Geekzone: technology news, blogs, forums
Guest
Welcome Guest.
You haven't logged in yet. If you don't have an account you can register now.


View this topic in a long page with up to 500 replies per page Create new topic
1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5
2915 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 414

Trusted
Subscriber

  Reply # 1082061 6-Jul-2014 20:52
7 people support this post
Send private message

gnfb: Well I am just glad that we got peace in the middle east and world hunger out of the way so we can work on important issues like this!


That's a pretty poor attitude to have.  Just because there is war and famine, certainly doesn't mean that we should dismiss all the small issues simply because they pale in comparison to the big issues.  Take that tack, and before long all your small issues have become big issues too, and you're no better off and far worse off.

178 posts

Master Geek
+1 received by user: 63


  Reply # 1082099 6-Jul-2014 22:03
2 people support this post
Send private message

I agree with freitasm, it says 'sample', it says 'not for resale', the only way they could be clearer would be to have the stuff ship with it's own personal security guard.

I don't know what the letter of the law is on the subject, however the product is clearly being sold in breach of any terms and conditions as arranged with the distributor.
Further, for the bottles being sold on their own with no packaging, I would be very concerned about a medical product being sold without packaging, as that is normally where all of the appropriate medical safety information is contained.

As for the rest of you who are in the 'nothing wrong here' camp..... if any of you are in the retail trade, or ever go in to the retail trade, please post a forum notice here, so that I know to avoid you.

 
 
 
 


1736 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 896


  Reply # 1082141 7-Jul-2014 00:28
Send private message

If it was bundled together then its one item. If it had a price on it for $24.95 then that is the maximum price they can sell it for. Charging more than the marked/advertised price is illegal. They do however have the option of refusing the sale.




Location: Dunedin

1709 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 95


  Reply # 1082202 7-Jul-2014 09:23
Send private message

Kyanar:
gnfb: Well I am just glad that we got peace in the middle east and world hunger out of the way so we can work on important issues like this!


That's a pretty poor attitude to have.  Just because there is war and famine, certainly doesn't mean that we should dismiss all the small issues simply because they pale in comparison to the big issues.  Take that tack, and before long all your small issues have become big issues too, and you're no better off and far worse off.

Fair enough! I suppose I was really just saying..... "Chill!"




Is an English Man living in New Zealand. Not a writer, an Observer he says. Graham is a seasoned 'traveler" with his sometimes arrogant, but honest opinion on life. He loves the Internet!.

 

gnfb on trademe travelkit.nz

GNFB Geeks Out on Geekzone

Email Me


3303 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 967


  Reply # 1082238 7-Jul-2014 10:22
Send private message

gnfb:
Kyanar:
gnfb: Well I am just glad that we got peace in the middle east and world hunger out of the way so we can work on important issues like this!


That's a pretty poor attitude to have.  Just because there is war and famine, certainly doesn't mean that we should dismiss all the small issues simply because they pale in comparison to the big issues.  Take that tack, and before long all your small issues have become big issues too, and you're no better off and far worse off.

Fair enough! I suppose I was really just saying..... "Chill!"


He he, i understood what you were saying. 

Reading between the lines , your opinion is that this is not a big issue for you. 


292 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 36


  Reply # 1082305 7-Jul-2014 11:30
Send private message

andrewNZ: If it was bundled together then its one item. If it had a price on it for $24.95 then that is the maximum price they can sell it for. Charging more than the marked/advertised price is illegal. They do however have the option of refusing the sale.


Need some clarity if it was advertised at $24.95 in the shop or if that price was based on the 2 pack price?

Website shows the $32 price. http://www.lifepharmacy.co.nz/p/Opti-Free-PureMoist-Contact-Lens-Solution-Economy-Pack-300-90-60ml-VALUE-PACK?i=13745043

Nonetheless I side with Mauricio. A product marked as "Professional Sample - Not For Resale" shouldn't be charged for.

1978 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 252

Subscriber

  Reply # 1082379 7-Jul-2014 13:13
Send private message

Kyanar:
freitasm: I think you folks are missing the "NOT FOR RESALE" in the packaging. If they are selling it (charging for it) then they are breaching the contract with their supplier, and trying to get money off the consumer at the same time.


Not necessarily.  Unless they get a paper contract with it that explicitly states they may not sell it, then there is no contract and first sale doctrine applies (which is to say, once a product has been sold by the manufacturer, it exhausts their right to control what is done with the product).

While this has only actually been tested in the US courts thus far to my knowledge, our bag of laws pertaining to it are similar enough that NZ law would most likely find the same way.

While legally it's almost certainly OK, the supplier is almost certain to be unhappy about it, and it's certainly unethical as all heck IMO.


Explain to us what you believe "NOT FOR RESALE" means then?

