Resolved Is it free?

[theSeb]

There is a vast difference between what is against the law and what is immoral. Morality is subjective and we all have a different code of morals. Personally, I think keeping the charger is immoral. Some others may not and it's not up to me to judge their moral code, even though to judge is human.

Walking into a store and taking something is against the law. It is stealing. Being given something for free due to a shopkeeper's mistake is not against the law. Not returning it, after realising the shopkeeper's mistake, can be seen as immoral by most people, but it is not against the law. If a shopkeeper gives you the incorrect change and it is less than he/she should have, that is against the law. But if the shopkeeper gives you more change than necessary and you don't take it back, then you're not breaking any laws.

The OP did not walk into an Apple store and take the charger without paying for it. He was sent an extra one due to a mistake. Apple can legally charge him for the extra charger, but it is up to Apple to prove that they sent two chargers instead of one. In the eyes of the law there isn't much a shopkeeper can do after realising their mistake of giving you too much change once you've walked out of the shop.

Having said all that though, I am sure that there is some county in the US where it is illegal for women to wear high-heels on a Tuesday, for men to wear a hat on a Monday and for a customer to not return the extra change he is given due to a shopkeeper's mistake, but as far as I understand it, the general law in the western world does not consider this a crime. Some religions on the other hand, like Judaism, do consider this as a crime, regardless of whether the shopkeeper is a Jew or not. But religious law and state law are two different things, hopefully, usually, not always.

 

[jcpb]

Speaking of dumb laws, there is nothing wrong with parking your car via back-in, but apparently if you do this in California you'll get fined.

 

[Dragoro]

There is a vast difference between what is against the law and what is immoral. Morality is subjective and we all have a different code of morals. Personally, I think keeping the charger is immoral. Some others may not and it's not up to me to judge their moral code, even though to judge is human.

Walking into a store and taking something is against the law. It is stealing. Being given something for free due to a shopkeeper's mistake is not against the law. Not returning it, after realising the shopkeeper's mistake, can be seen as immoral by most people, but it is not against the law. If a shopkeeper gives you the incorrect change and it is less than he/she should have, that is against the law. But if the shopkeeper gives you more change than necessary and you don't take it back, then you're not breaking any laws.

The OP did not walk into an Apple store and take the charger without paying for it. He was sent an extra one due to a mistake. Apple can legally charge him for the extra charger, but it is up to Apple to prove that they sent two chargers instead of one. In the eyes of the law there isn't much a shopkeeper can do after realising their mistake of giving you too much change once you've walked out of the shop.

Having said all that though, I am sure that there is some county in the US where it is illegal for women to wear high-heels on a Tuesday, for men to wear a hat on a Monday and for a customer to not return the extra change he is given due to a shopkeeper's mistake, but as far as I understand it, the general law in the western world does not consider this a crime. Some religions on the other hand, like Judaism, do consider this as a crime, regardless of whether the shopkeeper is a Jew or not. But religious law and state law are two different things, hopefully, usually, not always.

False. If a store keeper gives you back too much in change, and you realize it and don't return it, that is actually a crime. Its just hard to prosecute so you never see anyone get in trouble because of it.

Example: Armored car loses its load of money while driving down the highway. You stop and grab some of the money, and leave, your breaking the law, even though you found the money just laying on the highway.

 

[theSeb]

False. If a store keeper gives you back too much in change, and you realize it and don't return it, that is actually a crime. Its just hard to prosecute so you never see anyone get in trouble because of it.

Example: Armored car loses its load of money while driving down the highway. You stop and grab some of the money, and leave, your breaking the law, even though you found the money just laying on the highway.

Is it really? I would be interested to see an excerpt from a law book regarding this.

 

[beamer8912]

There is a vast difference between what is against the law and what is immoral. Morality is subjective and we all have a different code of morals. Personally, I think keeping the charger is immoral. Some others may not and it's not up to me to judge their moral code, even though to judge is human.

