this post was submitted on 11 Jun 2026
1058 points (98.6% liked)
Technology
85355 readers
4185 users here now
This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
Our Rules
- Follow the lemmy.world rules.
- Only tech related news or articles.
- Be excellent to each other!
- Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
- Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
- Politics threads may be removed.
- No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
- Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
- Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
- Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.
Approved Bots
founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
The problem with that is the first sentence:
It states pretty clearly to me they are liable for the current market price if they are unable to repair or replace.
That is not a sentence, you took a sentence fragment. Very important distinction in a legal document.
They are saying they are not liable for any implied warranties. The only warranty that is valid is the one defined in the document. They are not saying that section D does not apply to express warranties, as the next sentence talks about them in terms of limiting duration.
Reading is fundamental man.
Stop trying to act like you know the answer. It could go either way, it's up to the judge and judges can have different interpretations, even at the supreme court level decisions are usually not unanimous.
Fuck you gotta insult the guys reading ability, you both read perfectly fine and neither of you are lawyers so you have no authority even if you read English perfectly well.
thanks man we know
thanks
see what I did there?