854 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 125


  Reply # 1082389 7-Jul-2014 13:22
Send private message

Satch:
Kyanar:
freitasm: I think you folks are missing the "NOT FOR RESALE" in the packaging. If they are selling it (charging for it) then they are breaching the contract with their supplier, and trying to get money off the consumer at the same time.


Not necessarily.  Unless they get a paper contract with it that explicitly states they may not sell it, then there is no contract and first sale doctrine applies (which is to say, once a product has been sold by the manufacturer, it exhausts their right to control what is done with the product).

While this has only actually been tested in the US courts thus far to my knowledge, our bag of laws pertaining to it are similar enough that NZ law would most likely find the same way.

While legally it's almost certainly OK, the supplier is almost certain to be unhappy about it, and it's certainly unethical as all heck IMO.


Explain to us what you believe "NOT FOR RESALE" means then?


It's a discouragement that suppliers put on packaging to shame companies into NOT reselling items that weren't intended for resale.  As raised already things like First Sale Doctrines in the States apply that allow retailers to do whatever they like once they've purchased something, as long as it's within 'the Law', so the shame tactic is employed to show that places are cheap'os and hope people won't buy from them.

See there is a word missing....  "INTENDED"  i.e.   "NOT INTENDED FOR RESALE".

(Edit: Going way back to the OP/freitasm's point: None the less, coupled with 'Professional Sample' that is slightly different, sample implies free in my books)

1978 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 252

Subscriber

  Reply # 1082395 7-Jul-2014 13:25
Send private message

nigelj:
Satch:
Kyanar:
freitasm: I think you folks are missing the "NOT FOR RESALE" in the packaging. If they are selling it (charging for it) then they are breaching the contract with their supplier, and trying to get money off the consumer at the same time.


Not necessarily.  Unless they get a paper contract with it that explicitly states they may not sell it, then there is no contract and first sale doctrine applies (which is to say, once a product has been sold by the manufacturer, it exhausts their right to control what is done with the product).

While this has only actually been tested in the US courts thus far to my knowledge, our bag of laws pertaining to it are similar enough that NZ law would most likely find the same way.

While legally it's almost certainly OK, the supplier is almost certain to be unhappy about it, and it's certainly unethical as all heck IMO.


Explain to us what you believe "NOT FOR RESALE" means then?


It's a discouragement that suppliers put on packaging to shame companies into NOT reselling items that weren't intended for resale.  As raised already things like First Sale Doctrines in the States apply that allow retailers to do whatever they like once they've purchased something, as long as it's within 'the Law', so the shame tactic is employed to show that places are cheap'os and hope people won't buy from them.

See there is a word missing....  "INTENDED"  i.e.   "NOT INTENDED FOR RESALE".


We are not in the States and the word INTENDED doesn't feature here.  I miss the point of your post.

854 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 125


  Reply # 1082402 7-Jul-2014 13:37
Send private message

Satch:
nigelj:
Satch:
Kyanar:
freitasm: I think you folks are missing the "NOT FOR RESALE" in the packaging. If they are selling it (charging for it) then they are breaching the contract with their supplier, and trying to get money off the consumer at the same time.


Not necessarily.  Unless they get a paper contract with it that explicitly states they may not sell it, then there is no contract and first sale doctrine applies (which is to say, once a product has been sold by the manufacturer, it exhausts their right to control what is done with the product).

While this has only actually been tested in the US courts thus far to my knowledge, our bag of laws pertaining to it are similar enough that NZ law would most likely find the same way.

While legally it's almost certainly OK, the supplier is almost certain to be unhappy about it, and it's certainly unethical as all heck IMO.


Explain to us what you believe "NOT FOR RESALE" means then?


It's a discouragement that suppliers put on packaging to shame companies into NOT reselling items that weren't intended for resale.  As raised already things like First Sale Doctrines in the States apply that allow retailers to do whatever they like once they've purchased something, as long as it's within 'the Law', so the shame tactic is employed to show that places are cheap'os and hope people won't buy from them.

See there is a word missing....  "INTENDED"  i.e.   "NOT INTENDED FOR RESALE".


We are not in the States and the word INTENDED doesn't feature here.  I miss the point of your post.


My point is as other's have stated most countries have the principle in idea of America's First Sale Doctrine, else how would a second hand market (say Trade Me, pawn shops, e-Bay, etc) work (sorry reading back what I wrote, this should've been clearer, my brain doesn't seem to be working right today)?  Additionally, exactly the word INTENDED is missing, just because it says something on the packet, doesn't mean that it's legally enforceable.  It's just their wish/intention that people don't resell it.

Per my edit I actually acknowledged that the text is actually "Professional Sample - Not For Resale" (which the Quote Thread doesn't ack), the word 'sample' quantifies it slightly differently in my books.

