5 ms·

> That’s laughably wrong. Exclusive distribution rights are probably enforced more strictly in the U.S. than anywhere else in the world. They are governed by co

> That’s laughably wrong. Exclusive distribution rights are probably enforced more strictly in the U.S. than anywhere else in the world. They are governed by contract law. But that’s an issue between the manufacturer and the distributors which can then sue each other for breach of contract, right? The “authorized reseller” thing shouldn’t matter to the end consumer, as soon as I have the product, it’s as legitimate as every other purchase.

anon84873628 2y ago
I agree that it should be worked out between the manufacturer and distributor. But the idea that "it’s as legitimate as every other purchase" is flawed. Let's say a guy in China buys the product from Deye, who stipulates under Chinese law that this is only for use in China and not authorized for export. The guy sells it on to you in the US anyway (so let's call him a "scammer" for violating law and misrepresenting the product to you, and innocent consumer looking for a good deal). Why should Deye respect your rights at all and not brick the device? What rights should you have under Chinese law? If they don't brick the device, how can they disincentivize the scammers at scale? Sure you can say they should prosecute and rely on the deterrent aspect of the penal system, but that is not really going to be effective. Basically it boils down to what rights the victims of scammers and criminals have. If you unknowingly bought stolen diamonds, what rights do you have when the original owner comes knocking?
- account42 2y ago
  The real scam was selling the devices at vastly different prices in China vs. the US in the first place.
- yuliyp 2y ago
  The analogy to theft is doing a lot of heavy lifting here. Let's say it was a textbook that also had a label saying it was only to be sold in India. Would the US publisher have a right to steal such a book from someone in the U.S. that had it?

anon84873628 2y ago

I agree that it should be worked out between the manufacturer and distributor. But the idea that "it’s as legitimate as every other purchase" is flawed. Let's say a guy in China buys the product from Deye, who stipulates under Chinese law that this is only for use in China and not authorized for export. The guy sells it on to you in the US anyway (so let's call him a "scammer" for violating law and misrepresenting the product to you, and innocent consumer looking for a good deal). Why should Deye respect your rights at all and not brick the device? What rights should you have under Chinese law? If they don't brick the device, how can they disincentivize the scammers at scale? Sure you can say they should prosecute and rely on the deterrent aspect of the penal system, but that is not really going to be effective. Basically it boils down to what rights the victims of scammers and criminals have. If you unknowingly bought stolen diamonds, what rights do you have when the original owner comes knocking?

account42 2y ago
The real scam was selling the devices at vastly different prices in China vs. the US in the first place.
yuliyp 2y ago
The analogy to theft is doing a lot of heavy lifting here. Let's say it was a textbook that also had a label saying it was only to be sold in India. Would the US publisher have a right to steal such a book from someone in the U.S. that had it?