psychicscubadiver said:
Pemalite said:
Under Australian consumer law, it is illegal to knowingly buy stolen goods.
But if the prosecution cannot prove that you knew that the goods you purchased were stolen, then you will be able to defend a charge of receiving stolen goods.
Cerebralbore101 said:
Can you provide a link to U.K. law stating so? Also was it specifically an EULA that Sega was bound to and not a rental contract?Â
 I emailed (bolded below) Nintendo's PAL branch with the following email. I also reached out to a U.K. law service for clarification. Maybe we can figure out whether or not U.K. law overrides their agreement.Â
|
Are they renting it? Or is it a license they purchased? Just like when we buy a video game?
Perhaps someone who has an understanding of UK law can chime in on this one.
Even ignoring all that.,,,
Supporting a companies screwup and allowing them to be litigious to destroy an individuals life is not okay.
Cerebralbore101 said:
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.Â
But if the contract isn't an EULA but instead more like a rental contract or even an NDA then Pemalite would be wrong.Â
|
Keep in mind any and all agreements exist between Sega and Nintendo, not anyone else, that doesn't transfer to a 3rd party as they never signed or agreed to any contracts.
Eula/ToS doesn't override consumer rights either. (Maybe in the USA, but certainly not Australia/UK/Europe which are more pro-consumer.)
|
Okay? I never said the dude should be prosecuted for buying stolen goods, only that the stolen goods should be returned to their rightful owner.Â
As to the bolded how are they destroying the guy's life? I get that 10,000 pounds is not a small amount but he hasn't been jailed for any crimes and 10K is hardly life-ruining for someone that owns a business, especially since the article never alleges that this will cause him to go bankrupt. It would be nice if Sega would compensate him what he spent, assuming it is their fault and he can show receipts for what he paid, but regardless the consoles were not theirs to sell and should be restored to their rightful owner.
|
The buyer has recourse in the form of requesting their money back from the 3rd party contractor or suing them for false pretences, now if the contractor is sensible they would simply admit they weren't made aware by Sega of the kits status and so mistakingly sold the kit as part of the stock sale and then give the money back. along with an apology.
