4 ms·

Apple has taken full responsibility for this by acting as the seller of a product. If I sell you a washing machine and it breaks for whatever reason under statu

Apple has taken full responsibility for this by acting as the seller of a product. If I sell you a washing machine and it breaks for whatever reason under statutory warranty, I am responsible. No hiding behind “yeah but the producer wants to make more money off you so it’s not really my fault.” You take responsibility for what you sell in B2C. If you’re not happy, take it up with your suppliers. Or the law. Or Santa Claus for all I care. This is a vital part of our market rules. Otherwise people would never stop pointing fingers. (I want to add: it’s also true morally. Even if this is not strictly legally their responsibility, moral responsibility is assumed all the same. This is why we blame apple; they can’t have their cake and eat it too. There was this cartoon of a villain who copied the power of every hero he met. When he met Superman it all seemed lost; surely noone could defeat him now? In the world’s hour of truth, the Batman approaches with kryptonite, and he buckles. “He could not copy our strengths without copying our weaknesses.” So it is with Apple and Hollywood.)

neom 8y ago
By that logic, if I buy a DVD at the checkout of Marks & Spencer on my summer holidays before returning to the states, I get to the US to find out it won't work in the DVD player here, should I be annoyed at Marks & Spencer for not posting a sign that explains media regions?
- FabHK 8y ago
  Not only that, by GP's logic Marks & Spencers would somehow be obliged to get you a US region coded DVD of that movie (whether the actual rights holder ever released it or not!). To be clear: I absolutely hate the ridiculous licensing policies of the movie studios, but they're clearly not Marks & Spencer's fault, or Apple's, for that matter.
  - sanderjd 8y ago
    It is Marks & Spencers responsibility, even if there's nothing they could have done differently. You're their customer. In this scenario, when the DVD they sold you didn't work the way you wanted it to, they are the ones you should complain to, and they should give you a refund.
    - pas 8y ago
      Yes, it's their responsibility. And that's why they put a media region lock sticker on the box of the DVD. (And usually it's also printed on the labeled side of the disk.) Legally, Marks & Spencer must put this restriction into their contract with the customer. And of course these are sometimes implied contracts. Very much based on jurisdiction, case law, etc.
      - sanderjd 8y ago
        I'm not talking about law, I'm talking about what customers should expect from merchants. Even if there's some fine print somewhere that says otherwise, I expect the thing I bought from a merchant to work for me, and if it doesn't, I expect my money back. If neither of these things happens, I'll no longer be a customer of that merchant.
- nothrabannosir 8y ago
  Yes. Region locks are a fabricated limitation, just another way for Hollywood to extract money from the consumer. You should be annoyed with Marks & Spencer’s for playing ball. Because while one drop might not turn the tide, eventually the dam breaks and some retailer somewhere will find a way and sell unlocked DVD players. Effecting change in society is an exercise in finding the right pressure point. Hollywood doesn’t care about our feelings on region locks. Sellers do. Put the incentive in the right spot and watch the stars align. A well leveraged arm cannot be overturned.
  - lotsofpulp 8y ago
    One benefit of region locks is its crude ability to charge people based on their level of wealth, allowing more people to share in the experience. I've been to national parks in some countries that charge more if you have a passport from a richer country than if you have a passport from a poorer country, which I think is a noble effort to be a little more egalitarian with the distribution of resources. Obviously, not everyone from a poor country is poor and vice versa, but in the absence of a better method it sort of works. However, I'm not sold on region locks for media that has zero marginal cost to reproduce, nor am I sold on selling someone something and then revoking access to it based on their locale.
    - crtasm 8y ago
      You remind me of the last time I drove past Stonehenge in England. It's been paid entry for a long time but I found it surprising to discover tourists get a cheaper rate. It was a flat change though, not dependant on country.
BeetleB 8y ago
>If I sell you a washing machine and it breaks for whatever reason under statutory warranty, I am responsible. Eh? This never happens. It's always "Product is under manufacturer warranty. Go contact them".
- ddingus 8y ago
  Sure it does. Get loud, ask what value the seller provides, all while suggesting to anyone nearby purchases made here are dubious at best. They will deal. Always do. Yes, doing that is not nice, but neither is inane profit seeking and finger pointing.
  - ddingus 8y ago
    To the obvious naysayers, I know that kind of thing is unpleasant. What do you do? Just take it? I will, if money is not really an issue. But when it is? No way. Serious query, I will read with interest :D
