Received: from sog-mx-3.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com ([172.29.43.193] helo=mx.sourceforge.net) by sfs-ml-4.v29.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtp (Exim 4.76) (envelope-from ) id 1WTdq4-00069H-Qr for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net; Fri, 28 Mar 2014 20:57:20 +0000 Received-SPF: pass (sog-mx-3.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com: domain of m.gmane.org designates 80.91.229.3 as permitted sender) client-ip=80.91.229.3; envelope-from=gcbd-bitcoin-development@m.gmane.org; helo=plane.gmane.org; Received: from plane.gmane.org ([80.91.229.3]) by sog-mx-3.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtps (TLSv1:AES256-SHA:256) (Exim 4.76) id 1WTdq2-0004kD-3e for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net; Fri, 28 Mar 2014 20:57:20 +0000 Received: from list by plane.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1WTdpv-0000ii-Au for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net; Fri, 28 Mar 2014 21:57:11 +0100 Received: from f052145073.adsl.alicedsl.de ([78.52.145.73]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Fri, 28 Mar 2014 21:57:11 +0100 Received: from andreas by f052145073.adsl.alicedsl.de with local (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Fri, 28 Mar 2014 21:57:11 +0100 X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ To: bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net From: Andreas Schildbach Date: Fri, 28 Mar 2014 21:56:57 +0100 Message-ID: References: <5335BD17.6050408@plan99.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org X-Gmane-NNTP-Posting-Host: f052145073.adsl.alicedsl.de User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.4.0 In-Reply-To: <5335BD17.6050408@plan99.net> X-Enigmail-Version: 1.5.2 X-Spam-Score: -0.8 (/) X-Spam-Report: Spam Filtering performed by mx.sourceforge.net. See http://spamassassin.org/tag/ for more details. -0.0 RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE RBL: Sender listed at http://www.dnswl.org/, no trust [80.91.229.3 listed in list.dnswl.org] -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 1.1 DKIM_ADSP_ALL No valid author signature, domain signs all mail -0.0 SPF_PASS SPF: sender matches SPF record -0.4 RP_MATCHES_RCVD Envelope sender domain matches handover relay domain X-Headers-End: 1WTdq2-0004kD-3e 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: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 28 Mar 2014 20:57:21 -0000 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.