The German court allowed Nintendo not to return the money for pre -orders

After the user issued a pre -order in the digital store ESHOP from Nintendo, He cannot cancel it and return the money, even if the game hasn’t come out yet. This contradicts European laws, but the German court was on the side of the Japanese corporation.

The trial began in February 2018 with the filing of the Council of Consumers of Norway (Norwegian Consumer Council, NCC) – the country’s state body. NCC insisted that in the directive of consumer rights there is the right to a refusal, which leads to the following condition: the buyer can cancel pre -order until the game cannot be loaded and launched. Obviously, Nintendo violates this condition.

After some time, the NCC complaint was supported by Verbraucherzentrale Bundesverband (VZBV) – a consumer protection association from Germany. Together, the organizations brought the case to the regional court of Frankfurt.

Lawyers Nintendo asserted: the right to refuse burns out if the user was notified in advance that he could not return the money for pre -order. The ESHOP store really has such a checkmark: while the buyer has not pressed it, it will not work to purchase the goods. In addition, Eshop allows you to download the game files before its release. So, they say, the conditions of the directives are respected: the user purchased the goods and launched digital delivery.

The court issued a verdict at the end of December 2019 and took the side Nintendo. NCC and VZBV are appealing and, it seems, are going to push that preliminary download cannot be equated with the delivery of goods, since before the release the game files are useless for the buyer.

However, as Eurogamer writes, re -consideration of the case can take about another one and a half years.

January 23, 2020, a pumped reprint of the first Wastland starts on February 25

January 23, 2020 Dishonored is turned into https://sportsbettingmedia.co.uk/ a table role -playing game

The best comments

Why use the goods of those who are looking for benefits in everything, even in a cunning fiction of their customers

So where is the fiction exactly here? From the user did they hide the information that there would be no return? Or they wrote terribly small print at the bottom of the page where this is not noticed at all?

That is, if the buyer does not read what he agrees with and where he puts the daw, then he is not blind and does not think, this is "slyly fooling". OK.

The legality of these rules is quite dubious. This in the world of South Park in the rules can be prescribed by the sale of anal virginity and for this there will be nothing, but in reality the court has every right to recognize certain points of the rules by void.

So, ahem, I personally do not see a terrible evil in Nintedo here. Do not understand me correctly, on the one hand, I am also not pleased with the impossibility of the return of some product. On the other hand, users are charging that there will be no return, they personally put a tick at this point. They read it, did not read it, this is already their fault.
Of course, I do not claim that my opinion is truly true. But, working in the field of support, I began to notice for a long time that in such cases, “wine” goes from the side of the buyer.
People without checking the goods/service without reading the agreement (which are not hidden) without using trials, etc.D., He has to make his head with a headlong, and then sees that the button is not very beautiful and immediately requires return, while starting to cry and threaten what the company is bad for everyone.
Only the company here and? The company has the rules of use that were accepted, there is a trial (in most cases). But, as for me, the most interesting thing is that if these people were in a different direction, I’m sure they would also be guided by the rules, trial, etc.p.

If In the law such a "right to refuse" is stipulated – this is one. If not stipulated, then completely different, and the presence of this item by the publisher will not change.

Eheheh. Everyone complains of “leaky” laws, but these are not a holy laws, but people are so greedy and prayer that they will either bypass the law, or they will die.
Everyone is looking for ways to approach, but to remain within the law. And they find.

Just some need to first think with your head, not an ass, before buying something, and the problem will exhaust itself.

The fact is that such laws are written as if to limit the rule “do not want to-do not take”, because this principle will eventually lead to a fall in the quality of the services provided. Almost always, corporations are beneficial to what is not profitable for people. So if it were written in the law “You may not return the money for the purchase, if the client was pressed on the checkmark that it suits him”, then this Tikbox would have appeared in each store and the non -return of money would become the norm. Here, as a minimum salary, it is clear that there are many people who would work for less than 11280 rubles, but if it is legitimized, then employers will begin to abuse this and the minimum will fall everywhere everywhere.
Buyers (like those who wish to work out) often cannot defend their interests, and therefore there are laws that “roof” us

And people think that "here we have luxury laws".
There as a perfect car of the legal system in Germany works.

Perhaps dubious, here I will not say anything, not a lawyer.
But, for example, in the law of one of the European countries I read (if I understood it correctly) that if the user refuses his right to return when buying or refuses 7 days of verification, then there will be no return.
Are such "checkmarks" are considered when buying a refusal of their right-free concept. If not a lawyer, it seems to me that yes.

On the other hand, users are charging that there will be no return, they personally put a tick at this point. They read it, did not read it, this is already their fault.

Conclusion, do not buy Nintendo products, and ignore their new items. Why use the goods of those who are looking for benefits in everything, even in a cunning fiction of their customers.
> "We are not responsible for this, we can do whatever we want".

Well, only we will not buy your products, and use it at all.

We are a corporation, we do everything we want – you are a fool, pay. All. You like it, let.

 12 total views,  2 views today