer cannot legally unilaterally void the contract then refund the $540 to ADM and turn around and sell his soybeans to someone else for $800.

However, this is precisely what BFL did. They agreed to a contract to sell a specified amount of future units for a specified price. The market price of the contract rose five-fold. BFL then canceled the contract without compensating Xian for the fair market value. Finally, they turned around and sold the merchandise that Xian had rights to for more money to someone else (again via forward sale, but for a higher price than Xian paid).

Moreover, BFL does not support purchase of their products with credit cards. Why? For the simple reason that the credit card companies would not let them have pre-orders longer than 30 days, would not let them charge the full amount without delivery of product, and will come after them with lots of lawyers if they tried to do so.

Not sure how it used to be, but AFAIK they accept CC now.

Could you please verify this by clicking order now on their products page, then proceed to checkout, and screenshot more than just Bitcoin, Paypal, and Bank Transfer as the methods of payment? A screenshot would be excellent.

[Syke]

An example of a forward sale is a farmer agreeing to sell soybeans a year from now to ADM for $540 a ton. Suppose that when the soybeans are finally ready the market price for soybeans is $800 a ton. The farmer is still obligated to sell them to ADM for $540. The farmer cannot legally unilaterally void the contract then refund the $540 to ADM and turn around and sell his soybeans to someone else for $800.

However, this is precisely what BFL did. They agreed to a contract to sell a specified amount of future units for a specified price. The market price of the contract rose five-fold. BFL then canceled the contract without compensating Xian for the fair market value. Finally, they turned around and sold the merchandise that Xian had rights to for more money to someone else (again via forward sale, but for a higher price than Xian paid).

Pretty good analogy, but cars are even better.

Customer goes to a car dealership, picks the car he wants but it isn't in stock, so he's told it will be delivered in 2 months, and he pays the current price for the car in full at that point in time. 2 months pass, and the car he ordered is delivered to the dealership. The dealership sees that he can sell the same car to a new buyer for 67% more. So he calls up the original customer and says, sorry, I changed my mind, you can't have that car after all, because I'd rather sell it to someone else for more money. Here's your money back.

[drlukacs]

To summarize the legal position of Xian:

The contract that Xian and BFL entered into was not a normal sale, nor was it a pre-order. Pre-orders involve either deposits or credit-card authorizations, but not the full amount (at least according to Amazon, Barnes & Noble, Ebay, Newegg, Best Buy, and Apple). If you order something that is not in stock, the online retailer will not charge your credit card until they ship the product. The contract entered into with BFL was called a foward sale.

An example of a forward sale is a farmer agreeing to sell soybeans a year from now to ADM for $540 a ton. Suppose that when the soybeans are finally ready the market price for soybeans is $800 a ton. The farmer is still obligated to sell them to ADM for $540. The farmer cannot legally unilaterally void the contract then refund the $540 to ADM and turn around and sell his soybeans to someone else for $800.

However, this is precisely what BFL did. They agreed to a contract to sell a specified amount of future units for a specified price. The market price of the contract rose five-fold. BFL then canceled the contract without compensating Xian for the fair market value. Finally, they turned around and sold the merchandise that Xian had rights to for more money to someone else (again via forward sale, but for a higher price than Xian paid).

Moreover, BFL does not support purchase of their products with credit cards. Why? For the simple reason that the credit card companies would not let them have pre-orders longer than 30 days, would not let them charge the full amount without delivery of product, and will come after them with lots of lawyers if they tried to do so.

The method of payment does not strike me as being particularly relevant to the issue of contract.

I would be hesitant to characterize the sale as a "forward contract". I would be inclined to characterize it as a sale of future goods (emphasis added):

Definitions--transferability--"goods"--"future" goods--"lot"--"commercial unit".

400.2-105. (1) "Goods" means all things (including specially manufactured goods) which are movable at the time of identification to the contract for sale other than the money in which the price is to be paid, investment securities (article and things in action. "Goods" also includes the unborn young of animals and growing crops and other identified things attached to realty as described in the section on goods to be severed from realty (section 400.2-107).

(2) Goods must be both existing and identified before any interest in them can pass. Goods which are not both existing and identified are "future" goods. A purported present sale of future goods or of any interest therein operates as a contract to sell.

[drlukacs]

Customer goes to a car dealership, picks the car he wants but it isn't in stock, so he's told it will be delivered in 2 months, and he pays the current price for the car in full at that point in time. 2 months pass, and the car he ordered is delivered to the dealership. The dealership sees that he can sell the same car to a new buyer for 67% more. So he calls up the original customer and says, sorry, I changed my mind, you can't have that car after all, because I'd rather sell it to someone else for more money. Here's your money back.

Very good example.

[k9quaint]

An example of a forward sale is a farmer agreeing to sell soybeans a year from now to ADM for $540 a ton. Suppose that when the soybeans are finally ready the market price for soybeans is $800 a ton. The farmer is still obligated to sell them to ADM for $540. The farmer cannot legally unilaterally void the contract then refund the $540 to ADM and turn around and sell his soybeans to someone else for $800.

