• kamen@lemmy.worldEnglish
    2 hours

    I admire this guy’s stubbornness. Sadly, even if he ends up winning, Samsung probably won’t feel this at all.

    • w3dd1e@lemmy.zipEnglish
      2 hours

      It sets some precedent for future lawsuits so it might keep Samsung in line for the next one.

    • astrobird@thelemmy.clubEnglish
      2 hours

      I totally agree, but maybe it’s gonna inspire other people to do likewise. David doesnt have to be alone against Goliath anymore ^^Cheers

  • malloc@lemmy.worldEnglish
    12 hours

    Small claims court is likely where this is filed. So, it’s very likely he will get the desired outcome.

    edit: ended up watching video on yt at 2X. It is indeed his plan to file suit in small claims court, or as he puts it in his email, “Justice Court of Travis county, Texas” if his demands to replace at current market value or provide replacement are not met.

    The video implies he is willing to spend time and money that exceeds the cost of drive to get the outcome desired. But I think that’s more of a performative statement since it’s going to small claims which has very reasonable case fees and can defend self.

    • kevinsky@feddit.nlEnglish
      12 hours

      It also draws a bunch of negative attention to Samsung for this scummy move. Ideally more media pick this up.

      That samsung doesn’t have a replacement drive in stock is a blatant lie. They just want to sell him one for the inflated price.

      They never used to give you full refunds when these drives lost value over time. And if they did it wasn’t what you paid origionally. Now their price is ballooned and suddenly they are eager to do so.

      It’s extremely clear what Samsung is doing here.

      Edit/Addendum that i take no credit for:

      Evidently it’s against their own warranty terms: https://semiconductor.samsung.com/consumer-storage/support/warranty/

      In the event Samsung determines, in its sole discretion, that the Product suffers from defects in material or workmanship and does not substantially conform to the published specifications under normal use, for as long as You own the Product and during the limited warranty period, and subject to the conditions and exceptions stated in this Agreement, Samsung will, at its option, either: (1) repair or replace the Product with new or refurbished Product of equal or greater capacity and functionality; or (2) refund the then current market value of the Product at the time the warranty claim is made to Samsung if Samsung is unable to repair or replace the Product.

      • Ledivin@lemmy.worldEnglish
        5 hours

        Also in that policy, however:

        IN NO EVENT WILL SAMSUNG’S LIABILITY EXCEED THE AMOUNT PAID BY YOU FOR THE PRODUCT.

        Shitty? Absolutely. Legally sound? Could really go either way.

        • kevinsky@feddit.nlEnglish
          4 hours

          They say that in a paragraph where they attempt to limit their liability, not in the part where they inform you of their actual warranty policy.

          But I guess we’ll find out in time where this ship ultimately runs onto land.

          • 0x0@infosec.pubEnglish
            3 hours

            I like Rossman but he is in the wrong here unfortunately.

            In any sane country receipt price is what you get back if the issue cant be solved, price matching in reverse isnt a thing.

            On top of that a lot of sellers will try to compensate you in some way, but they really dont have to.

            Should samsung eat the cost of issuing a new disk for goodwill? Sure we think so but that is entirely up how much they value their brand name.

            Except that in this case, the bad PR is manufactured by louis

            • w3dd1e@lemmy.zipEnglish
              2 hours

              I sort of agree with you on him being wrong but I think this situation is also unique to our current retail environments and laws around that need to be reevaluated.

              I think the ridiculous rise in cost over the 90day warranty period is charting new territory and if we don’t set precedent now, we are hurting ourselves.

              Rossman could have bought 2-3 drives for the amount they are selling for now and that’s ridiculous.

        • kevinsky@feddit.nlEnglish
          4 hours

          This is obviously more about dust Louis is kicking up than the claim itself.

          But samsung has so much money that it is splashing up against the baseboards in their offices. There really is no reason for them to nickel and dime their customers like this, especially not where they are just straight up morally obliged to replace the product.

          I sincerely hope this affects them more than it would’ve just honoring these warranty claims like they should in the first place.

        • Flagstaff@programming.devEnglish
          6 hours

          It’s probably because it’s Louis Rossmann against Samsung (both giants in their respective fields)…

          • kieron115@startrek.websiteEnglish
            6 hours

            It’s definitely because of Louis. He’s been doing a lot of work in the right to repair field, as well as this whole fuckin fiasco that Bambu (the 3d printer company) got themselves into by violating the LGPL license with some software. Streisand’ed themselves good on that one.

        • Holytimes@sh.itjust.worksEnglish
          6 hours

          Even a small court can have a notable impact when it’s between not able figures.

          This is less about the case and more about the message. Hench why it makes the news.

    • tb_@lemmy.worldEnglish
      12 hours

      But I think that’s more of a performative statement

      Should it somehow go beyond that, somehow, I have little doubt Louis will put his money where his mouth is. He’s paid $10.000 bounties to people demonstrating they can crack locked firmware, and done lots of other things.

  • rose56@lemmy.zipEnglish
    4 hours

    I like how the article does not mention Samsung on the title even once.

      • rose56@lemmy.zipEnglish
        3 hours

        Something is off, It was not there when I made my post. Op is framing me, you have to believe me. Op is protecting Samsung or something.

