Miners, Consumer Protections (UCC), and Pre-orders

[Endlessa]

Next up: What else can MSantori get besides the $200?  Can he also get the value of all of the money he would have made from the widget?

I also would love to hear the finale to this question.  I assume you proposed it in an offer to answer it in a "theoretical" academic perspective. woo

[1715014373]

1715014373

[1715014373]

1715014373

[1715014373]

1715014373

[YipYip]

OK I get this, if Widgetco terminates with an explicit reason of non-delivery.  What if Widgetco has a thousand orders and tells 1 we don't want to do business with you for non-breach reasons? That's not an expression of intent not to deliver (repudiation) but an expression of a desire not to do business with an individual.  (scroll up I posted some law).   Is there a difference?   How does that affect pursuit? What cases has this happened within previously?

Widgetco can choose not to do further business with them (providing they do not violate any discrimination laws). But they cannot choose to unwind previous business protected by contract on a whim.  

How would the reason for non-delivery be "non-breach"? Failure to deliver is a breach of the contract, there must be some mitigating circumstance to that failure for there to not be a breach.

A fact pattern that illustrates the need for sales contracts to remain intact:

I run GoldBuyer Co. I offer to sell people gold for $10 below spot price and I guarantee delivery of gold within 3 weeks. The customer pays the full amount at the time of purchase. I actually only buy the gold 4 days before I deliver it.
My business model is as follows:
If at the time I purchase the gold the spot price for gold is higher than the amount paid by the customer, I dissolve the contract and give them a refund. I make money on 16 days of deposit interest.
If at the time I purchase the gold the spot price for gold is lower than the amount paid by the customer, I fulfill the order and ship the customer their gold. I pocket the difference between the spot price and the price the customer paid for the gold. I also make interest on 16 days of deposit.

If sellers can unwind any contract they choose citing only that they don't like the customer, bad things happen.

I have got a spare btc lying around to start a fighting fund to follow this through !!!!

Honestly I think we cant raise 10-20 btc to get BFL to be held to account ...We not only have Xian but also another user who was dealt with in the same way

[Endlessa]

The crust of my question falls to, does a seller have no right to terminate for non-breach reasons after funds are received? Is there a circumstance where they could?  

I don't understand what you mean by non-breach reasons.  There are some affirmative defenses to a claim for a breach of contract, but none of them apply on the facts of my example.

by non-breach reasons I'm specifically referring to:

400.2-106 . . .

(3) "Termination" occurs when either party pursuant to a power created by agreement or law puts an end to the contract otherwise than for its breach. On "termination" all obligations which are still executory on both sides are discharged but any right based on prior breach or performance survives.

I'm think of this with a perspective that neither party has claimed breach.  One party issues a notification of Termination the order.  Is this a misnomer that either party has this right?  Without complain of breach prior to this termination, what is your opinion of academic rights of both the buyer and seller?  (Sorry I'm a very "wordy" person) . ... damn you common language English training!

[Endlessa]

OK I get this, if Widgetco terminates with an explicit reason of non-delivery.  What if Widgetco has a thousand orders and tells 1 we don't want to do business with you for non-breach reasons? That's not an expression of intent not to deliver (repudiation) but an expression of a desire not to do business with an individual.  (scroll up I posted some law).   Is there a difference?   How does that affect pursuit? What cases has this happened within previously?

Widgetco can choose not to do further business with them (providing they do not violate any discrimination laws). But they cannot choose to unwind previous business protected by contract on a whim.  

How would the reason for non-delivery be "non-breach"? Failure to deliver is a breach of the contract, there must be some mitigating circumstance to that failure for there to not be a breach.

A fact pattern that illustrates the need for sales contracts to remain intact:

I run GoldBuyer Co. I offer to sell people gold for $10 below spot price and I guarantee delivery of gold within 3 weeks. The customer pays the full amount at the time of purchase. I actually only buy the gold 4 days before I deliver it.
My business model is as follows:
If at the time I purchase the gold the spot price for gold is higher than the amount paid by the customer, I dissolve the contract and give them a refund. I make money on 16 days of deposit interest.
If at the time I purchase the gold the spot price for gold is lower than the amount paid by the customer, I fulfill the order and ship the customer their gold. I pocket the difference between the spot price and the price the customer paid for the gold. I also make interest on 16 days of deposit.

