psychicscubadiver said:
Pemalite said:
Companies terms of service, EULA does not override your consumer rights.
In Australia, which is often based on UK law, secondhand purchases are generally not bound by a company's original terms of service, as the terms of service contract is between the manufacturer and the original purchaser.
Also. Read the article and start putting consumers before big business/rich. It's silly.
|
What?
If someone sells something they don't have a right to sell, then that's selling stolen goods and the original owner has a right to recover it. It doesn't matter if the owner is a company or an individual. The line cerebralbore outlines above shows that the kits belonged to Nintendo so unless someone at Nintendo signed off on the deal, then they *can't* be legally purchased. Not unless the UK has some strange law that allows theft. I'm less inclined to blame the guy who purchased them as he may be unaware that the kits were Nintendo's property, but whether he's aware or not, stolen goods deserve to be restored to their rightful owners.
|
Pemalite is claiming that 3DS Dev kits are under an EULA and that EULAs don't apply to secondhand purchases, in the U.K. If he can provide a reliable source for his EULA claim. And if it was indeed an EULA and not a different contract, then I would concede. I would love it if LegalEagle or somebody knowledgeable in the law picked this up.
But if the contract isn't an EULA but instead more like a rental contract or even an NDA then Pemalite would be wrong.
Last edited by Cerebralbore101 - on 12 September 2025