  • flop_leash_973@lemmy.worldEnglish
    19 hours

    Louis taking the financial hit for all of us. One of the few people that are “famous” I would buy a coffee if I were to see him on the street.

    • malloc@lemmy.worldEnglish
      12 hours

      I wouldn’t say it’s a “financial hit”. He has specifically worded his YT video to make it seem as if he will hire a lawyer and take Samsung et al to court. But in reality he is definitely planning on filing this in a local small claims court.

      Still want to see him win because honestly he deserves it and fuck Samsung. But he does tend to be a bit over dramatic in his videos for the clicks/viewership 😂

      • Null User Object@lemmy.worldEnglish
        10 hours

        But in reality he is definitely planning on filing this in a local small claims court.

        Which is arguably better, because it demonstrates to other people how they too can fight back.

    • muusemuuse@sh.itjust.worksEnglish
      18 hours

      He seems mean spirited and just a bit unstable to me, but I think that’s just an encode/decode mismatch in communication styles. What’s important is he can speak the truth to power AND BE HEARD. And for that I will absolutly cheer that crazy bastard on.

      • godsammitdam@lemmy.zipEnglish
        16 hours

        I believe a bit of that we’re seeing is being self-titled as “dark woke” lol. I’d count myself among them. Where, instead of trying to hold decorum and be super duper respectful, if you see or hear someone doing something immoral, you call that shit out and you do it hard. Modern day “punch a Nazi” and not accrue assault charges essentially.

        Not to turn it entirely political, but I see it as the next step based on how politics have evolved. Conservatives would often do and say terrible things themselves, but then they’d tell liberals/centrists “but where’s the tolerant left, where’s you’re decorum, how could you do these terrible things” etc etc and it would work fairly well where establishment dems would shrink back in their holes or they’d “work across the aisle” and produce half measures that barely helped the public, if at all, rather than standing on principle.

        Now, I think you’re seeing a lot more, especially leftists, essentially say fuck that and push back and go on the offensive to knock them down a peg. And given that most conservative talking points are all bluster, they have no real principle or ideology, it falls flat with a more aggressive stance backed up by facts and principle.

        Louis gives off that to me, as many leftists are grounded in principle to do what is right for people and humanity. He’s saying, look, Samsung, you’re a piece of shit and I know you’re a piece of shit to others, and I know that you know others won’t be able to push back against you, you’re taking advantage of them. So fuck you, I’ll stand up for both myself and all the others you’ve been harming. Let’s fucking go.

        People are tired. And we know what is right. And we’re tired of being gaslit and taken advantage of.

        An example of what I’m kind of talking about: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9ZzZCo_JKO4

        • Schmoo@slrpnk.netEnglish
          3 hours

          I don’t think Rossman is a leftist. He’s pro-consumer and sticks up for the little guy against big corporations, but he’s not anti-capitalist.

          • godsammitdam@lemmy.zipEnglish
            3 hours

            Just to clarify I wasn’t trying to insinuate anything of Rossman’s political stance. I was just using it as an example to describe the more aggressive nature towards protecting people over corporations. Which is often a leftist stance but doesn’t mean you’re necessarily a leftist.

        • girsaysdoom@sh.itjust.worksEnglish
          3 hours

          Unfortunately, I think you’re projecting a bit. He’s had interviews stating that he has issues with “both” sides, so from what I can find he seems centrist in his views. Also, he’s now a part of FUTO which has hosted him as a speaker alongside others with alt-right tech personalities.

          From my perspective, I think he fits the burned out IT professional archetype that is tired of all the BS today, but as far as activism I think he’s pretty much only focused on right to repair. Anything beyond that seems to not be in his scope of interest. But to be honest, I would be happy to be proven wrong.

          • godsammitdam@lemmy.zipEnglish
            2 hours

            Another user said similar, so:

            Just to clarify I wasn’t trying to insinuate anything of Rossman’s political stance. I was just using it as an example to describe the more aggressive nature towards protecting people over corporations. Which is often a leftist stance but doesn’t mean you’re necessarily a leftist.

            And yeah, I’m also not a fan of FUTO’s, their strategy for licensing for example, I looked into Grayjay and ultimately went to Newpipe. While better than entirely closed source, it still centralizes control so 🤷‍♂️

            But I entirely agree, he’s definitely more towards the center. However, right to repair and his fight against corporations are obviously worth supporting.

            • girsaysdoom@sh.itjust.worksEnglish
              2 hours

              I totally agree with you.

              I wish more in the tech industry were able to see how these issues are all related to the leftist struggle.

        • pishadoot@sh.itjust.worksEnglish
          9 hours

          not to turn it entirely political, but

          proceeds to use the next few paragraphs to turn it political

        • AceOnTrack@lemmy.blahaj.zoneEnglish
          10 hours

          I feel his message is a bit muddied by the overly aggressive tone, particularly to try and reach ‘normies’

          But he gets results so all the best to him

          I hope Samsung gets fucked

          • SaveTheTuaHawk@lemmy.caEnglish
            9 hours

            I feel his message is a bit muddied by the overly aggressive tone

            I hope Samsung gets fucked

    • MinnesotaGoddam@lemmy.worldEnglish
      14 hours

      See, that’s cool for a bit but there’s a reason I aimed for the level of fame called Wait Who Do You Say You Are? Who? What The Hells Is That Famous For? It’s nice being able to disappear into a crowd.

    • village604@adultswim.fanEnglish
      17 hours

      Often these cases are taken on contingency. The lawyers are always the true winners of these lawsuits

      • malloc@lemmy.worldEnglish
        12 hours

        I highly doubt there will be lawyers involved on the plaintiff side. This is definitely going to a local small claims court.

        If Samsung or this “Total Tech Solutions” company does send a lawyer (very rare), he will get the desired outcome. Probably check for the cost of new SSD + court fees.

    • warm@kbin.earth
      24 hours

      It’s small claims court, so anyone else getting fucked by this wont benefit. It’s going to take a bigger case. This will be forgotton about in a coupke months and Samsung will keep doing it.

      • halcyoncmdr@piefed.socialEnglish
        20 hours

        Not true. If you can cite another similar small claims case against the company, the Judge will take that under consideration as well.

        It’s only not beneficial if they settle outside court and have a non disclosure agreement. And that’s not going to happen with Rossmann. There is zero doubt in my mind that he would turn down a million dollar payout to keep quiet.

        • njordomir@lemmy.worldEnglish
          13 hours

          I also don’t expect him to settle. Louis has principles and a DGAF - get it done attitude and an extreme allergy to bullshit. Truly a hero for the people. All he asks is that we participate and speak out on these issues. My next guys poker night (or equivalent) might include a group email writing session. I know several people who I would not have expected to get involved who have written their reps regarding right to repair and other consumer advocacy and freedom issues.

      • artyom@piefed.socialEnglish
        23 hours

        Yep. Samsung knows what’s up. Settle a couple small claims here and there and fuck everyone else.

      • fuck_u_spez_in_particular@lemmy.worldEnglish
        21 hours

        But if he has success, well, I can go to the lawyer and show him that success (because I’m in the same boat right now), maybe it just needs more cases…

      • Steve@startrek.websiteEnglish
        19 hours

        Unless Rossman shares a template for individually suing them in any state. Maybe they will start to play fair when they are defending 25,000 individual lawsuits.

        • muusemuuse@sh.itjust.worksEnglish
          17 hours

          You do realize that is exactly what he will do, right? He’s a spiteful little shit. John fucking Deere is terrified of him for a reason.

          I have to wonder, what are the horcruxes of Louis Rossman?

          • njordomir@lemmy.worldEnglish
            13 hours

            I admire his level of pettiness. When it comes to pettiness, Louis comes second only to the hungry hustler, OG Afroman. The way he was dropping diss tracks all up and through the trial and had the court of public opinion massively on his side was legendary.

    • imetators@lemmy.dbzer0.comEnglish
      16 hours

      Doubt that’ll change in a good way for us. I believe that they just going to change refund policy to the price that was at the time of buying.

      • kevinsky@feddit.nlEnglish
        12 hours

        I don’t think they will, because at some point we’ll return to the point where SSD’s just get cheaper over time and then Samsung has no interest in refunding you the full amount. This warranty is policy is this way exactly because drives used to lose value pretty quickly.

  • Kairos@lemmy.todayEnglish
    22 hours

    The wording of Samsung’s warranty seems to support this conclusion:

    “{…}during the limited warranty period, and subject to the conditions and exceptions stated in this Agreement, Samsung will, at its option, either: (1) repair or replace the Product with new or refurbished Product of equal or greater capacity and functionality; or (2) refund the then current market value of the Product at the time the warranty claim is made to Samsung if Samsung is unable to repair or replace the Product.” [emphasis added]

    • Prove_your_argument@piefed.socialEnglish
      7 hours

      Please review section D of their warranty terms and conditions. It clearly states they are not liable for more money than the original purchase price:

      D. Warranty Limitations and Limitations of Liability

      Except for the express warranties stated herein, Samsung disclaims all other express and implied warranties, including but not limited to any implied warranties of merchantability, fitness for a particular purpose, noninfringement, course of dealing and usage of trade. All expressed and implied warranties are limited in duration to the limited warranty period. This agreement contains Samsung’s entire liability and your exclusive remedy for breach of this agreement. in no event shall Samsung, its suppliers or any affiliates be liable for any indirect, consequential, incidental or special damages, any financial loss or any lost data or files, even if Samsung has been advised of the possibility of such damage and notwithstanding the failure of essential purpose of any limited remedy. in no event will Samsung’s liability exceed the amount paid by you for the product. these limitations and exclusions apply to the fullest extent permitted by applicable law.

      So yes, they will totally cover the cost of a replacement or refund of market value at the time of requesting the refund, but they are only liable for that purchase price. If the value goes above what you paid, they are not liable for providing the increased price. This is the having cake and eating it too. It’s worded to protect them the fullest, or if they decline to replace it later and it’s much cheaper for them to provide you with a market value refund, they will do so.

      • xthexder@l.sw0.comEnglish
        5 hours

        The problem with that is the first sentence:

        Except for the express warranties stated herein

        It states pretty clearly to me they are liable for the current market price if they are unable to repair or replace.

