I like how the article does not mention Samsung on the title even once.
this post was submitted on 11 Jun 2026
1184 points (98.8% liked)
Technology
85494 readers
4039 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
I experienced something similar with a GPU when coin mining made the prices explode.
But I knew they would do that, because the law here is not designed for prices to suddenly explode out of proportion.
So you are only refunded the original price of purchase, which would normally be fine.
This resulted in me using a low end GPU (unsuitable for mining) for almost a year, because I refused to pay the inflated prices for a proper GPU.
I'm sorry to say, but I doubt Louis Rossmann can win this case, because it is not generally feasible to make the law so the customer can demand a replacement, because a replacement isn't always possible, which is why the seller can fulfill obligations with a refund of the price paid.
If new products had come out at lower prices, a refund is normally a great deal for the customer. But currently in this case it is not.
load more comments
(2 replies)