this post was submitted on 11 Jan 2024
974 points (98.5% liked)

Technology

59422 readers
2854 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related content.
  3. Be excellent to each another!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots


founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] MindSkipperBro12@lemmy.world 11 points 10 months ago (2 children)

They can argue that you “bought” the lease.

[–] grue@lemmy.world 7 points 10 months ago

No they fucking can't argue that! Words have meanings and Google is not entitled to change them.

[–] essteeyou@lemmy.world 4 points 10 months ago (3 children)

It's pretty clear that you're leasing a car when you do it. Make it like that.

[–] MindSkipperBro12@lemmy.world 1 points 10 months ago (3 children)

If it’s in the term and you sign it, then, for better or for worse, then that is true.

[–] DreadPotato@sopuli.xyz 9 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago)

There are usually loads of unenforceable terms and definitions in the ToS you sign. Just because you sign it doesn't make it true or enforceable, and many won't hold up in court even if you've signed the document. But that requires you to spend the energy and money to fight these fuckers.

[–] essteeyou@lemmy.world 6 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago)

If a car dealership put a sticker on the front window of a car saying "Buy this car for $250 a month for 4 years" and then took the car from you after 4 years because their terms had some fine print, the dealership would likely be sued.

If they weren't sued they'd at least lose business. Unfortunately for everyone, that's not going to happen with Amazon or Sony or any other big company doing this shit because we're just letting them get away with shady business practices.

I'm not saying the terms are wrong or that what the companies are doing is illegal right now, but I do think it should be looked at closely by someone who can dish out some massive fines, or ideally change the situation.

[–] lolcatnip@reddthat.com 2 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago)

Maybe that's true in a legal sense, depending on the jurisdiction, but in a moral sense, it's only true if you read and understood what you were agreeing to. You can't consent to something you were tricked into.

[–] LazaroFilm@lemmy.world 1 points 10 months ago (1 children)

It’s in the terms you agreed to. Didn’t you read them?

[–] essteeyou@lemmy.world 6 points 10 months ago (1 children)

I wish the terms and conditions had reading times at the top of them, and I also wish there was a law saying something to the effect of "buying a movie shouldn't require you to read 35 minutes of ALL CAPS TERMS AND CONDITIONS while holding a dictionary and a thesaurus after gaining a legal degree"

[–] LazaroFilm@lemmy.world 2 points 10 months ago

Agreed there should be a max word count for this kind of things.

[–] danielfgom@lemmy.world 1 points 10 months ago

Exactly. It should say "lease" instead of "buy" or just "price" .

They know that too but you know why they don't use "lease"? They would have WAY less sales. Almost no one would click that.

So they use "buy"/"price" to make you think you own it, and then think they are clever when they define it as "buying a licence" in the Terms.

That's plain and sneaky so I don't feel sorry for them when people pirate stuff.

I wish every dev had the option of "go to my website and buy this from me with an eternal licence included" as well as the option to lease it from the Play Store.

Same goes for music and movies.