        • Prove_your_argument@piefed.socialEnglish
          5 hours

          That is not a sentence, you took a sentence fragment. Very important distinction in a legal document.

          Except for the express warranties stated herein, Samsung disclaims all other express and implied warranties, including but not limited to any implied warranties of merchantability, fitness for a particular purpose, noninfringement, course of dealing and usage of trade.

          They are saying they are not liable for any implied warranties. The only warranty that is valid is the one defined in the document. They are not saying that section D does not apply to express warranties, as the next sentence talks about them in terms of limiting duration.

          Reading is fundamental man.

          • Bluescluestoothpaste@sh.itjust.worksEnglish
            4 hours

            Stop trying to act like you know the answer. It could go either way, it’s up to the judge and judges can have different interpretations, even at the supreme court level decisions are usually not unanimous.

            Fuck you gotta insult the guys reading ability, you both read perfectly fine and neither of you are lawyers so you have no authority even if you read English perfectly well.

    • xthexder@l.sw0.comEnglish
      21 hours

      What’s funny is this wording was likely designed to try and screw over the customer and backfired, because historically a used SSD has always been cheaper than the original purchase price. But in this specific market, it works in the consumer’s favor.

      • Tarambor@lemmy.worldEnglish
        10 hours

        Exactly that because drives were getting cheaper over time so it saved Samsung money to refund at the going market rate and at worst case it would be just a few dollars more. When they penned that they never envisaged the shitshow we have going on today when the price of storage and RAM has 4x’d or more.

      • hakase@lemmy.zipEnglish
        21 hours

        Which is, of course, why they suddenly feel entitled to not follow their own rules.

    • village604@adultswim.fanEnglish
      16 hours

      I guess the question is what the price was when he submitted the claim.

      Edit: Today’s price isn’t necessarily the price when the claim was filed.

        • jve@lemmy.worldEnglish
          16 hours

          Now here’s a guy who at least bothered to read the title.

          • village604@adultswim.fanEnglish
            16 hours

            There’s a time difference between today and when the claim was filed.

            He sent it off, they sent it back, and he tested it before they offered the purchase price as a refund.

        • village604@adultswim.fanEnglish
          16 hours

          No, that’s the price when the refund was offered. The warranty states it’s the price when the claim was filed.

          • M0oP0o@mander.xyzEnglish
            16 hours

            As stated in the video, this was not done long ago. This is why he has to wait 60 days.

  • heatermcteets@lemmy.worldEnglish
    23 hours

    Just had a similar thing happen to me. Bought some WD reds. Two drives were DOA. Since no drives were available to replace them, I could return for a refund. Then had to buy drives when they were in stock again at double the price.

    • paraphrand@lemmy.worldEnglish
      21 hours

      It’s like DoorDash giving you a partial refund and not actually getting you what you ordered when there is a fuckup by the restaurant.

      How satisfied are you with your customer support? I didn’t get what I fucking ordered!

      • Bluegrass_Addict@lemmy.caEnglish
        21 hours

        doordash is a horrible example…

        they do nothing but keep you lazy… they don’t make the food, package the food, or see the food… that’s the restaurant’s problem, not doordash

        that said, don’t use doordash… or Uber…

        • kobra@piefed.socialEnglish
          19 hours

          You have no idea how helpful DoorDash/Ubereats is for people with health issues and no support network. I’m not going to share any of my details but I’d be in a much worse situation if I couldn’t rely on DoorDash for meals.

          • Bluegrass_Addict@lemmy.caEnglish
            5 hours

            ya… I don’t agree with a corporation being the solution to that at all…

            neighbours exist. communities used to help each other, until corporations got involved and made us not be communities anymore.

            most neighbours will help, if you ask. I’d rather see communities helping each other, even paying neighbours rather then some shit company, that’s screwing you and the employees over.

            • kobra@piefed.socialEnglish
              4 hours

              I really don’t mean to be disrespectful but it sounds like you’ve been lucky enough to never have anything like this happen to you. I’m glad for you, I wouldn’t wish this on anyone. But please realize you’re talking about an idealistic view that doesn’t match, at least my own, reality.

              I know DoorDash is expensive, I’m fine paying the prices and tipping the drivers extra well. The service is useful and important to me. And taking care of the drivers with tips and them taking care of me with service IS my community. I love those people that bring me food and it means the world to me that I can get the food I need, when I need it, with such little friction. (Which btw, is not pizza and Chinese food. I WISH I could eat those things 😭) That’s well worth the extra costs I’m paying. Plus I get to support local businesses that I otherwise wouldn’t be able to patronize.

              If you have issues with DoorDash or gig economy type stuff, I’d urge you to think about legislation or unionization type things that would help and evangelize for those, rather than taking it out on the patrons and drivers.

          • M0oP0o@mander.xyzEnglish
            17 hours

            Yes, before the invention of DoorDash people with health challenges just died. No one could order food and have it delivered by cabs or the restaurant. Not like pizza places did delivery at all let alone base their whole business model around it. Really just a good thing such Uber and Dash companies came along to be super valuable middlemen charging a fee to everyone involved.

            • paraphrand@lemmy.worldEnglish
              16 hours

              Pizza every day isn’t great.

              And those other contexts were not as pervasive as DoorDash has become.

