summaryrefslogtreecommitdiff
path: root/61/69884d3782732ab2114e541f50ba41fccc53ac
blob: ab13c5f736d9648c52d97a94c9bee5a4e29c779d (plain)
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
Received: from sog-mx-1.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com ([172.29.43.191]
	helo=mx.sourceforge.net)
	by sfs-ml-1.v29.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtp (Exim 4.76)
	(envelope-from <roy@gnomon.org.uk>) id 1WTpY7-0003k6-3V
	for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net;
	Sat, 29 Mar 2014 09:27:35 +0000
Received-SPF: pass (sog-mx-1.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com: domain of gnomon.org.uk
	designates 93.93.131.22 as permitted sender)
	client-ip=93.93.131.22; envelope-from=roy@gnomon.org.uk;
	helo=darla.gnomon.org.uk; 
Received: from darla.gnomon.org.uk ([93.93.131.22])
	by sog-mx-1.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtps (TLSv1:AES256-SHA:256)
	(Exim 4.76) id 1WTpY5-0000KE-Mf
	for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net;
	Sat, 29 Mar 2014 09:27:35 +0000
Received: from darla.gnomon.org.uk (localhost.gnomon.org.uk [127.0.0.1])
	by darla.gnomon.org.uk (8.14.3/8.14.3) with ESMTP id s2T9RMw7047155
	(version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NOT);
	Sat, 29 Mar 2014 09:27:27 GMT (envelope-from roy@darla.gnomon.org.uk)
Received: (from roy@localhost)
	by darla.gnomon.org.uk (8.14.3/8.14.1/Submit) id s2T9RM5s047154;
	Sat, 29 Mar 2014 09:27:22 GMT (envelope-from roy)
Date: Sat, 29 Mar 2014 09:27:22 +0000
From: Roy Badami <roy@gnomon.org.uk>
To: Andreas Schildbach <andreas@schildbach.de>
Message-ID: <20140329092721.GG62995@giles.gnomon.org.uk>
References: <CANEZrP0AwR3WgHfwYWcrC9Z_MHPDwymWXAQwp7D8XZ+o2FsK8g@mail.gmail.com>
	<lh3m7i$v18$1@ger.gmane.org>
	<CANEZrP3zBFs=JpJi6eazTvrTaRX6XCJLu-zrraE6bezYW7b9pQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<lh49pp$4bc$1@ger.gmane.org> <5335BD17.6050408@plan99.net>
	<lh4nma$h3e$1@ger.gmane.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <lh4nma$h3e$1@ger.gmane.org>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.20 (2009-06-14)
X-Spam-Score: -1.9 (-)
X-Spam-Report: Spam Filtering performed by mx.sourceforge.net.
	See http://spamassassin.org/tag/ for more details.
	-1.5 SPF_CHECK_PASS SPF reports sender host as permitted sender for
	sender-domain
	-0.0 SPF_HELO_PASS          SPF: HELO matches SPF record
	-0.0 SPF_PASS               SPF: sender matches SPF record
	-0.4 RP_MATCHES_RCVD Envelope sender domain matches handover relay
	domain
X-Headers-End: 1WTpY5-0000KE-Mf
Cc: bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net
Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] BIP 70 refund field
X-BeenThere: bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: <bitcoin-development.lists.sourceforge.net>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development>,
	<mailto:bitcoin-development-request@lists.sourceforge.net?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://sourceforge.net/mailarchive/forum.php?forum_name=bitcoin-development>
List-Post: <mailto:bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net>
List-Help: <mailto:bitcoin-development-request@lists.sourceforge.net?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development>,
	<mailto:bitcoin-development-request@lists.sourceforge.net?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 29 Mar 2014 09:27:35 -0000

On Fri, Mar 28, 2014 at 09:56:57PM +0100, Andreas Schildbach wrote:
> On 03/28/2014 07:19 PM, Mike Hearn wrote:
> 
> >> Ok, why don't fix this in the spec for now, by defining a fixed expiry
> >> time. In the EU, most products are covered by a 2 years warranty, so it
> >> seems appropriate to pick 2.5 years (30 months) -- allowing for some
> >> time to ship the product back and forth.
> >
> > Yeah I was thinking something like that on the walk home. But 2 years is
> > a long time. Do we have enough RAM for that?
> 
> It depends on usage stats, script size, etc...
> 
> > Plus warranties usually
> > result in the defective goods being replaced rather than a monetary
> > refund, right?
> 
> Usually yes. The next smaller "unit of time" in Germany would be two
> weeks, the so-called "Fernabsatzgesetz". It allows you to send back
> mail-orders and usually you want the money back. Don't know if that made
> it into EU law or how it applies to other countries.

It's EU law, but the Distance Selling Directive only says "at least
seven days", so the exact period probably varies by country (in the UK
it is 7 days).

But the clock only starts ticking when you receive the goods, and the
Distance Selling Directive allows the supplier 30 days "to execute the
order" (I *think* the 30 days always has to include shipping, because
for consumer contracts title doesn't pass until the goods are
delivered, so the order wouldn't be considered complete until then).

So I think latest possible deadline for returning the goods for refund
could be up to 30 days to execute the order plus "at least 7 days"
(with some countries allowing more).  Plus, conceivably, shipping
time, if some member states have chosen to interpret the 30 day
execution differently.

So I think this adds up to "a couple of months, give or take".  In
practice, though, even a couple of months is a bit on the short time.
What if the goods are delayed.  How many people have had miner orders
outstanding for the best part of a year?

roy