this post was submitted on 10 Oct 2024
1204 points (96.5% liked)
memes
10428 readers
2686 users here now
Community rules
1. Be civil
No trolling, bigotry or other insulting / annoying behaviour
2. No politics
This is non-politics community. For political memes please go to !politicalmemes@lemmy.world
3. No recent reposts
Check for reposts when posting a meme, you can only repost after 1 month
4. No bots
No bots without the express approval of the mods or the admins
5. No Spam/Ads
No advertisements or spam. This is an instance rule and the only way to live.
Sister communities
- !tenforward@lemmy.world : Star Trek memes, chat and shitposts
- !lemmyshitpost@lemmy.world : Lemmy Shitposts, anything and everything goes.
- !linuxmemes@lemmy.world : Linux themed memes
- !comicstrips@lemmy.world : for those who love comic stories.
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
if owning a product is based in ownership of the product and buying proves ownership then, you can't own their product by "buying" their product when they can revoke your ownership anytime.
so, if you can't buy the product and can't own the product, you can't steal the product because they never gave you possession of it.
they didn't lease me the use of the product according to the law, they sold it to me. from a legal perspective, there are contracts, signatures, and other documents that must be filed for every lease to determine the structure of the lease. TOS is not a binding contract strong enough for leases.
funny thing, that's one of the fights going on right now with companies like Disney and Doordash. their argument that the victim agreed to their (broad) TOS, releases them of any legal liability.
should the corpos win those cases, TOS for the most mundane bullshit will likely end terribly for consumers.