              • M0oP0o@mander.xyzEnglish
                16 hours

                I worked delivering food when I was young, all food was able to be delivered way back. It was not just pizza and very common, DoorDash and the like have just gaslit everyone into thinking they are needed. I remember the small town I lived in even had a program to pay for cabs to get groceries for people with limited mobility (this was in the 90’s). We have abandoned working systems like meals on wheels in favor of for profit middlemen.

                • paraphrand@lemmy.worldEnglish
                  16 hours

                  DoorDash supplanting meals on wheels is terrible. I don’t mean to argue otherwise.

                  I think awareness of the options was really low, though. And that’s probally what I’m speaking to. And I expect my ignorance was shared. I see your point though. And I can see how I was speaking from ignorance there.

                  While maybe more people are aware of a way to deliver food and basic supplies in the era of DoorDash, I never really meant to defend them. It just made sense to me that the pervasiveness of DoorDash is improving access. But it’s definitely not improving affordability. Not at all, holy shit.

        • paraphrand@lemmy.worldEnglish
          21 hours

          Well, it’s definitely tangential. The only overlap is how their refunds don’t actually fix anything and there is no path to actually addressing the original customer intent. A new order would be more money, and a gamble on the same error happening (maybe even intentional neglect by the people at the restaurant). And having to go out and get it yourself breaks the whole reason you engaged with the company at all.

          It’s a very broken customer service system they have. And it has to be that way to keep their margins.

          • vrek@programming.devEnglish
            20 hours

            The part that irritates me is the act like they can’t refund anything after “the store confirmed the order”. One time I meant to check the price of a liquor bottle, dropped phone, between trying to prevent it falling and picking it up I touched the purchase button. The store “confirmed the order” within 30 seconds. Since the store confirmed the order and started “preparing the order” I could cancel it but couldn’t get a refund. The issue? It was 11:15pm. Legally liquor stores can’t sell packaged liquor after 9pm here. Either a. The store didn’t confirm anything and have be not started preparing anything b. The store is openly defying multiple laws. The c. The you are full of shit. Plus what’s “preparing” a bottle of liquor? Why can’t you send a notification of “put it back on shelf” and be done? Fine yeah my mistake of accidentally pressing button, maybe a 10% “restocking fee” still bullshit but acceptable. Not being able to cancel order at all though???

            If it’s not clear, the store was closed but order was defaulted to be delivered at 11am the next day as that was next available legal delivery time.

            • M0oP0o@mander.xyzEnglish
              17 hours

              Charge back time! That is like full on Karen mode appropriate (a very rare occurrence).

              Since we know what happened is the liquor store just has every order that comes in “confirmed” by default and its just better for them and Dash to work this way. Like what if a child had hit the button? Fuck you I guess?

              • vrek@programming.devEnglish
                16 hours

                If I did it right now same thing would happen… With 2 different liquor stores

                • M0oP0o@mander.xyzEnglish
                  16 hours

                  Yeah, it looks like that is by design then. Glad I don’t deal with those programs myself. I would worry opening the thing on my phone.

    • Sprocketfree@sh.itjust.worksEnglish
      22 hours

      I think doa refund is kind of fair. Should compensate you a little for wasting your time but you’re made whole. RMA though feels like they should replace.

      • heatermcteets@lemmy.worldEnglish
        19 hours

        Yeah for sure. Didn’t lose any money. Just a bit frustrating that I didn’t have the option to leave an RMA open and replace the DOA drives when there was stock. It was either refund or store credit.

      • M0oP0o@mander.xyzEnglish
        16 hours

        Yeah, good thing our time is not worth anything. And if those drives are ordered for a project? Eh you got your money back 4 weeks later so what are you to complain about?

        Really this is why things are so bad, we all take this shit and think its fine. If I stole your wallet and you caught me, be returning it does not make the event not happen.

        If I buy a thing, and its DOA the very min is money back and most of the time if that is the case there better be a fucking amazing reason for that. If I spend time, money and effort to first buy a thing then jump though hoops when it does not work I am not made whole by “undoing” that transaction. I have spent many many many hours on hold and texting support chats when bad products are shipped, those are not done to get my $ back, they are to get what I needed when I paid for the thing. If after all that they think I will not burn and salt the very earth the company sits on by giving me my money back, they don’t understand. I have and will refuse money back, I will and have paid money to make sure I get what I ordered and if they will not send me a working thing, I will never do business with them again while making sure anyone I can talk to knows what they did.

        And before you think I don’t get the other end of the relation ship, I for many years did RMA and or warranty work for places like Cisco and Lenovo. I don’t expect mistakes to never happen, I don’t expect everything will show up without issue, I don’t expect instant results. But I hold places to the same standards I was held to, if I could not fix the thing I had to return to try again, and again, and again until it was fixed. I have never once been able to just say fuck it and give the person the money value of the device and walk away (in fact there where times where my company spent several times the devices value on the service).

  • Ebby@lemmy.ssba.comEnglish
    1 day

    I’m rooting for him, but I also can’t recall any warranty agreement that didn’t include something along the lines of “or refund of original purchase price at manufacturers discretion” as an acceptable remedy instead of replacement.

