|
| ▲ | shakna 35 minutes ago | parent | next [-] |
| The ACCC is more than happy to explain unenforceable terms, if you'd like to do business with Australia. Feel free to consult Steam, Google, Meta and others, if a software license is enough to ignore consumer rights. |
| |
|
| ▲ | josephg an hour ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| Taking functionality away from a product after you bought it is a scum move. If the law lets them get away with it, the law should be changed. When I buy a product, I look at reviews and make my purchasing decision on the features and functionality at the time of sale. If a software update later ruins that, I want the option to get my money back. |
| |
| ▲ | parasubvert 14 minutes ago | parent [-] | | A scum move? Such drama. It's what every shrink wrapped software company does unless you're paying "enterprise software" licenses that have more protections... with commensurate prices. Violating license agreements is also a scum move, but the 3D printer community online is mostly entitled juveniles, so they'll just get away with it I guess. |
|
|
| ▲ | mttpwll 38 minutes ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| No, it’s not creative at all, it’s what happened — I have first hand experience to corroborate this. Regardless, at least in the US, not only are software-based ToS becoming unenforceable, but there’s a large upswing towards “right to repair” legislation, which, I think, is what you’re arguing against here… and I really think you’re going to be on the wrong side of history with your current line of thinking (despite what Bambu Labs does). |
| |
| ▲ | parasubvert 23 minutes ago | parent [-] | | > No, it’s not creative at all, it’s what happened — I have first hand experience to corroborate this. As do I.... and I disagree. I think Bambu has been well behaved, and the "community" have largely been acting like entitled juveniles. > not only are software-based ToS becoming unenforceable Eh? The opposite is true. > I really think you’re going to be on the wrong side of history with your current line of thinking I'm on the side of history that is called "reality", not wishful thinking from people rationalizing their copyright violations. But, your argument isn't with me, it's with the legislators you claim are, any day now, going to let you run roughshod over copyright. Make it so! Except for , you know, companies you don't like.... (eg. AI companies) then copyright really matters and must be strictly enforced! |
|
|
| ▲ | mystraline an hour ago | parent | prev [-] |
| The "agreement" is at best coerced, and under blackmail of hardware you bought and paid for. At worst, its a fraudulent indefinite rental masquerading as a 'sale'. And lets discuss 'updates that fuck over your hardware'. In dwcent countries, thats hacking, and a serious criminal charge. But lol, companies are somehow exempt. |
| |
