5 ms·

Oh the tyranny of having to pay…

Ensorceled 5y ago
I have a 10 year old Sony TV that I have NO proof of purchase for, I threw out that receipt with the box about 3 moves ago.
- anonuser123456 5y ago
  Well, since you didn't steal it why would they disable it? But if you bought it off the back of some guys truck would you honestly expect it to work?
  - Ensorceled 5y ago
    From the parent: > "Should a customer’s TV be incorrectly blocked, the functionality can be reinstated once proof of purchase and a valid TV license is shared to serv.manager@samsung.com or click here for more information" I don't know why they would block me, but apparently it is something they've created a process for, a process I wouldn't be able to participate in.
    - rad_gruchalski 5y ago
      But they wouldn't. You have a 10 year old Sony TV. This is Samsung.
      - Ensorceled 5y ago
        My point is that, I don't have proof of purchase for my 10 year old Sony. I would presume this also applies to Samsung customers.
ollien 5y ago
Obviously that's not the point, here. The fact that Samsung has the ability to brick a TV remotely _at all_ is ridiculous. It's not hard to imagine this being used by an attacker to shut down all Samsung TVs remotely, or for planned obsolescence if you want to be more cynical.
- gambiting 5y ago
  Or.....against thieves. As someone who had stuff stolen, I'd pay money for electronics that catches fire once reported stolen, thieves are literally scum of the earth and only one step above murderers and rapists in my books. Great step by Samsung here.
  - dpedu 5y ago
    You'd install a firebomb in your own home? I think you need to rethink this position.
    - Filligree 5y ago
      I carry one in my pocket every day, so why not?
  - nate_meurer 5y ago
    I can't argue with your assessment of thieves, but if you're going to have self-destruct mechanisms in your devices, appliances, or car, do you really trust a company like Samsung with the red button? Wouldn't you rather have that under your own control?
  - x86_64Ubuntu 5y ago
    That's akin to a booby trap, and US law does not look kindly on such machinations.
- mminer237 5y ago
  That would be about as huge of a security failure as an attacker sending out a malicious OS update for any other device, except with a planned, controlled way to disable TVs, Samsung could reenable them promptly once they realize. Intentionally disabling purchased devices to force them to buy new ones is called trespass to chattels and is illegal.
  - MichaelZuo 5y ago
    Which part of the South African laws says that?
kazinator 5y ago
Some people will pay, not knowing the TV was stolen. A batch of stolen TV's could end up in the ends of a legit distributors; someone could end up with that by walking into some established brick-and-mortar discount TV warehouse type place. Gee, I hope that everything you own that you got off Craigslist in good faith and paid for is remotely disabled if it had been stolen, while the thieves enjoy the money. Because you're the bad guy!
- gruez 5y ago
  >Gee, I hope that everything you own that you got off Craigslist in good faith and paid for is remotely disabled if it had been stolen, while the thieves enjoy the money. Because you're the bad guy! You're not the bad guy, but you're also not entitled to keep the stolen goods. It has to go back to its original owner. I'd be pretty pissed if someone stole my bike, sold it, and I'm not able to recover my bike because somebody "bought" it at 80% off.
  - kazinator 5y ago
    No, you aren't; it called "possession of stolen property". However, Samsung is not the law, first of all. (If they have a court order to disable the equipment, that's fine, I suppose.) Second of all, these TV's won't be recovered; they will probably just end up in the landfill. You're not catching the thieves this way.
    - gruez 5y ago
      >However, Samsung is not the law, first of all. (If they have a court order to disable the equipment, that's fine, I suppose.) Should apple require a court order to enable icloud lock on your stolen iphone? >Second of all, these TV's won't be recovered; they will probably just end up in the landfill. >You're not catching the thieves this way. Same for stolen iphones, are you against icloud locks as well?
- MichaelZuo 5y ago
  Do you not believe in property rights? If a stolen car gets resold that doesn’t automatically void the original ownership papers… and that’s the standard practice in every country in the world I think.
Teknoman117 5y ago
I don’t have proof of purchase for 90% of the stuff I own. It’s insane to expect people to hang on to receipts for eternity.
- memco 5y ago
  Even more fun is that there’s some receipts where the ink fades/rubs off in a matter of days so even though you have the paper receipt you still have no proof of purchase.
  - tatersolid 5y ago
    You have a high-res camera on your person at all times. I take photos of all receipts for over $50 or so as a precaution.
- gruez 5y ago
  And you're not expected to. This is for TVs that were recently stolen. Do people here actually think this will be used in the future for random ownership checks?
- rad_gruchalski 5y ago
  No bank statements?
  - Teknoman117 5y ago
    I have bank / credit card statements, but those aren't itemized. I could say I spent $1500 at BestBuy on some date, but not have concrete proof of exactly what I bought from that alone.
cyckl 5y ago
oh the tyranny of having a product which you purchase and think you own have all functionality be remotely disabled—effectively becoming a multi thousand dollar paperweight—at the whim of a large international corporation with no real recourse...
- anonuser123456 5y ago
  You have recourse by showing proof of purchase. Or you sue them.
  - nate_meurer 5y ago
    > You have recourse by showing proof of purchase How does that help when the product is out of warranty? > Or you sue them. How exactly would you go about suing Samsung. Figure that out and let us know if it would be worth it for a TV.
    - gruez 5y ago
      > > You have recourse by showing proof of purchase >How does that help when the product is out of warranty? This is for TVs that were recently stolen. They'd definitely be in warranty (short of you not buying from an authorized reseller because you bought it out of the back of a truck), and you're reasonably likely to have the receipt.
      - nate_meurer 5y ago
        While TFA focuses on recently stolen goods, the broader concern here is the invasive remote control that Samsung has over your device. The concerns I'm reading in this thread include Samsung turning on invasive advertising, remote bricking, and possibly monitoring your media consumption. So in light of the relevant debate here, how exactly does a proof-of-purchase help if the product is out of warranty?
zimbatm 5y ago
You might have paid the TV second hand, and not be aware of the theft. What recourse do you have then? You're out of pocket, the seller might not be reachable anymore, and you have no proof of purchase.
- anonuser123456 5y ago
  Supply chains matter and that has always been true. You have never had recourse for buying stolen goods under law. If you buy stolen goods, the police can seize them and you are out the money.
  - reaperducer 5y ago
    Samsung is not a police agency. It should not be allowed to virtually seize something that belongs to me.
    - colejohnson66 5y ago
      If it was stolen, it was never yours, even if you paid the thief for it. At least in the US, this is a settled matter; You have no right to a stolen good that you paid for.
      - reaperducer 5y ago
        I don't dispute that. I just don't like huge corporations in other countries acting like the criminal justice where I live.
  - hef19898 5y ago
    You did, if you did so unknowingly and had no reason to doubt you bought stolen merchandise.
- deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]
- im3w1l 5y ago
mrkramer 5y ago
Apple remotely scanning our phones for "suspicious" content, Samsung remotely disabling our TVs on the suspicion of TV being stolen what is next?! This is akin to Crypto Wars from the 1990s but this time the enemy is far more dangerous. In the 1990s we had a centralized enemy the government which decided to turn against us this time the enemy is decentralized in the form of private corporations which are turning against us one by one. Government can be tamed but private corporations can not; they only see profit and now they think they can get more of it by lying to us they do it in the name of social justice.