Walking into a store and taking something is against the law. It is stealing. Being given something for free due to a shopkeeper's mistake is not against the law. Not returning it, after realising the shopkeeper's mistake, can be seen as immoral by most people, but it is not against the law. If a shopkeeper gives you the incorrect change and it is less than he/she should have, that is against the law. But if the shopkeeper gives you more change than necessary and you don't take it back, then you're not breaking any laws.

The OP did not walk into an Apple store and take the charger without paying for it. He was sent an extra one due to a mistake. Apple can legally charge him for the extra charger, but it is up to Apple to prove that they sent two chargers instead of one. In the eyes of the law there isn't much a shopkeeper can do after realising their mistake of giving you too much change once you've walked out of the shop.

Having said all that though, I am sure that there is some county in the US where it is illegal for women to wear high-heels on a Tuesday, for men to wear a hat on a Monday and for a customer to not return the extra change he is given due to a shopkeeper's mistake, but as far as I understand it, the general law in the western world does not consider this a crime. Some religions on the other hand, like Judaism, do consider this as a crime, regardless of whether the shopkeeper is a Jew or not. But religious law and state law are two different things, hopefully, usually, not always.

Agree with basically everything you said.

One thing though, for Apple online returns, don't they allow you to keep your laptop (and accessories) until they send you a new one? Then, once you've received the new one, you must return the old laptop (and accessories?). Until you've returned them, they hold a charge on your credit card.

I haven't done this myself, but I believe I've read about it on here somewhere.

It's hard to translate the extra change and walking out to an online transaction. By the nature of the sale, either the money or the product must be held for sometime before the other is received.

 

[Dragoro]

Is it really? I would be interested to see an excerpt from a law book regarding this.

Don't have the law book to quote. My brother (state prosecutor in florida) told me about it.

 

[bamaster]

It's funny... I can almost predict who would be an OWS occupier by some of the comments on here. Screw the rich megajumbo corporation! Spread the wealth! Haha!

 

[Dragoro]

It's funny... I can almost predict who would be an OWS occupier by some of the comments on here. Screw the rich megajumbo corporation! Spread the wealth! Haha!

Cheers to that lol

That colorado shooter was just found out to be an active participant in OWS.

 

[qpiqp]

Thanks guy I'm finding these thread to be very comical. If you guys haven't noticed, this is actually my second thread started on here (the first one only got like 2 replies), so I decided to word the title and body in a way that would create more discussion and get more responses. I think it may have worked a little better than I had liked.

Correct me if I am wrong, but here is a little blow to the logic that stealing is black and white. I was looking to find if Apple specifically requests that I send one of the chargers back. If not, it would be fair to consider an extra charger sent to me for no cost a gift. By law, it is legal for me to accept the gift without paying the price. So it is not stealing...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gift_(law)

Would it be too unreasonable to assume that Apple has sent me a gift in light of putting me through the troubles of going through the return process (which actually took hours on the phone and a few steps aside from that as well)?

Before you guys freak out on me, I will repeat that the charger will be returned, so i can keep my morals, morale, honestly, honor, legacy, ect... intact. Hopefully be following this logic and path I will lead a righteous life stemming from the very monstrosity of this event which will lead me one day to be accepted into a glorious afterlife, which may or may not exist, by a super being, which also may or may not exist. Or maybe when it's all said and done I will just be buried in the ground, and remembered by the things I have done or not done in my life which actually have an impact on the world or people of the world .

 

[AirThis]

Thanks guy I'm finding these thread to be very comical. If you guys haven't noticed, this is actually my second thread started on here (the first one only got like 2 replies), so I decided to word the title and body in a way that would create more discussion and get more responses. I think it may have worked a little better than I had liked.

Correct me if I am wrong, but here is a little blow to the logic that stealing is black and white. I was looking to find if Apple specifically requests that I send one of the chargers back. If not, it would be fair to consider an extra charger sent to me for no cost a gift. By law, it is legal for me to accept the gift without paying the price. So it is not stealing...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gift_(law)

Would it be too unreasonable to assume that Apple has sent me a gift in light of putting me through the troubles of going through the return process (which actually took hours on the phone and a few steps aside from that as well)?

Well, if Apple has given you two chargers with the new machine, then they are yours. No question about it really.