However, this is precisely what BFL did. They agreed to a contract to sell a specified amount of future units for a specified price. The market price of the contract rose five-fold. BFL then canceled the contract without compensating Xian for the fair market value. Finally, they turned around and sold the merchandise that Xian had rights to for more money to someone else (again via forward sale, but for a higher price than Xian paid).

Pretty good analogy, but cars are even better.

Customer goes to a car dealership, picks the car he wants but it isn't in stock, so he's told it will be delivered in 2 months, and he pays the current price for the car in full at that point in time. 2 months pass, and the car he ordered is delivered to the dealership. The dealership sees that he can sell the same car to a new buyer for 67% more. So he calls up the original customer and says, sorry, I changed my mind, you can't have that car after all, because I'd rather sell it to someone else for more money. Here's your money back.

This is the internet, and both cars and cats should be involved in analogies where ever possible.
Unfortunately, car dealerships do not use future contracts for goods that I can discern. They take deposits to reserve the car. They are still subject to the same terms however, and there are a lot of consumer protection laws that call out specifically what car dealerships may do. Tesla for instance took a $5000 deposit on their model S cars before production began.

[k9quaint]

To summarize the legal position of Xian:

The contract that Xian and BFL entered into was not a normal sale, nor was it a pre-order. Pre-orders involve either deposits or credit-card authorizations, but not the full amount (at least according to Amazon, Barnes & Noble, Ebay, Newegg, Best Buy, and Apple). If you order something that is not in stock, the online retailer will not charge your credit card until they ship the product. The contract entered into with BFL was called a foward sale.

An example of a forward sale is a farmer agreeing to sell soybeans a year from now to ADM for $540 a ton. Suppose that when the soybeans are finally ready the market price for soybeans is $800 a ton. The farmer is still obligated to sell them to ADM for $540. The farmer cannot legally unilaterally void the contract then refund the $540 to ADM and turn around and sell his soybeans to someone else for $800.

However, this is precisely what BFL did. They agreed to a contract to sell a specified amount of future units for a specified price. The market price of the contract rose five-fold. BFL then canceled the contract without compensating Xian for the fair market value. Finally, they turned around and sold the merchandise that Xian had rights to for more money to someone else (again via forward sale, but for a higher price than Xian paid).

Moreover, BFL does not support purchase of their products with credit cards. Why? For the simple reason that the credit card companies would not let them have pre-orders longer than 30 days, would not let them charge the full amount without delivery of product, and will come after them with lots of lawyers if they tried to do so.

The method of payment does not strike me as being particularly relevant to the issue of contract.

It is if you are considering violating them. Credit card companies have agreements to protect their user base from "fraudulent" purchases. There is a very high level of built in protections for consumers who use credit cards to purchase. Mastercard and Visa explicitly disallow the sort of transactions BFL is engaging in. There is no way that BFL could maintain a merchant account with a CC company and engage in the sort of behavior they have been. BFL (by Jody's admission) has already come under pressure from Paypal to demonstrate their ability to ship any product.

I would be hesitant to characterize the sale as a "forward contract". I would be inclined to characterize it as a sale of future goods (emphasis added):

Definitions--transferability--"goods"--"future" goods--"lot"--"commercial unit".

400.2-105. (1) "Goods" means all things (including specially manufactured goods) which are movable at the time of identification to the contract for sale other than the money in which the price is to be paid, investment securities (article and things in action. "Goods" also includes the unborn young of animals and growing crops and other identified things attached to realty as described in the section on goods to be severed from realty (section 400.2-107).

(2) Goods must be both existing and identified before any interest in them can pass. Goods which are not both existing and identified are "future" goods. A purported present sale of future goods or of any interest therein operates as a contract to sell.

That is precisely what a "forward contract" is. It is a contract of sale between private parties for future goods at a fixed price. A "future contract" is a standardized forward contract offered by exchanges.
More about them here: http://www.investopedia.com/ask/answers/06/forwardsandfutures.asp

[int03h]

I'm hoping to find a discussion board that I can post on to get some more legal minded people involved.  .and I can return with more opinions . . . .this forum (obviously) make it difficult to have an intelligent conversation about what the factual legal obligations of a company are. .. .like I said it's something that everybody who purchases mining products needs to know. . .

Are you finally dropping all pretense of the int30h account?
Compare the following two posts, notice the bizarre use of periods and phraselets instead of sentences.
Here the Endlessa account is upset and lapses into some very strange grammar and formatting.
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=207331.msg2271520#msg2271520
Here int30h is also upset and uses the same weird formatting and grammatical constructs:
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=207331.msg2272747#msg2272747

80 of the last 83 posts by the Endlessa account are in this thread and in the last 24 hours.
58 of the last 58 posts (all of the non-newbie forum posts) by the int30h account are in this thread in the last 24 hours.

When he gets agitated, his mask slips. Like when I was making fun of int30h and the Endlessa account responded with the int30h style of insults to the taunting. OOPS.
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=207331.msg2271207#msg2271207

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dissociative_identity_disorder

Nope I am still here. Waiting for that bet to be clarified.

Thanks for helping Xian get his money back. We wouldn't have found it without you.
Clear enough?

Not at all.