bowspearer on 19 April 2010
They're probably caught on the distinction between B-to-B and B-to-C transactions, which the TPA does draw distinctions on. I can see this possibly being a very complex ruling. Possibly what the ACCC will announce is that customers are entitled to refunds or compensation from retailers due to Sony's illegal actions, as consumers were caught out in a B-to-C transaction. From there, retailers would be entitled to a recourse from Sony as the laws regading supply for B-to-B transactions are almost identical to B-to-C and would most likely act through the ARA to gain a recourse through Sony. The whole thing could prove to be a disaster for Sony in the longrun, even with the distinction between B-to-B and B-to-C commerce in place under the TPA.