    - BeetleB 8y ago
      >What do you do? Just take it? Take what? You have a manufacturer warranty. Contact the manufacturer. Don't take it out on the store. It's really that simple. In all my years of buying stuff that was under manufacturer warranty, I have never had a problem with the manufacturer honoring their warranty. There's nothing to "take". The store has a return policy. If you are within that policy, they take the item back (or exchange, or whatever). Beyond that, just deal with the manufacturer.
      - ddingus 8y ago
        Oh no. If the seller, represented it that way, sure. When they don"t, and at those times they are asking dollars for implied value, they need to either earn it, or quit making those representations. To their credit many have, I will no longer buy from them. The few that still do tend to get this right. I have had few incidents in the last decade. The 90's and lesser degree 00's were particularly bad.
dperfect 8y ago
Thank you for pointing this out. I wish more people understood this point. It happens to be the same reason that Amazon can't just say "sorry, we don't take any responsibility for the suppliers of solar eclipse glasses that we sell on our website." As a reseller, you have to take responsibility for the products you sell. Here's another example: Let's say supplier A produces a part used by manufacturer B, who produces a final product sold to consumers through retailer C. If A was negligent and produced a defective part that causes harm/malfunction in the final product, it would be complete chaos to drag all of those parties into court in a single case (it may not even be obvious to retailer C or the customer that the product's failure is related to A's part). To sort things out legally (assuming the problem makes it to the court system), the customer fights their case against C. C may or may not understand why the product they sell is defective, but if they believe it to be B's fault, they can file a separate case against B. And B can then file a case against A. In the end, the legal system can find the party who is ultimately responsible and hold them accountable, but it doesn't work for B or C to say "sorry, this isn't our fault because we're just selling something that includes A's defective part". Leadership is (or should be) similar: if an employee screws up, it's still the CEO's problem and responsibility. Internally, that CEO can hold a manager accountable, and that manager can hold the employee accountable, but that responsibility doesn't end just because it's assumed by a higher level.
- pas 8y ago
  I don't know. Is Apple actually selling it? Or do they just provide the marketplace and the payment gateway (bankcard charging services)?
AndrewKemendo 8y ago
I don't think this is actually true. In many cases on packaging for items I've purchased they explicitly state "Do not return this to the store, return to the manufacturer." It's also not true for Car Dealerships (recalls) and Large Appliances that aren't from major Box Stores. So yes take it up with suppliers, but your claim that the middleman (Apple in this case) is de-facto responsible, isn't nearly universal.
- Someone 8y ago
  Law trumps whatever sellers say. In the EU, B2C sellers have to comply with regulation that more or less say “once you’re the middle man, you stay the middle man” https://europa.eu/youreurope/citizens/consumers/shopping/guarantees-returns/index_en.htm https://europa.eu/youreurope/citizens/consumers/shopping/gua...: ”Guarantees and returns Under EU rules, a trader must repair, replace, reduce the price or give you a refund if goods you bought turn out to be faulty or do not look or work as advertised. If you bought a good or a service online or outside of a shop (by telephone, mail order, from a door-to-door salesperson), you also have the right to cancel and return your order within 14 days, for any reason and with no justification.” Having said that, sellers are allowed to outsource required support, so I don’t see how products saying the manufacturer will cover repairs and warranties is in conflict with those rules, as long as those manufacturers actually provide the services law requires. And of course, nothing guarantees consumers will get what they are entitled to, but having the law on their side won’t hurt and may help.
pas 8y ago
Service industry. More and more things become a lot more complex than just a once in the past transaction of money for a gadget. (It never was that simple, mind you, but at least the responsibility of fit for a purpose, some kind of warranty and so on was clear, that it was the seller's.) Now as people sell services that include access to 3rd party content (movies), the things become complicated. That said, I think it's good that the users demand simplicity with regards to responsibility assignment. When Apple sells an app on their store, and the app doesn't work, people understand that it's not Apple's fault. But that's because the communication is clear. Whereas with media content Apple provides iTunes or Apple Music or the appropriate program and service, and so it's reasonable for end users to demand that Apple make good on its implied promises.