 

[heisenberg123]

Thanks guy I'm finding these thread to be very comical. If you guys haven't noticed, this is actually my second thread started on here (the first one only got like 2 replies), so I decided to word the title and body in a way that would create more discussion and get more responses. I think it may have worked a little better than I had liked.

Correct me if I am wrong, but here is a little blow to the logic that stealing is black and white. I was looking to find if Apple specifically requests that I send one of the chargers back. If not, it would be fair to consider an extra charger sent to me for no cost a gift. By law, it is legal for me to accept the gift without paying the price. So it is not stealing...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gift_(law)

Would it be too unreasonable to assume that Apple has sent me a gift in light of putting me through the troubles of going through the return process (which actually took hours on the phone and a few steps aside from that as well)?

Before you guys freak out on me, I will repeat that the charger will be returned, so i can keep my morals, morale, honestly, honor, legacy, ect... intact. Hopefully be following this logic and path I will lead a righteous life stemming from the very monstrosity of this event which will lead me one day to be accepted into a glorious afterlife, which may or may not exist, by a super being, which also may or may not exist. Or maybe when it's all said and done I will just be buried in the ground, and remembered by the things I have done or not done in my life which actually have an impact on the world or people of the world .

why do you need advice from others on how to live your life

 

[qpiqp]

why do you need advice from others on how to live your life

Don't we all learn from each other?

 

[Small White Car]

I actually agree with the OP. (And yes, I'm very much on the side of "stealing is wrong no matter how small." I don't think this is stealing.)

If he was returning or exchanging the computer for his own reasons, then yes, keeping the charger is theft. But that's not what happened.

He took the computer to them because it was broken. They owed him a new computer. Nothing more. He bought the first charger and it was not broken. It's his. He owns it. He brought a broken computer to Apple, they owed him a fixed computer. That's all that's owed by either side.

The fact that they decided to do that by sending him a complete box of stuff is Apple's choice. They decided to do it that way. He didn't ask for it.

Here's my analogy:

I order a steak with potatoes. The steak comes out cooked wrong. They apologize and take it back. I eat my potatoes while waiting. Then they send out a new steak with more potatoes. Should I be charged for an extra side?

I say no. And based on that I say the OP is right, he doesn't owe them the charger. If the restaurant/Apple wants to send extra potatoes/chargers that's their call. They certainly don't have to do it, but if they do, that's on them.

 

[ericrwalker]

I think consumable products like food shouldn't be compared to a computer charger.

They can't take your original potatoes and sell them as refurbished/used.

They give you new potatoes, because they know you probably wanted to eat the steak and potatoes together.

I actually agree with the OP.

If he was returning or exchanging the computer for his own reasons, then yes, keeping the charger is theft. But that's not what happened.

He took the computer to them because it was broken. They owed him a new computer. Nothing more. He bought the first charger and it was not broken. It's his. He owns it. He brought a broken computer to Apple, they owed him a fixed computer. That's all that's owed by either side.

The fact that they decided to do that by sending him a complete box of stuff is Apple's choice. They decided to do it that way. He didn't ask for it.

Here's my analogy:

I order a steak with potatoes. The steak comes out cooked wrong. They apologize and take it back. I eat my potatoes while waiting. Then they send out a new steak with more potatoes. Should I be charged for an extra side?

I say no. And based on that I say the OP is right, he doesn't owe them the charger. If the restaurant/Apple wants to send extra potatoes/chargers that's their call. They certainly don't have to do it, but if they do, that's on them.

 

[Small White Car]

I think consumable products like food shouldn't be compared to a computer charger.

They can't take your original potatoes and sell them as refurbished/used.

They give you new potatoes, because they know you probably wanted to eat the steak and potatoes together.

I don't see how that's relevant. If I give you a gift of pizza or a gift of books I'd still say that it was my choice to give you those things.

You would bestow upon me the right to come back and ask you for money tomorrow? I don't think that's right.

 

[heisenberg123]

I actually agree with the OP. (And yes, I'm very much on the side of "stealing is wrong no matter how small." I don't think this is stealing.)