I have a 10 year old Sony TV that I have NO proof of purchase for, I threw out that receipt with the box about 3 moves ago.

anonuser123456 5y ago
Well, since you didn't steal it why would they disable it? But if you bought it off the back of some guys truck would you honestly expect it to work?
- Ensorceled 5y ago
  From the parent: > "Should a customer’s TV be incorrectly blocked, the functionality can be reinstated once proof of purchase and a valid TV license is shared to serv.manager@samsung.com or click here for more information" I don't know why they would block me, but apparently it is something they've created a process for, a process I wouldn't be able to participate in.
  - rad_gruchalski 5y ago
    But they wouldn't. You have a 10 year old Sony TV. This is Samsung.
    - Ensorceled 5y ago
      My point is that, I don't have proof of purchase for my 10 year old Sony. I would presume this also applies to Samsung customers.

ollien 5y ago

Obviously that's not the point, here. The fact that Samsung has the ability to brick a TV remotely _at all_ is ridiculous. It's not hard to imagine this being used by an attacker to shut down all Samsung TVs remotely, or for planned obsolescence if you want to be more cynical.

gambiting 5y ago
Or.....against thieves. As someone who had stuff stolen, I'd pay money for electronics that catches fire once reported stolen, thieves are literally scum of the earth and only one step above murderers and rapists in my books. Great step by Samsung here.
- dpedu 5y ago
  You'd install a firebomb in your own home? I think you need to rethink this position.
  - Filligree 5y ago
    I carry one in my pocket every day, so why not?
- nate_meurer 5y ago
  I can't argue with your assessment of thieves, but if you're going to have self-destruct mechanisms in your devices, appliances, or car, do you really trust a company like Samsung with the red button? Wouldn't you rather have that under your own control?
- x86_64Ubuntu 5y ago
  That's akin to a booby trap, and US law does not look kindly on such machinations.
mminer237 5y ago
That would be about as huge of a security failure as an attacker sending out a malicious OS update for any other device, except with a planned, controlled way to disable TVs, Samsung could reenable them promptly once they realize. Intentionally disabling purchased devices to force them to buy new ones is called trespass to chattels and is illegal.
- MichaelZuo 5y ago
  Which part of the South African laws says that?