neom 8y ago

By that logic, if I buy a DVD at the checkout of Marks & Spencer on my summer holidays before returning to the states, I get to the US to find out it won't work in the DVD player here, should I be annoyed at Marks & Spencer for not posting a sign that explains media regions?

FabHK 8y ago
Not only that, by GP's logic Marks & Spencers would somehow be obliged to get you a US region coded DVD of that movie (whether the actual rights holder ever released it or not!). To be clear: I absolutely hate the ridiculous licensing policies of the movie studios, but they're clearly not Marks & Spencer's fault, or Apple's, for that matter.
- sanderjd 8y ago
  It is Marks & Spencers responsibility, even if there's nothing they could have done differently. You're their customer. In this scenario, when the DVD they sold you didn't work the way you wanted it to, they are the ones you should complain to, and they should give you a refund.
  - pas 8y ago
    Yes, it's their responsibility. And that's why they put a media region lock sticker on the box of the DVD. (And usually it's also printed on the labeled side of the disk.) Legally, Marks & Spencer must put this restriction into their contract with the customer. And of course these are sometimes implied contracts. Very much based on jurisdiction, case law, etc.
    - sanderjd 8y ago
      I'm not talking about law, I'm talking about what customers should expect from merchants. Even if there's some fine print somewhere that says otherwise, I expect the thing I bought from a merchant to work for me, and if it doesn't, I expect my money back. If neither of these things happens, I'll no longer be a customer of that merchant.
nothrabannosir 8y ago
Yes. Region locks are a fabricated limitation, just another way for Hollywood to extract money from the consumer. You should be annoyed with Marks & Spencer’s for playing ball. Because while one drop might not turn the tide, eventually the dam breaks and some retailer somewhere will find a way and sell unlocked DVD players. Effecting change in society is an exercise in finding the right pressure point. Hollywood doesn’t care about our feelings on region locks. Sellers do. Put the incentive in the right spot and watch the stars align. A well leveraged arm cannot be overturned.
- lotsofpulp 8y ago
  One benefit of region locks is its crude ability to charge people based on their level of wealth, allowing more people to share in the experience. I've been to national parks in some countries that charge more if you have a passport from a richer country than if you have a passport from a poorer country, which I think is a noble effort to be a little more egalitarian with the distribution of resources. Obviously, not everyone from a poor country is poor and vice versa, but in the absence of a better method it sort of works. However, I'm not sold on region locks for media that has zero marginal cost to reproduce, nor am I sold on selling someone something and then revoking access to it based on their locale.
  - crtasm 8y ago
    You remind me of the last time I drove past Stonehenge in England. It's been paid entry for a long time but I found it surprising to discover tourists get a cheaper rate. It was a flat change though, not dependant on country.

BeetleB 8y ago

>If I sell you a washing machine and it breaks for whatever reason under statutory warranty, I am responsible. Eh? This never happens. It's always "Product is under manufacturer warranty. Go contact them".

