4 ms·

Especially with no refund option. If I don't agree to the new software terms, I can't sent the console hardware back to Sony/Microsoft. But I've always questio

Especially with no refund option. If I don't agree to the new software terms, I can't sent the console hardware back to Sony/Microsoft. But I've always questioned the legality of waiving your legal rights in such a manner. It's always seemed paradoxical to me, at best. Using the systems provided by the courts against me to ensure I have no further recourse in using the courts against them.

Florin_Andrei 15y ago
I see no paradox. Their legal funds are larger than yours, so they can do whatever they want.
- CaptainZapp 15y ago
  Uh no; they can't. Or more precisely: It probably very much depends on the jurisdiction (or country). The absolute fundamental basis of contract law (at least around here, but I strongly suspect this to be a more or less universal concept) is that a contract is negotiated in good faith from both parties. I'd wager (and no IANAL) that a bait and switch scheme (and it's exactly that when a contract is suddenly unilaterally changed on the whim of one party) is fundamentally contradictory to this very concept and thus invalid. Sure: They try it anyway, but I would be very, very surprised if such a scam is upheld by a court.
dhimes 15y ago
It especially pisses me off when one group (Apple) does it and I am also financially bound to AT&T so I can't even walk away. Those need to be decoupled: Apple changes their TOS, I refuse, and thus I am released from my AT&T contract. That, I believe, would at least slow down these changes for the coupled contracts.
- subway 15y ago
  You could always buy the device outright instead of letting AT&T subsidize it.
danssig 15y ago
Well, certain rights can't be signed away. I really suspect this is one of them. If you stand in front of a Jury and say "yes, I signed it. I couldn't use what I paid good money for if I didn't!" all 12 of them are going to feel your pain.

Florin_Andrei 15y ago

I see no paradox. Their legal funds are larger than yours, so they can do whatever they want.

CaptainZapp 15y ago
Uh no; they can't. Or more precisely: It probably very much depends on the jurisdiction (or country). The absolute fundamental basis of contract law (at least around here, but I strongly suspect this to be a more or less universal concept) is that a contract is negotiated in good faith from both parties. I'd wager (and no IANAL) that a bait and switch scheme (and it's exactly that when a contract is suddenly unilaterally changed on the whim of one party) is fundamentally contradictory to this very concept and thus invalid. Sure: They try it anyway, but I would be very, very surprised if such a scam is upheld by a court.

dhimes 15y ago

It especially pisses me off when one group (Apple) does it and I am also financially bound to AT&T so I can't even walk away. Those need to be decoupled: Apple changes their TOS, I refuse, and thus I am released from my AT&T contract. That, I believe, would at least slow down these changes for the coupled contracts.

subway 15y ago
You could always buy the device outright instead of letting AT&T subsidize it.

danssig 15y ago

Well, certain rights can't be signed away. I really suspect this is one of them. If you stand in front of a Jury and say "yes, I signed it. I couldn't use what I paid good money for if I didn't!" all 12 of them are going to feel your pain.