That is one way of looking at the situation. However, to my mind, and according to the law, both vendors and customers each have a right of refusal. You would not demand food in some glitzy place without the fancy serving etc provided they charged you no more than the dhaba outside, but fortunately, there is no detectable difference between a computer loaded with software and one without, until they are taken out of the packing and switched on. No fancy serving, no waiters, no airconditioning.
This has its aspects of convenience, in such a case. Because no policeman can tell the difference either, hence it should be possible in most cases to ask for a refund, be refused, ask for it in writing (not all that difficult to do if you are buying from one of the shopping chains), and take that to the nearest police station to register a non-cognizable case. Not everyone will succeed without too much waste of time, that is easy to understand, but only a few successful registrations are needed, uploaded on some public site, referenced publicly in social media, and the vendors (both manufacturers and retailers) shamed repeatedly. It will probably take about the same amount of time, but cost a whole lot less, and get many more people (parents, other shoppers, etc) engaged and aware, than registering or pursuing a case from sessions to Supreme Court, which will be, I regret to foresee, mostly unwatched by the professional media, and take years more, even in case of a favorable outcome, for the trade to change its ways. But it does need some amount of pro-activity, in becoming aware of the consumer (home and student, mostly) next buy, amongst social circles. Vickram On Dec 10, 2014 1:27 AM, "A. Mani" <[email protected]> wrote:
_______________________________________________ network mailing list [email protected] http://lists.fosscom.in/listinfo.cgi/network-fosscom.in