    • twinnie@feddit.ukEnglish
      24 hours

      At the bottom of the article it cites that they have the right to refund if they can’t repair or replace, but since they’ve shown plenty of stock in their own store they can replace. He also cites their own policy which reads “refund the then current market value of the Product”.

      • paper_moon@lemmy.worldEnglish
        23 hours

        Agreeing with you here, they probably had the last line there to save themselves money, as historically tech items lose value over time, so if you bought an ssd for $200, and 6 months later needed to be replaced or refunded, historically they can realistically offer you $150, as that would traditionally be the new market value after 6 months, but in today’s timeline, now its apparently worth $900 and they probably don’t want to pay that.

        Samsung hurt itself in confusion

        • Zephorah@discuss.onlineEnglish
          23 hours

          And yet data center investors are running on the presentation of the hardware being used as not depreciating in value.

      • malloc@lemmy.worldEnglish
        12 hours

        I wonder if these repair companies that Samsung outsources to have internal metrics to keep payouts or replacements as low as possible.

        Gaslight the customer into returning and agreeing to a “refund at original cost”. Do this X number of times for contract bonuses or something.

        • JcbAzPx@lemmy.worldEnglish
          5 hours

          Thing is, original cost was usually higher than current market value. It’s only recently that has started biting them in the ass.

    • ExcessShiv@lemmy.dbzer0.comEnglish
      1 day

      Yeah I think it’s a tall order, but I also don’t have the impression that rossmann picks a fight without having a pretty good chance of winning.

  • fuck_u_spez_in_particular@lemmy.worldEnglish
    21 hours

    I had the same case when the prices weren’t as absurd then, so I just paid 20 Euros extra, not that bad, but now… I will likely this issue again (like he has), because the SSD in question is defective again, I really hope he has success, it’s still within guaranty for some time so I wait how this turns out (until short before guaranty is gone).

  • Buffalox@lemmy.worldEnglish
    23 hours

    I experienced something similar with a GPU when coin mining made the prices explode.
    But I knew they would do that, because the law here is not designed for prices to suddenly explode out of proportion.
    So you are only refunded the original price of purchase, which would normally be fine.

    This resulted in me using a low end GPU (unsuitable for mining) for almost a year, because I refused to pay the inflated prices for a proper GPU.

    I’m sorry to say, but I doubt Louis Rossmann can win this case, because it is not generally feasible to make the law so the customer can demand a replacement, because a replacement isn’t always possible, which is why the seller can fulfill obligations with a refund of the price paid.

    If new products had come out at lower prices, a refund is normally a great deal for the customer. But currently in this case it is not.

    • egregiousRac@piefed.socialEnglish
      21 hours

      Their terms were written to allow them to refund less than the purchase price by refunding the current price instead of the purchase price. You buy SSD for $200, a year later the model is reduced to $150, they refund you $150. They haven’t changed those terms, so they are violating their own contract by not refunding at the current price.

      • Buffalox@lemmy.worldEnglish
        12 hours

        Their terms were written to allow them to refund less than the purchase price

        OK that would be clearly illegal here (Denmark). They can replace the product, but they can’t make a refund that i smaller than the purchase price.
        It is also illegal to change conditions so they are worse for the customer than what the law states.
        I think this goes for all of EU, but USA is an absolute shit country also regarding consumer rights.

  • Prove_your_argument@piefed.socialEnglish
    6 hours

    Yeah, they know it’s cheaper to refund the purchase price rather than to provide a replacement. Why would they ever take the bigger loss to them? They’re businesses, not people with a conscious. They are legally required to make the most profit possible for their shareholders as they are both public entities. Publicly traded businesses are by definition lawful evil because this is the kind of world humanity gravitates towards.

    I’m sure the warranty terms are worded in such a way that is most hostile to consumers and most beneficial to themselves. There’s always a half dozen legal gotchas that rarely apply in cases where they would lose a penny more than is typical like market shortages caused by AI infrastructure spend. The only time it makes financial sense for them to honor the warranty is if it’s cheaper than providing a refurbished replacement, and a refurb of these drives is likely worth much, much more than the original.

    I’d say the play here is to buy a new one and return the old one but do a label swap. It’s certainly fraud, but then amazon or sandisk get to eat it instead of you. If you are concerned about how hard it hits their bottom lines, check out their stock valuation over the last year.

    edit: section D of their published warranty clearly outlines that they are not liable for more than your purchase price:

    D. Warranty Limitations and Limitations of Liability

    Except for the express warranties stated herein, Samsung disclaims all other express and implied warranties, including but not limited to any implied warranties of merchantability, fitness for a particular purpose, noninfringement, course of dealing and usage of trade. All expressed and implied warranties are limited in duration to the limited warranty period. This agreement contains Samsung’s entire liability and your exclusive remedy for breach of this agreement. in no event shall Samsung, its suppliers or any affiliates be liable for any indirect, consequential, incidental or special damages, any financial loss or any lost data or files, even if Samsung has been advised of the possibility of such damage and notwithstanding the failure of essential purpose of any limited remedy. in no event will Samsung’s liability exceed the amount paid by you for the product. these limitations and exclusions apply to the fullest extent permitted by applicable law.

