4 ms·

However ridiculous, there is absolutely no way to convince any EU court to rule that a company should be responsible for a product after 24 months if there is n

However ridiculous, there is absolutely no way to convince any EU court to rule that a company should be responsible for a product after 24 months if there is no SLA or other factors; you're citing one law as if it exists isolated - it doesn't. On top of that, I'm reacting to a comment that said a device should be "secure", not "functional" - a huge difference. My car costs multiple tens of thousands of euro and yet it's still only 24 months (people actually tried this one at a court, failed). If you bought your Samsung phone in the EU, you will get the 24 month warranty automatically from all EU-native suppliers. Of course if you ship it from somewhere else like the US or Asia, it's very different. If it's from EU, send it in as non-functional. There are many things that are counter-productive in the EU, this one is probably one of the smallest ones.

Fnoord 8y ago
Please link to those court cases. Here's a lawyer's take on it [1]. Although I'm not sure if its EU specific or NL specific. According to [2] [3] [4] there are some differences between NL and EU on this account. They specifically mention the car example in those sources, btw. [1] https://blog.iusmentis.com/2018/09/27/honderden-klachten-over-verdwijnende-smart-tv-apps-in-nederland/ https://blog.iusmentis.com/2018/09/27/honderden-klachten-ove... [2] http://www.conformiteit.nl/conformiteit-conformiteitbeginsel_garantie.html http://www.conformiteit.nl/conformiteit-conformiteitbeginsel... [3] http://www.conformiteit.nl/gebruiksduurverwachting.html http://www.conformiteit.nl/gebruiksduurverwachting.html [4] http://www.conformiteit.nl/economische-levensduur.html http://www.conformiteit.nl/economische-levensduur.html
- deleted 8y ago
  [deleted]