Dexter
Arcane
- Joined
- Mar 31, 2011
- Messages
- 15,655
A hypothetical/imaginary future apocalyptic scenario that has to first a) materialize b) be accepted by consumers and c) be as bad as you make it out to be is not a valid reason to forfeit your basic consumer rights and ownership over the things you buy.I see a lot of dogmatic consumer rights and ownership talk. But have you actually tried thinking through the consequences of this decision on the market? Are you even aware that in a digital market there is no difference between a used and a new product? Have you maybe wondered what consequences that would have on the market? I'll leave you a hint: the consequences wouldn't be positive for the consumer. But the companies could easily get away with it and fuck you in the ass because of this decision.
More importantly, why would you trust companies that you believe would lead to said future as a consequence of this/out of spite with upholding your consumer rights over the courts in the first place, and why would they forgo ushering in said future anyway if you willingly give up all aforementioned things, given that they're apparently dealing with a used washrag they can just step on?
Also, you didn't answer the questions.
Last edited: