Microsoft sued over alleged Xbox 360 glitch 6739

chrisv

snip

Not fully true. Misleading advertising *is* illegal. If someone sells a product that does not do what the ads implied, then not only you have the right to a refund (of course!), but also the right to sue them. You spent some time going to buy the item, then trying to use it, then wondering if it's your fault that it doesn't work, then time going back to the seller, then spending effort to convince the seller that it's their fault, not yours, that it doesn't work. You actually suffer because the product doesn't do what you rightly expected it to do (some idiots have "illusion"), and you might actually be timid or even lazy to go back and ask for your money back... It's all a hbuttle you shouldn't have been forced to go through. If it was avoidable by the seller (or maker) of the product, then it's suable. Of course, no product is ever perfect, and errors are always to be expected and forgiven... the line between suable and not is very thin.

If the only punishment a company gets for shipping under-tested products is giving the customers (and only the ones that actually go back to ask for the money) *their* money back... then what's to stop them from cutting down their budget on the QA department? So the customers are the beta-testers? Fine, but as a beta-tester, I want to bepaid, not pay.

-- I-aki Silanes Chemistry Faculty UPV-EHU Donostia