Onward
11427 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 5143

Trusted
Subscriber

  Reply # 1082435 7-Jul-2014 13:59
Send private message

If the product concerned was labelled in store  as being $24.99 then the store should either honour the price or remove it from sale and correct the labelling. Mistakes can happen especially if the deal was set up by head office and the POS updated before the staff came aware and corrected in store labelling etc. As for the "Professional Sample - Not For Resale" issue it may well be legal to sell it but is it moral? ethics and goodwill go hand in hand.




Mike
Retired IT Manager. 
The views stated in my posts are my personal views and not that of any other organisation.

 

 It's our only home, lets clean it up then...

 

Take My Advice, Pull Down Your Pants And Slide On The Ice!

 

 




BDFL - Memuneh
59189 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 10421

Administrator
Trusted
Geekzone
Subscriber

  Reply # 1082436 7-Jul-2014 14:01
2 people support this post
Send private message

And would it be ethical to have a product for $24.99 and the same product with the "PROFESSIONAL SAMPLE" charged at $32?

Not in my opinion.






854 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 125


  Reply # 1082463 7-Jul-2014 14:33
One person supports this post
Send private message

freitasm: And would it be ethical to have a product for $24.99 and the same product with the "PROFESSIONAL SAMPLE" charged at $32?

Not in my opinion.




This is the most succinct summary of the issue, and the one I agree with, they've been dumped with a bunch of 'professional samples' and decided to bundle them with the standard product and charge people for the privilege. That is wrong. (Not because of the whole 'not for resale' thing, but because of the whole 'sample'/doesn't sit right thing).  If it was "Bonus small bottle at regular price" then I'd be "meh, who cares".

2915 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 414

Trusted
Subscriber

  Reply # 1082468 7-Jul-2014 14:37
Send private message

Satch:

We are not in the States and the word INTENDED doesn't feature here.  I miss the point of your post.


First Sale Doctrine originates in Common Law, from which NZ law derives as well.  Hence the principle would apply in NZ equally. Which is why I'm saying that it's unlikely this would be a legal issue - however it is an ethical one IMO.  Getting free samples then taping them to regular product and charging extra is a bit of taking the mickey.

Onward
11427 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 5143

Trusted
Subscriber

  Reply # 1082477 7-Jul-2014 15:11
Send private message

Kyanar:
Satch:

We are not in the States and the word INTENDED doesn't feature here.  I miss the point of your post.


First Sale Doctrine originates in Common Law, from which NZ law derives as well.  Hence the principle would apply in NZ equally. Which is why I'm saying that it's unlikely this would be a legal issue - however it is an ethical one IMO.  Getting free samples then taping them to regular product and charging extra is a bit of taking the mickey.


In NZ is it not possible the rights holder to apply a restriction on resale? from memory the exhaustion doctrine I may well be wrong though




Mike
Retired IT Manager. 
The views stated in my posts are my personal views and not that of any other organisation.

 

 It's our only home, lets clean it up then...

 

Take My Advice, Pull Down Your Pants And Slide On The Ice!

 

 


1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5
View this topic in a long page with up to 500 replies per page Create new topic



Twitter »

Follow us to receive Twitter updates when new discussions are posted in our forums:



Follow us to receive Twitter updates when news items and blogs are posted in our frontpage:



Follow us to receive Twitter updates when tech item prices are listed in our price comparison site:





News »

New Zealand government to create digital advisory group
Posted 16-Dec-2017 08:47


Australia datum changes means whole country moving 1.8 metres north-east
Posted 16-Dec-2017 08:39


UAV Traffic Management Trial launching today in New Zealand
Posted 12-Dec-2017 16:06


UFB connections pass 460,000
Posted 11-Dec-2017 11:26


The Warehouse Group to adopt IBM Cloud to support digital transformation
Posted 11-Dec-2017 11:22


Dimension Data peeks into digital business 2018
Posted 11-Dec-2017 10:55


2018 Cyber Security Predictions
Posted 7-Dec-2017 14:55


Global Govtech Accelerator to drive public sector innovation in Wellington
Posted 7-Dec-2017 11:21


Stuff Pix media strategy a new direction
Posted 7-Dec-2017 09:37


Digital transformation is dead
Posted 7-Dec-2017 09:31


Fake news and cyber security
Posted 7-Dec-2017 09:27


Dimension Data New Zealand strengthens cybersecurity practice
Posted 5-Dec-2017 20:27


Epson NZ launches new Expression Premium Photo range
Posted 5-Dec-2017 20:26


Eventbrite and Twickets launch integration partnership in Australia and New Zealand
Posted 5-Dec-2017 20:23


New Fujifilm macro lens lands in New Zealand
Posted 5-Dec-2017 20:16



Geekzone Live »

Try automatic live updates from Geekzone directly in your browser, without refreshing the page, with Geekzone Live now.



Are you subscribed to our RSS feed? You can download the latest headlines and summaries from our stories directly to your computer or smartphone by using a feed reader.

Alternatively, you can receive a daily email with Geekzone updates.