If he was returning or exchanging the computer for his own reasons, then yes, keeping the charger is theft. But that's not what happened.

He took the computer to them because it was broken. They owed him a new computer. Nothing more. He bought the first charger and it was not broken. It's his. He owns it. He brought a broken computer to Apple, they owed him a fixed computer. That's all that's owed by either side.

The fact that they decided to do that by sending him a complete box of stuff is Apple's choice. They decided to do it that way. He didn't ask for it.

Here's my analogy:

I order a steak with potatoes. The steak comes out cooked wrong. They apologize and take it back. I eat my potatoes while waiting. Then they send out a new steak with more potatoes. Should I be charged for an extra side?

I say no. And based on that I say the OP is right, he doesn't owe them the charger. If the restaurant/Apple wants to send extra potatoes/chargers that's their call. They certainly don't have to do it, but if they do, that's on them.

maybe if the OP gave the steak(broken laptop) back to apple prior to them replacing it, at no point did the restaurant(apple) give you both plates of steak and potatoes at the same time

 

[ericrwalker]

Was he given a gift? Sounds like he got a computer, something was wrong with it. He's suppose to return the old computer and all the equipment that it came with because they sent him a new one.

What gift, did Apple acknowledge they gave him a gift?

I don't see how that's relevant. If I give you a gift of pizza or a gift of books I'd still say that it was my choice to give you those things.

You would bestow upon me the right to come back and ask you for money tomorrow? I don't think that's right.

 

[beamer8912]

I don't see how that's relevant. If I give you a gift of pizza or a gift of books I'd still say that it was my choice to give you those things.

You would bestow upon me the right to come back and ask you for money tomorrow? I don't think that's right.

A consumable product is by definition gone once its used. Not the same case with the adapter. The OP has used the adapter, much like you ate the potatoes. However, he can still return the adapter, you can't return the potatoes.

Consumable products are very different, and in fact Apple has a separate policy on those, such as software.

It is a very different scenario and I'm sorry to say, but your example is not relevant in this case.

 

[Small White Car]

Was he given a gift? Sounds like he got a computer, something was wrong with it. He's suppose to return the old computer and all the equipment that it came with because they sent him a new one.

I don't know what Apple's rules are. All I have to go by is what actually happened.

So if Apple took the machine back without a cord then I have to assume that Apple takes machines back without cords.

If this is wrong, then someone can point me to something saying so and we can change our minds on this. But until that happens I can only go with the evidence I have been presented.

And currently that evidence points to yes, yes it was a gift.

A consumable product is by definition gone once its used.

Which is why I worded it as "should I be charged for the side?"

No, they can't get the potatoes back. But they can charge me for them. So answer that one. Would you charge for those potatoes?

maybe if the OP gave the steak(broken laptop) back to apple prior to them replacing it

Did I get his story wrong? I really thought that's what happened.

 

[ericrwalker]

That might be the case. I recently sent back a baby monitor (summer infant brand) and the customer service made sure that I not only need to send the handheld monitor, but I needed to send back everything that came with it. The camera and both power cords.

They ended up mailing me a brand new one.

Apple might not care that they don't get everything back, but I am betting they either instructed the OP over the phone or sent paperwork telling him what he needs to send back.

I don't know what Apple's rules are. All I have to go by is what actually happened.

So if Apple took the machine back without a cord then I have to assume that Apple takes machines back without cords.

If this is wrong, then someone can point me to something saying so and we can change our minds on this. But until that happens I can only go with the evidence I have been presented.

And currently that evidence points to yes, yes it was a gift.

 

[Interstella5555]

I actually agree with the OP. (And yes, I'm very much on the side of "stealing is wrong no matter how small." I don't think this is stealing.)

If he was returning or exchanging the computer for his own reasons, then yes, keeping the charger is theft. But that's not what happened.

He took the computer to them because it was broken. They owed him a new computer. Nothing more. He bought the first charger and it was not broken. It's his. He owns it. He brought a broken computer to Apple, they owed him a fixed computer. That's all that's owed by either side.