kazinator 5y ago

Some people will pay, not knowing the TV was stolen. A batch of stolen TV's could end up in the ends of a legit distributors; someone could end up with that by walking into some established brick-and-mortar discount TV warehouse type place. Gee, I hope that everything you own that you got off Craigslist in good faith and paid for is remotely disabled if it had been stolen, while the thieves enjoy the money. Because you're the bad guy!

gruez 5y ago
>Gee, I hope that everything you own that you got off Craigslist in good faith and paid for is remotely disabled if it had been stolen, while the thieves enjoy the money. Because you're the bad guy! You're not the bad guy, but you're also not entitled to keep the stolen goods. It has to go back to its original owner. I'd be pretty pissed if someone stole my bike, sold it, and I'm not able to recover my bike because somebody "bought" it at 80% off.
- kazinator 5y ago
  No, you aren't; it called "possession of stolen property". However, Samsung is not the law, first of all. (If they have a court order to disable the equipment, that's fine, I suppose.) Second of all, these TV's won't be recovered; they will probably just end up in the landfill. You're not catching the thieves this way.
  - gruez 5y ago
    >However, Samsung is not the law, first of all. (If they have a court order to disable the equipment, that's fine, I suppose.) Should apple require a court order to enable icloud lock on your stolen iphone? >Second of all, these TV's won't be recovered; they will probably just end up in the landfill. >You're not catching the thieves this way. Same for stolen iphones, are you against icloud locks as well?
MichaelZuo 5y ago
Do you not believe in property rights? If a stolen car gets resold that doesn’t automatically void the original ownership papers… and that’s the standard practice in every country in the world I think.

Teknoman117 5y ago

I don’t have proof of purchase for 90% of the stuff I own. It’s insane to expect people to hang on to receipts for eternity.

memco 5y ago
Even more fun is that there’s some receipts where the ink fades/rubs off in a matter of days so even though you have the paper receipt you still have no proof of purchase.
- tatersolid 5y ago
  You have a high-res camera on your person at all times. I take photos of all receipts for over $50 or so as a precaution.
gruez 5y ago
And you're not expected to. This is for TVs that were recently stolen. Do people here actually think this will be used in the future for random ownership checks?
rad_gruchalski 5y ago
No bank statements?
- Teknoman117 5y ago
  I have bank / credit card statements, but those aren't itemized. I could say I spent $1500 at BestBuy on some date, but not have concrete proof of exactly what I bought from that alone.

cyckl 5y ago

oh the tyranny of having a product which you purchase and think you own have all functionality be remotely disabled—effectively becoming a multi thousand dollar paperweight—at the whim of a large international corporation with no real recourse...

anonuser123456 5y ago
You have recourse by showing proof of purchase. Or you sue them.
- nate_meurer 5y ago
  > You have recourse by showing proof of purchase How does that help when the product is out of warranty? > Or you sue them. How exactly would you go about suing Samsung. Figure that out and let us know if it would be worth it for a TV.
  - gruez 5y ago
    > > You have recourse by showing proof of purchase >How does that help when the product is out of warranty? This is for TVs that were recently stolen. They'd definitely be in warranty (short of you not buying from an authorized reseller because you bought it out of the back of a truck), and you're reasonably likely to have the receipt.
    - nate_meurer 5y ago
      While TFA focuses on recently stolen goods, the broader concern here is the invasive remote control that Samsung has over your device. The concerns I'm reading in this thread include Samsung turning on invasive advertising, remote bricking, and possibly monitoring your media consumption. So in light of the relevant debate here, how exactly does a proof-of-purchase help if the product is out of warranty?

zimbatm 5y ago

You might have paid the TV second hand, and not be aware of the theft. What recourse do you have then? You're out of pocket, the seller might not be reachable anymore, and you have no proof of purchase.

anonuser123456 5y ago
Supply chains matter and that has always been true. You have never had recourse for buying stolen goods under law. If you buy stolen goods, the police can seize them and you are out the money.
- reaperducer 5y ago
  Samsung is not a police agency. It should not be allowed to virtually seize something that belongs to me.
  - colejohnson66 5y ago
    If it was stolen, it was never yours, even if you paid the thief for it. At least in the US, this is a settled matter; You have no right to a stolen good that you paid for.
    - reaperducer 5y ago
      I don't dispute that. I just don't like huge corporations in other countries acting like the criminal justice where I live.
- hef19898 5y ago
  You did, if you did so unknowingly and had no reason to doubt you bought stolen merchandise.
deleted 5y ago
[deleted]
im3w1l 5y ago

mrkramer 5y ago

Apple remotely scanning our phones for "suspicious" content, Samsung remotely disabling our TVs on the suspicion of TV being stolen what is next?! This is akin to Crypto Wars from the 1990s but this time the enemy is far more dangerous. In the 1990s we had a centralized enemy the government which decided to turn against us this time the enemy is decentralized in the form of private corporations which are turning against us one by one. Government can be tamed but private corporations can not; they only see profit and now they think they can get more of it by lying to us they do it in the name of social justice.