ddingus 8y ago
Sure it does. Get loud, ask what value the seller provides, all while suggesting to anyone nearby purchases made here are dubious at best. They will deal. Always do. Yes, doing that is not nice, but neither is inane profit seeking and finger pointing.
- ddingus 8y ago
  To the obvious naysayers, I know that kind of thing is unpleasant. What do you do? Just take it? I will, if money is not really an issue. But when it is? No way. Serious query, I will read with interest :D
  - BeetleB 8y ago
    >What do you do? Just take it? Take what? You have a manufacturer warranty. Contact the manufacturer. Don't take it out on the store. It's really that simple. In all my years of buying stuff that was under manufacturer warranty, I have never had a problem with the manufacturer honoring their warranty. There's nothing to "take". The store has a return policy. If you are within that policy, they take the item back (or exchange, or whatever). Beyond that, just deal with the manufacturer.
    - ddingus 8y ago
      Oh no. If the seller, represented it that way, sure. When they don"t, and at those times they are asking dollars for implied value, they need to either earn it, or quit making those representations. To their credit many have, I will no longer buy from them. The few that still do tend to get this right. I have had few incidents in the last decade. The 90's and lesser degree 00's were particularly bad.

dperfect 8y ago

Thank you for pointing this out. I wish more people understood this point. It happens to be the same reason that Amazon can't just say "sorry, we don't take any responsibility for the suppliers of solar eclipse glasses that we sell on our website." As a reseller, you have to take responsibility for the products you sell. Here's another example: Let's say supplier A produces a part used by manufacturer B, who produces a final product sold to consumers through retailer C. If A was negligent and produced a defective part that causes harm/malfunction in the final product, it would be complete chaos to drag all of those parties into court in a single case (it may not even be obvious to retailer C or the customer that the product's failure is related to A's part). To sort things out legally (assuming the problem makes it to the court system), the customer fights their case against C. C may or may not understand why the product they sell is defective, but if they believe it to be B's fault, they can file a separate case against B. And B can then file a case against A. In the end, the legal system can find the party who is ultimately responsible and hold them accountable, but it doesn't work for B or C to say "sorry, this isn't our fault because we're just selling something that includes A's defective part". Leadership is (or should be) similar: if an employee screws up, it's still the CEO's problem and responsibility. Internally, that CEO can hold a manager accountable, and that manager can hold the employee accountable, but that responsibility doesn't end just because it's assumed by a higher level.

pas 8y ago
I don't know. Is Apple actually selling it? Or do they just provide the marketplace and the payment gateway (bankcard charging services)?

AndrewKemendo 8y ago

I don't think this is actually true. In many cases on packaging for items I've purchased they explicitly state "Do not return this to the store, return to the manufacturer." It's also not true for Car Dealerships (recalls) and Large Appliances that aren't from major Box Stores. So yes take it up with suppliers, but your claim that the middleman (Apple in this case) is de-facto responsible, isn't nearly universal.

Someone 8y ago
Law trumps whatever sellers say. In the EU, B2C sellers have to comply with regulation that more or less say “once you’re the middle man, you stay the middle man” https://europa.eu/youreurope/citizens/consumers/shopping/guarantees-returns/index_en.htm https://europa.eu/youreurope/citizens/consumers/shopping/gua...: ”Guarantees and returns Under EU rules, a trader must repair, replace, reduce the price or give you a refund if goods you bought turn out to be faulty or do not look or work as advertised. If you bought a good or a service online or outside of a shop (by telephone, mail order, from a door-to-door salesperson), you also have the right to cancel and return your order within 14 days, for any reason and with no justification.” Having said that, sellers are allowed to outsource required support, so I don’t see how products saying the manufacturer will cover repairs and warranties is in conflict with those rules, as long as those manufacturers actually provide the services law requires. And of course, nothing guarantees consumers will get what they are entitled to, but having the law on their side won’t hurt and may help.

pas 8y ago

Service industry. More and more things become a lot more complex than just a once in the past transaction of money for a gadget. (It never was that simple, mind you, but at least the responsibility of fit for a purpose, some kind of warranty and so on was clear, that it was the seller's.) Now as people sell services that include access to 3rd party content (movies), the things become complicated. That said, I think it's good that the users demand simplicity with regards to responsibility assignment. When Apple sells an app on their store, and the app doesn't work, people understand that it's not Apple's fault. But that's because the communication is clear. Whereas with media content Apple provides iTunes or Apple Music or the appropriate program and service, and so it's reasonable for end users to demand that Apple make good on its implied promises.