5 ms·
Those ridiculous "warranty void if sticker removed" stickers have been illegal in the US for decades but companies continue to use them because the vast majorit
by opencl 9y ago
Those ridiculous "warranty void if sticker removed" stickers have been illegal in the US for decades but companies continue to use them because the vast majority of consumers are not familiar with warranty law, and even if they are nobody is going to bother suing over a warranty claim on sub-$1000 hardware.
Seems very similar to this “Codes are not for sale or transfer” thing.
- dragonwriter 9y ago> Those ridiculous "warranty void if sticker removed" stickers have been illegal in the US for decades No, they've just had no legal effect. They aren't illegal; that would mean merely placing them on a product would incur some civil or criminal liability for the illegal act.
- bluGill 9y agoThey do have one legal effect: if the sticker is broken/removed the company has proof that you tried something. Legally they still have to prove your actions did damage, but it eliminates the "but I didn't do anything" defense.
- joombaga 9y agoCouldn't I just say "Your honor, I always remove those stickers immediately upon purchase of any electronic product." Removal of the sticker doesn't seem like proof of anything.
- dragonwriter 9y agoProof in a civil case is by preponderance of the evidence; basically, whatever seems more likely based on the totalkry of the evidence. It doesn't require on one piece of evidence in isolation, or even the totality of the evidence, only permitting one possible interpretation.
- opencl 9y agoYes, I should have been slightly more specific. The presence of the sticker is by itself technically not illegal. The illegal part is the practice of refusing warranty service for breaking the sticker.
- jopsen 9y agoOff topic: But maybe it should be illegal. Why should we permit deliberate misinformation of consumers?
- mindslight 9y agoI would love to see such behavior start being prosecuted as giving fraudulent legal advice. Written contracts that purport terms blatantly at odds with prevailing law would be a good target, too.