I don’t like what the world has become over the last 20 years.
These types of “agreements” existed in the 90s too.
Not really. Clickwrap licensing only came about near the end of the 90s and didn't really take off until post-2000.
Motorola's legal terms claim to strip owners of their right to sell their device
21–30 of 93 posts
Re: Motorola's legal terms claim to strip owners of their right to sell their device
#22The no sale requirements in the "contract" is interesting. However, is the following actually legal in the US? > You have only yourself to blame. Once you get the unlock code, your device is no longer covered by the Motorola warranty; in other words, please don't blame us if things go wrong, even if they appear unrelated to unlocking the bootloader. In Australia they can revoke the "Motorola warranty" all they want.…
Not generally - they can refuse a warranty service if it seems like the custom modification you made is causing whatever issue you're trying to use the warranty for, but they can't deny it if it unrelated. So if you have a warranty on your car, and you put a custom engine in it, and then it turns out you received defective seatbelts, the warranty is still active. But if your drive train is trashed from the extra power of the new engine, then the warranty will not be honored.
Re: Motorola's legal terms claim to strip owners of their right to sell their device
#23Absent a winning court case on some very novel arguments, this is pretty obviously illegal: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First-sale_doctrine You can put anything in a click-through license, but that doesn't make it a contract nor override established legal paradigms.
Can downvoters explain why they are doing so? I agree with both of these points (first sale doctrine and that a license is not a contract) and would like to hear explanation of why they are mistaken here.
In particular, there is no consideration offered by either party, and so this cannot be contractual on its face.
Re: Motorola's legal terms claim to strip owners of their right to sell their device
#24The no sale requirements in the "contract" is interesting. However, is the following actually legal in the US? > You have only yourself to blame. Once you get the unlock code, your device is no longer covered by the Motorola warranty; in other words, please don't blame us if things go wrong, even if they appear unrelated to unlocking the bootloader. In Australia they can revoke the "Motorola warranty" all they want.…
Re: Motorola's legal terms claim to strip owners of their right to sell their device
#25This feels like they don't want to be liable if someone roots a phone, installs malware or something, sells it to another person, and then proceeds to exploit the compromised phone they just sold.
Which would be entirely understandable. IDK if that's what this is, or if this is the best way to do that.
edit: in a way, once you do this it's not "a motorola phone" anymore. They are selling you a device and software configuration together branded as the motorola whatever. If you modify that, it's not what they sold you, but they have no way to note to the secondary market that the device is not what they intended it to be. It's not a visible change. Again, no idea if this is the right way to stop that (I'm guessing not), but I can also see where they would be upset about this.
edit 2: Setting aside the "we don't want to be liable" idea. It could also be a "we don't want to support this device anymore" idea. We do this sort of thing all the time - you did what with our code? Sorry dude you're on your own. Again, why do it this way. But maybe.
Re: Motorola's legal terms claim to strip owners of their right to sell their device
#26Given they took thentime to out this together, I'm guessing they won't actually go after anybody for this, they're just putting it there to distance themselves from any consequences that arise from somebody selling unlocked devices. But agreeing to terms on the belief that they won't actually be enforced is a risky game to play. Bot sure what the consequences could possibly be though.
Re: Motorola's legal terms claim to strip owners of their right to sell their device
#27The no sale requirements in the "contract" is interesting. However, is the following actually legal in the US? > You have only yourself to blame. Once you get the unlock code, your device is no longer covered by the Motorola warranty; in other words, please don't blame us if things go wrong, even if they appear unrelated to unlocking the bootloader. In Australia they can revoke the "Motorola warranty" all they want.…
Warranties are just normal contracts. If both parties agree to modify a contract, they are pretty much always allowed to do so. In this case, Motorola is offering a second contract, which modifies an earlier agreement (the warranty) in exchange for the key to unlocking one's phone.
Re: Motorola's legal terms claim to strip owners of their right to sell their device
#28This feels like they don't want to be liable if someone roots a phone, installs malware or something, sells it to another person, and then proceeds to exploit the compromised phone they just sold. Which would be entirely understandable. IDK if that's what this is, or if this is the best way to do that. edit: in a way, once you do this it's not "a motorola phone" anymore. They are selling you a device and software con…
I'm wondering how many used Windows PCs have been sold with malware on them, and whether anyone has ever attempted to hold the OEM legally responsible for it.
Re: Motorola's legal terms claim to strip owners of their right to sell their device
#29This feels like they don't want to be liable if someone roots a phone, installs malware or something, sells it to another person, and then proceeds to exploit the compromised phone they just sold. Which would be entirely understandable. IDK if that's what this is, or if this is the best way to do that. edit: in a way, once you do this it's not "a motorola phone" anymore. They are selling you a device and software con…
[deleted]
Re: Motorola's legal terms claim to strip owners of their right to sell their device
#30“Once you unlock the device, you can only use it for your personal use, and may not sell or otherwise transfer the device.” https://en-us.support.motorola.com/ci/fattach/get/741421/138...
Thanks. reading the rest of the document I think I see what the point is here.
This basically adds an extra layer of legal protection for motorola against people unlocking the bootloader, installing bad things on it, then selling it on.
The whole t&cs are basically "use this software and it will be considered legally as intentionally breaking the device".
It doesnt stop anyone selling the device - but it does shift any warranty or damage claims directly onto whoever broke it.
selling a "broken" mobile as working has wider implications because of the SOS call laws.
IMHO.