4 ms·

also interesting is the following clause > 5.3 BEFORE SELLING, LICENSING, PROVIDING OR DISTRIBUTING THE DIGITAL IMAGING SYSTEM TO YOUR CUSTOMER (IF ANY), YOU S

also interesting is the following clause > 5.3 BEFORE SELLING, LICENSING, PROVIDING OR DISTRIBUTING THE DIGITAL IMAGING SYSTEM TO YOUR CUSTOMER (IF ANY), YOU SHALL EXPLAIN AND MAKE SUCH CUSTOMER FULLY UNDERSTAND THE WARRANTY-EXCEPTION SET FORTH IN THE PRECEDING PARAGRAPH. this is a b2b2c term -- we need better tech for capturing consent up the chain and for surfacing contract terms to downstream clients (notwithstanding the fact that in this case, it's 65% bullshit that the warranty is voided and 110% bullshit that fuji expects downstream consent to be captured)

ravel-bar-foo 5y ago
Of course it isn't good that the warranty is being voided, but as a matter of contract this particular clause seems very logical. For the consumer it is good to know when you are being provided a third-party service/app that could void a warranty, and a clause like this makes the third-party provider liable for non-disclosure of the risks.
- awinter-py 5y ago
  but they're not being provided a 3rd-party app that voids a warranty they're getting a 1st party app that (if you think this contract is enforceable) voids the warranty in practice, this whole page of products https://fujifilm-x.com/en-us/products/software https://fujifilm-x.com/en-us/products/software probably (I'm guessing) uses the sdk, is probably advertised as part of the product's value, and doesn't say anything about warranty if fuji finds out you used the camera with photoshop, then uses that to reject a subsequent repair (related or unrelated to sdk), this seems like a reasonable case for false advertising and a refund