    • mbirth 🇬🇧@lemmy.mlEnglish
      23 hours

      Read for yourself!

      Samsung will, at its option, either: (1) repair or replace the Product with new or refurbished Product of equal or greater capacity and functionality; or (2) refund the then current market value of the Product at the time the warranty claim is made to Samsung if Samsung is unable to repair or replace the Product.

      • Prove_your_argument@piefed.socialEnglish
        7 hours

        You too! Please read it all!

        D. Warranty Limitations and Limitations of Liability

        Except for the express warranties stated herein, Samsung disclaims all other express and implied warranties, including but not limited to any implied warranties of merchantability, fitness for a particular purpose, noninfringement, course of dealing and usage of trade. All expressed and implied warranties are limited in duration to the limited warranty period. This agreement contains Samsung’s entire liability and your exclusive remedy for breach of this agreement. in no event shall Samsung, its suppliers or any affiliates be liable for any indirect, consequential, incidental or special damages, any financial loss or any lost data or files, even if Samsung has been advised of the possibility of such damage and notwithstanding the failure of essential purpose of any limited remedy. in no event will Samsung’s liability exceed the amount paid by you for the product. these limitations and exclusions apply to the fullest extent permitted by applicable law.

        • JcbAzPx@lemmy.worldEnglish
          5 hours

          these limitations and exclusions apply to the fullest extent permitted by applicable law.

          This is the actually important part. Companies drop unenforceable shit in t&c all the time. It’s just there to intimidate you and force you to give up your rights.

          • Prove_your_argument@piefed.socialEnglish
            4 hours

            Of course local laws apply, but then you’re relying on specific local or regional laws that somehow invalidate the agreement which probably don’t exist. You’re really in an uphill battle to argue that all of these sections of the warranty - the very thing you’re using to argue you are owed - do not apply to your case.

            Your skin in the game is <$500 (for me, this 4TB ssd w/ heatsink is $793 at a local microcenter.) $500 is hardly more than an hour of lawyer time, odds are you’re paying at least $300 just for them to write a cease and desist, and now you’ve got to argue that your lawyer fees should be covered despite an arbitration clause, a jurisdiction clause, and a maximum liability clause. One of the best case scenarios is that you would pony up the cash and they give you a settlement that still doesn’t get you to a point where you have a working product or enough money to buy an identical item after lawyer fees. The worst case scenario is that you get absolutely nothing out of the suit and have to pay for arbitration fees on top of your legal fees.

      • kevinsky@feddit.nlEnglish
        12 hours

        That seems quite damning to me. We ought to make sure this page is archived, in case the’ll try a gaslight us.

        Edit: It is.

    • TheTechnician27@lemmy.worldEnglish
      23 hours

      I’d say the play here is to buy a new one and return the old one but do a label swap.

      Louis addressed this in his video. He pointed out that he’s suing in large part because Samsung is penalizing the honest way of doing things. He wants to promote the honest way by setting an example, and good for him.

      • Prove_your_argument@piefed.socialEnglish
        6 hours

        I’m sure, and unless his lawyers can have section D struck from the agreement somehow I can’t imagine how he’s going to get them to pay him more than what he paid.

        For normal people who don’t want to spend the time, effort and energy not to mention cash if you lose to sue I am not sure what relief you could suggest for them. I don’t see anything beyond the typical social media posts where you beg for somebody like GN to buy it from you or for their social media team to eat the cost of a replacement which is wholly unrealistic imo.

        oh and their warranty has a fucking arbitration clause and puts it’s legal area in korea, that’s fun and another hurdle which is a total unknown to me how it will go down, but I would guess their arbitration can’t be much better for consumers than the US one.

        This Agreement shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of the
        Republic of Korea (excluding conflict of law’s provisions which may direct the application of
        another jurisdiction’s laws). All disputes, controversies or claims between the parties arising
        out of or in connection with this Agreement (including its existence, validity or termination)
        shall be finally resolved by arbitration to be held in Seoul, Korea and conducted in English
        under the Rules of Arbitration of the International Chamber of Commerce. The arbitral award
        shall be final and binding on the parties. Except to the extent entry of judgment and any
        subsequent enforcement may require disclosure, all matters relating to the arbitration,
        including the award, shall be held in confidence.

        • TheTechnician27@lemmy.worldEnglish
          2 hours

          I can’t imagine how he’s going to get them to pay him more than what he paid.

          I have no idea why you’re citing “Section D”. Section D is about the limitations of the warranty/liability, and that clearly doesn’t apply (they offered Louis compensation for the warranty; both parties agree this is within the bounds of the warranty). Sections B, C, and D have been met because both parties agree they have been.

          The warranty (Section A) reads:

          Samsung will, at its option, either: (1) repair or replace the Product with new or refurbished Product of equal or greater capacity and functionality; or (2) refund the then current market value of the Product at the time the warranty claim is made to Samsung if Samsung is unable to repair or replace the Product.

          Samsung therefore has two options: 1) repair/replace the unit or 2) pay Louis the current market value. That’s not even slightly ambiguous. Even if you agree that “at its option” means that “unable to repair or replace the Product” is 100% up to Samsung regardless of its actual ability (which it appears to be), that still means they owe him current market value, which is in the ~$900 range – not what he paid for it. You’re way off-base with your assessment.