The fact that they decided to do that by sending him a complete box of stuff is Apple's choice. They decided to do it that way. He didn't ask for it.

Here's my analogy:

I order a steak with potatoes. The steak comes out cooked wrong. They apologize and take it back. I eat my potatoes while waiting. Then they send out a new steak with more potatoes. Should I be charged for an extra side?

I say no. And based on that I say the OP is right, he doesn't owe them the charger. If the restaurant/Apple wants to send extra potatoes/chargers that's their call. They certainly don't have to do it, but if they do, that's on them.

I usually agree with you because we live in the same town, but not quite this one...It would be more like you go into a restaurant and order the meal and when they come to take your plate away you scrape the side order of potatoes onto another plate so they bring you more. Now if your intent was to get another order of potatoes that's one thing, but either way, they've already given you the potatoes which you've eaten...why should they give you more?

 

[Small White Car]

That might be the case. I recently sent back a baby monitor (summer infant brand) and the customer service made sure that I not only need to send the handheld monitor, but I needed to send back everything that came with it. The camera and both power cords.

They ended up mailing me a brand new one.

Apple might not care that they don't get everything back, but I am betting they either instructed the OP over the phone or sent paperwork telling him what he needs to send back.

Yeah, that's the thing. If they told him to do something and he didn't and just came here and fudged the story to make himself sound good...

Yeah, that's stealing.

But I like to take posts at face value and analyze them based on what they say, not what I think it going on behind the scenes. So I'm basing my opinion on what he said. If that ends up being wrong then the opinion will clearly be wrong too.

If he wants to lie to us and get faulty feedback...that's his problem, not ours.

they've already given you the potatoes which you've eaten...why should they give you more?

They do it because the manages realize that the small cost of potatoes is worth the good-will the customer will feel at seeing a complete meal being brought out.

Do they have to do it? Certainly not. But if I were a manager I'd make the same call.

Basically, what I'm doing here is defending Apple's right to make that same judgement call. Since it's what I'd do I feel weird saying Apple doesn't have that right or couldn't possibly have thought of it.

 

[heisenberg123]

I don't know what Apple's rules are. All I have to go by is what actually happened.

So if Apple took the machine back without a cord then I have to assume that Apple takes machines back without cords.

If this is wrong, then someone can point me to something saying so and we can change our minds on this. But until that happens I can only go with the evidence I have been presented.

And currently that evidence points to yes, yes it was a gift.




Which is why I worded it as "should I be charged for the side?"

No, they can't get the potatoes back. But they can charge me for them. So answer that one. Would you charge for those potatoes?

why not return what was replaced if you havnt already eaten before you have a chance to return it?

 

[beamer8912]

It seems like the OP really already made up his/her mind. He just wants to know if he'll get in trouble if he keeps the adapter. If yes, he'll return it, if no, then he'll just keep it; regardless of what others think.

It's amazing how much abuse Apple takes from its consumers. There are so many threads of people buying and returning 2, 3 or 4 computers just to try out different specs. Some even order two at a time with full intentions of returning one.

I've also seen this on the iPhone and iPad side. When the iPhone 4 was launched there were 4 or 5 threads of people buying and returning black iPhone 4's while they waited for the white iPhone 4 to come out. Every 2 weeks they'd take an iPhone back to the store and exchange it for another one.

I'm not insinuating the OP is single handedly responsible, rather pointing out a continuing trend.

It doesn't seem like anything will be done about it, so maybe we should all just partake in these acts. Personally, I'm waiting for a tax holiday in mid-August to get my rMBP. I guess I should just go to the store and buy one now and just return it every couple 2 weeks until the one I really want comes in the mail (tax free).

 

[Small White Car]

why not return what was replaced if you havnt already eaten before you have a chance to return it?

Here's how I understand the story:

1) Bought laptop / came with charger

2) Laptop doesn't work

3) Apple says "send us laptop, we'll send you back a new one"

4) OP sends laptop

5) Apple sends new laptop, it contains a charger


If I have any of this wrong, let me know. Given all that, I don't understand your comment. So perhaps I'm seeing the story differently than you.