If sellers can unwind any contract they choose citing only that they don't like the customer, bad things happen.

I have got a spare btc lying around to start a fighting fund to follow this through !!!! I think we cant raise 10-20 btc to get BFL to be held to account ...We not only have Xian but also another user who was dealt with in the same way

I would respectfully ask that you take this matter to a PM and not involve this thread in a specific business or personal desire.  This thread has been created not to persecute person or entity, but to help miners understand basic rights as a buyer and sellers rights as a seller.  I hope to prevent future litigation through education.

[drlukacs]

400.2-106 . . .

(3) "Termination" occurs when either party pursuant to a power created by agreement or law puts an end to the contract otherwise than for its breach. On "termination" all obligations which are still executory on both sides are discharged but any right based on prior breach or performance survives.

So, in order to "Terminate" a contract, there is a need for an explicit clause in the contract or a law that specifically allows for doing so. In the absence of both, the contract cannot be terminated.

[drlukacs]

I have got a spare btc lying around to start a fighting fund to follow this through !!!!

Honestly I think we cant raise 10-20 btc to get BFL to be held to account ...We not only have Xian but also another user who was dealt with in the same way

While this is a legitimate discussion too, I agree that this is not the right thread for it. But if you want to start a threat about this, please let me know.

[Endlessa]

400.2-106 . . .

(3) "Termination" occurs when either party pursuant to a power created by agreement or law puts an end to the contract otherwise than for its breach. On "termination" all obligations which are still executory on both sides are discharged but any right based on prior breach or performance survives.

So, in order to "Terminate" a contract, there is a need for an explicit clause in the contract or a law that specifically allows for doing so. In the absence of both, the contract cannot be terminated.

That is the essence of the question, but for me as a layperson.  I hope to verify with an academic authority.  Not as a slight, are you proposing an, not previously stated, authority as a professor, lawyer or judge? that would be awesome as I hope to get "weight" for reputable sources.

[Endlessa]

I have got a spare btc lying around to start a fighting fund to follow this through !!!!

Honestly I think we cant raise 10-20 btc to get BFL to be held to account ...We not only have Xian but also another user who was dealt with in the same way

While this is a legitimate discussion too, I agree that this is not the right thread for it. But if you want to start a threat about this, please let me know.

Yes I encourage either a PM or thread to pursue your interests.  @drlukacs on the Freudian "threat" wording . ..rofl . . .just jovial jibing of somebody I respect.

[Endlessa]

400.2-106 . . .

(3) "Termination" occurs when either party pursuant to a power created by agreement or law puts an end to the contract otherwise than for its breach. On "termination" all obligations which are still executory on both sides are discharged but any right based on prior breach or performance survives.

So, in order to "Terminate" a contract, there is a need for an explicit clause in the contract or a law that specifically allows for doing so. In the absence of both, the contract cannot be terminated.

In addition, what rights are there in an undefined contract?  Are they explicitly denied a right to termination because the contract itself is undefined? or is that an implied right?

[drlukacs]

Yes I encourage either a PM or thread to pursue your interests.  @drlukacs on the Freudian "threat" wording . ..rofl . . .just jovial jibing of somebody I respect.

I admit, you caught me -- it was a Freudian slip.

[drlukacs]

400.2-106 . . .

(3) "Termination" occurs when either party pursuant to a power created by agreement or law puts an end to the contract otherwise than for its breach. On "termination" all obligations which are still executory on both sides are discharged but any right based on prior breach or performance survives.

So, in order to "Terminate" a contract, there is a need for an explicit clause in the contract or a law that specifically allows for doing so. In the absence of both, the contract cannot be terminated.

In addition, what rights are there in an undefined contract?  Are they explicitly denied a right to termination because the contract itself is undefined? or is that an implied right?

What do you mean by an "undefined contract"? Contracts of sale at least define the item sold and the price.

