5 ms·

That's a highly creative interpretation of events. The software license agreement usually upfront covers what can or cannot not change. It is pretty rare in

That's a highly creative interpretation of events. The software license agreement usually upfront covers what can or cannot not change. It is pretty rare in most countries to see successful legal action for changed features, but best of luck.

josephg 5mo ago
Taking functionality away from a product after you bought it is a scum move. If the law lets them get away with it, the law should be changed. When I buy a product, I look at reviews and make my purchasing decision on the features and functionality at the time of sale. If a software update later ruins that, I want the option to get my money back.
- parasubvert 5mo ago
  [flagged]
mystraline 5mo ago
The "agreement" is at best coerced, and under blackmail of hardware you bought and paid for. At worst, its a fraudulent indefinite rental masquerading as a 'sale'. And lets discuss 'updates that fuck over your hardware'. In dwcent countries, thats hacking, and a serious criminal charge. But lol, companies are somehow exempt.
- parasubvert 5mo ago
  [flagged]
mttpwll 5mo ago
No, it’s not creative at all, it’s what happened — I have first hand experience to corroborate this. Regardless, at least in the US, not only are software-based ToS becoming unenforceable, but there’s a large upswing towards “right to repair” legislation, which, I think, is what you’re arguing against here… and I really think you’re going to be on the wrong side of history with your current line of thinking (despite what Bambu Labs does).
- parasubvert 5mo ago
  [flagged]
  - mttpwll 5mo ago
    No, it is with you -- the legislators are doing "fine" (and, again, are heading in a fine direction wrt RTR and software ToS). I have no idea why you think copyright violations apply here? You seem to be throwing legal terms around without regard for their actual meaning. It's clear you're here to argue for the sake of argument, but I'd really encourage you to reflect and think about why you're so loyal to a corporate entity instead of your fellow consumers (of which there are many in the parent and sibling comments... hint: you may be on the wrong side). Just for fun, pretend you bought a propane grill for cooking on Monday. On Tuesday, you cooked some bbq chicken and some corn. Later on Thursday, and without your knowledge or authorization, the grill no longer allowed you to use the propane apparatus for cooking non-meats unless you call a special telephone number and said a magic word whenever the call was answered. As a minimum, I feel, it'd be very confusing because, even though you're doing the exact same thing as Tuesday, the outcome is not the same. Your freedoms have been restricted by someone else; if you are okay with that, then have fun licking boots. The rest of us will still be here advocating for your freedoms.
shakna 5mo ago
The ACCC is more than happy to explain unenforceable terms, if you'd like to do business with Australia. Feel free to consult Steam, Google, Meta and others, if a software license is enough to ignore consumer rights.
- parasubvert 5mo ago
  I look forward to them sternly changing Bambu Labs' practices!
  - tankenmate 5mo ago
    They will just fine them into oblivion; they are known to fine companies AUD10M to AUD50M for this sort of thing, and from 1st April this year they can now fine up to AUD100M. Will this mean that Bambu will withdraw from the Australian market? Possibly maybe probably, but the ACCC takes a very hard stance against bait and switch.
    - autoexec 5mo ago
      It's a whole lot better than the US, but AUD100M isn't enough to scare a lot of companies. A law with real teeth would go after an increasing percentage of their revenue for each offense.
      - marcus_holmes 5mo ago
        As a percentage of global revenue, sure, it's not much. But as a percentage of what that company is likely to make in the Australian market, it can be significant.
    - anakaine 5mo ago
      The largest ACCC fine to date for a company undertaking anti consumer practices is $483m against an educational provider for misleading students. I'd be reasonably happy to lodge a complaint if I could find a version that's reasonably articulated. As a Bambu customer in Australia I switched my printer to local mode and its been great.
tannertech 5mo ago
The license agreement being the AGPLv3?

josephg 5mo ago

Taking functionality away from a product after you bought it is a scum move. If the law lets them get away with it, the law should be changed. When I buy a product, I look at reviews and make my purchasing decision on the features and functionality at the time of sale. If a software update later ruins that, I want the option to get my money back.

parasubvert 5mo ago
[flagged]

mystraline 5mo ago

The "agreement" is at best coerced, and under blackmail of hardware you bought and paid for. At worst, its a fraudulent indefinite rental masquerading as a 'sale'. And lets discuss 'updates that fuck over your hardware'. In dwcent countries, thats hacking, and a serious criminal charge. But lol, companies are somehow exempt.

parasubvert 5mo ago
[flagged]

mttpwll 5mo ago

No, it’s not creative at all, it’s what happened — I have first hand experience to corroborate this. Regardless, at least in the US, not only are software-based ToS becoming unenforceable, but there’s a large upswing towards “right to repair” legislation, which, I think, is what you’re arguing against here… and I really think you’re going to be on the wrong side of history with your current line of thinking (despite what Bambu Labs does).

parasubvert 5mo ago
[flagged]
- mttpwll 5mo ago
  No, it is with you -- the legislators are doing "fine" (and, again, are heading in a fine direction wrt RTR and software ToS). I have no idea why you think copyright violations apply here? You seem to be throwing legal terms around without regard for their actual meaning. It's clear you're here to argue for the sake of argument, but I'd really encourage you to reflect and think about why you're so loyal to a corporate entity instead of your fellow consumers (of which there are many in the parent and sibling comments... hint: you may be on the wrong side). Just for fun, pretend you bought a propane grill for cooking on Monday. On Tuesday, you cooked some bbq chicken and some corn. Later on Thursday, and without your knowledge or authorization, the grill no longer allowed you to use the propane apparatus for cooking non-meats unless you call a special telephone number and said a magic word whenever the call was answered. As a minimum, I feel, it'd be very confusing because, even though you're doing the exact same thing as Tuesday, the outcome is not the same. Your freedoms have been restricted by someone else; if you are okay with that, then have fun licking boots. The rest of us will still be here advocating for your freedoms.

shakna 5mo ago

The ACCC is more than happy to explain unenforceable terms, if you'd like to do business with Australia. Feel free to consult Steam, Google, Meta and others, if a software license is enough to ignore consumer rights.

parasubvert 5mo ago
I look forward to them sternly changing Bambu Labs' practices!
- tankenmate 5mo ago
  They will just fine them into oblivion; they are known to fine companies AUD10M to AUD50M for this sort of thing, and from 1st April this year they can now fine up to AUD100M. Will this mean that Bambu will withdraw from the Australian market? Possibly maybe probably, but the ACCC takes a very hard stance against bait and switch.
  - autoexec 5mo ago
    It's a whole lot better than the US, but AUD100M isn't enough to scare a lot of companies. A law with real teeth would go after an increasing percentage of their revenue for each offense.
    - marcus_holmes 5mo ago
      As a percentage of global revenue, sure, it's not much. But as a percentage of what that company is likely to make in the Australian market, it can be significant.
  - anakaine 5mo ago
    The largest ACCC fine to date for a company undertaking anti consumer practices is $483m against an educational provider for misleading students. I'd be reasonably happy to lodge a complaint if I could find a version that's reasonably articulated. As a Bambu customer in Australia I switched my printer to local mode and its been great.

tannertech 5mo ago

The license agreement being the AGPLv3?