          (edit: “does not apply” was, I hope, clearly intended to mean “in reference to this conversation because the criteria have obviously been met”.)

          • Prove_your_argument@piefed.socialEnglish
            4 hours

            How did you come to the conclusion that section D does not apply?

            The agreement is the whole thing, not just part of it. Remember this is going to arbitration based out of korea and it has no severability clause. Odds are if you invalidate a part you’re invalidating the whole thing - but who knows, i’m not familiar with arbitration law out of seoul.

            • TheTechnician27@lemmy.worldEnglish
              4 hours

              How did you come to the conclusion that section D does not apply?

              I didn’t. I came to the conclusion that the criteria in Section D have already been cleared, because Section D discusses the cases in which the warranty will not apply; both parties clearly agree the warranty applies because Samsung offered Louis compensation. I don’t understand what warranty you were reading or why this is so difficult for you.

              Specifically what part of Section D concerns you?

    • cenzorrll@piefed.caEnglish
      24 hours

      Samsung’s costs haven’t inflated 3x, and they’re the fab, therefore there’s a real strong argument that they should replace rather than refund. The error in your argument is it being cheaper, it’s instead less profitable for Samsung to give refunds at the new purchase price.

      I would be willing to bet that a letter from a lawyer along the lines of “refund at purchase price or send replacement, otherwise meet us in court and incur lawyer fees” will get a replacement sent. They’re chasing profits, paying lawyers hurt profits, especially since a single lawyer for a day just to review the situation probably costs them more than their current profits.

      • Prove_your_argument@piefed.socialEnglish
        7 hours

        They certainly have the capability of replacing the hardware but they know they have you over a barrel because they choose the winner, which is them!

        They would just eat a few hundred bucks in unrealized profits… which they’re never gonna do willingly. They probably have an arbitration clause to prevent class action suits too because that’s what everybody lawful evil does these days.

        edit: their warranty terms include a line that states:

        IN NO EVENT WILL SAMSUNG’S LIABILITY EXCEED THE AMOUNT PAID BY YOU FOR THE PRODUCT.

        • village604@adultswim.fanEnglish
          17 hours

          I need you to realize that you’re 100% wrong. Their warranty states that the refund will be the market price at the time the warranty case is opened.

          You don’t even need a lawyer to win this one.

          • Prove_your_argument@piefed.socialEnglish
            7 hours

            I need you to realize that you’re 100% wrong. Their warranty states that their liability will never exceed the purchase price of the product.

            https://download.semiconductor.samsung.com/resources/warranty/Samsung_SSD_Limited_Warranty_English_US_10140201029126.pdf

            D. Warranty Limitations and Limitations of Liability EXCEPT FOR THE EXPRESS WARRANTIES STATED HEREIN, SAMSUNG DISCLAIMS ALL OTHER EXPRESS AND IMPLIED WARRANTIES, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO ANY IMPLIED WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY, FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE, NONINFRINGEMENT, COURSE OF DEALING AND USAGE OF TRADE. ALL EXPRESSED AND IMPLIED WARRANTIES ARE LIMITED IN DURATION TO THE LIMITED WARRANTY PERIOD. THIS AGREEMENT CONTAINS SAMSUNG’S ENTIRE LIABILITY AND YOUR EXCLUSIVE REMEDY FOR BREACH OF THIS AGREEMENT. IN NO EVENT SHALL SAMSUNG, ITS SUPPLIERS OR ANY AFFILIATES BE LIABLE FOR ANY INDIRECT, CONSEQUENTIAL, INCIDENTAL OR SPECIAL DAMAGES, ANY FINANCIAL LOSS OR ANY LOST DATA OR FILES, EVEN IF SAMSUNG HAS BEEN ADVISED OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH DAMAGE AND NOTWITHSTANDING THE FAILURE OF ESSENTIAL PURPOSE OF ANY LIMITED REMEDY. IN NO EVENT WILL SAMSUNG’S LIABILITY EXCEED THE AMOUNT PAID BY YOU FOR THE PRODUCT. THESE LIMITATIONS AND EXCLUSIONS APPLY TO THE FULLEST EXTENT PERMITTED BY APPLICABLE LAW.

    • acosmichippo@lemmy.worldEnglish
      1 day

      I’d say the play here is to buy a new one and return the old one but do a label swap. It’s certainly fraud, but then amazon or sandisk get to eat it instead of you. If you are concerned about how hard it hits their bottom lines, check out their stock valuation over the last year.

      you’re also kinda screwing whatever customer ends up with it. For lost time troubleshooting and returning at the very least.

      • Prove_your_argument@piefed.socialEnglish
        23 hours

        In my experience essentially all amazon fraud returns that go into circulation end up getting a free replacement.

        If you’re not returning a brick in place of a GPU and instead return the actual hardware, the next guy simply gets a DOA that looks like a DOA, quacks like a DOA, and returns like a DOA for another one… so the odds of this causing an actual issue for a normal human is extremely low.

    • tourist@lemmy.world
      English
      1 day

      I’d say the play here is to buy a new one and return the old one but do a label swap.

      make sure to double check the labels before the swap

      my stupid ass would 100% return the working unit by accident