[k9quaint]

In which state would Customer A have to file to seek restitution if the transaction took place over the internet?
The state where Widgetco is located? Or the state where Customer A lives?

[Bicknellski]

I'd donate some bitcoin for a fund that goes after BFL and helps out Xian.... anyone else want to get JOHN K. to escrow that?

[Xian01]

 I am terrible with math.

 Would a kind soul be able to calculate the BTC earnings of 120GH/s (Two 60GH/s Single SC's) worth of processing power sustained to present day, assuming I took delivery of my pre-orders on November 1st, 2012.

 It would be most appreciated.

EDIT: 1 BTC reward to the first person that posts a Google docs with an accurate assessment.

[Xian01]

I'd donate some bitcoin for a fund that goes after BFL and helps out Xian.... anyone else want to get JOHN K. to escrow that?

It wouldn't feel right asking the community to donate money for my legal pursuits. I've thought about it, but it doesn't sit well with me. I need to deal with this myself.

The only way something might feel right, is if it was for a forums based advertising account, where all proceeds donated would be used as a "Butterfly Labs Truth-in-Advertising" fund, that would link to a post vetted by a core group of people to have a unified message. JohnK (if he is comfortable with that) or some other trusted source or neutral third-party could be the OP that would only update text after a consensus was reached by a core group.

[drlukacs]

I am terrible with math.

 Would a kind soul be able to calculate the BTC earnings of 120GH/s (Two 60GH/s Single SC's) worth of processing power sustained to present day, assuming I took delivery of my pre-orders on November 1st, 2012.

 It would be most appreciated.

You will need to gather historic data on past level of difficulty. I suggest using an Excel spreadsheet.

[drlukacs]

In which state would Customer A have to file to seek restitution if the transaction took place over the internet?
The state where Widgetco is located? Or the state where Customer A lives?

If Widgetco advertises in the state where Customer A lives, then it already creates a real and substantial connection to that state (which is the test, at least in Canada, for jurisdiction). If the contract of sale provides for delivery to Customer A's address, then it strengthens the tie to that state, and makes that state the right forum for taking legal action.

[grnbrg]

I am terrible with math.

 Would a kind soul be able to calculate the BTC earnings of 120GH/s (Two 60GH/s Single SC's) worth of processing power sustained to present day, assuming I took delivery of my pre-orders on November 1st, 2012.

 It would be most appreciated.

Assuming BFL was wrong in cancelling your order, and assuming that they are required to pay damages for "lost potential earnings"  (both of which are very big ifs) then earnings from November 2012 on are incorrect.

Your potential earnings from November 2012 to today are exactly zero.  With the tenuous exception of Luke-Jr's "Single", which is a prototype that never left BFL, not a single customer has received a 60GH/s miner.  If you were unhappy with your pre-order not making you any money between then and now, you could have asked for a refund.

They question you should be asking, is "How much in BTC earnings would 120GH/s of mining power earn between June 2013 and June 2014?"



grnbrg.

[Xian01]

If you were unhappy with your pre-order not making you any money between then and now, you could have asked for a refund.

 With all due respect, and I know you have done a great job in running the Twitter feed and keeping the community up-to-date, you are a shill. A paid-for-and-bought shill. Tell Ivan I say "Hi."

 Forgive me for adding you to my ignore list. I would recommend you return to the safety and sanctity of your Butterfly Labs shout-box and continue to drink the koolaid with it's participants.

[grnbrg]

You do realize that was not "Hur, hur, hur, get a refund, then!", right?

You were talking about calculating your potential earnings from November 2012 to the present.  My point is that you could have asked for a refund at any time within that period, but didn't.  So I don't think you would be entitled to "damages" within that timeframe.  And that those damages would be zero in any respect.  I suspect that earnings calculated for a 12 month period after you would have received your orders would still be quite substantial, and are a much more justifiable target for damages.

And lastly (and as a non-lawyer), while I personally think BFL probably has the legal right to act as they have, it was a shitty thing to do, and they should not have.  But on the other hand, you appear to have worked very hard to make it happen.



grnbrg.

PS:  Ivan says "Hi." back.  Or something like that.