I-Appliance BBS The Official Source for Internet Appliance Upgrades and Mods BBS Main List | Sign In | Sign Up | Search | Help | Linux-Hacker.net Reply to Thread | Printer |

Home / I-Appliance BBS General / NEWS, Breaking NEWS CC & NP try to apply TOS to pre-ordered units?

CC & NP try to apply TOS to pre-ordered units? (modified 0 times) hardware1 Spiff, I think this deserves its own thread, thanks for the info. Remember, this info is unconfirmed! (BTW: where did you get it?) Posted by Spiff_Anderson on 04-17-2000 04:42:54 A.M. off topic..but rather than start a new thread or bring an old thread to the top...here it is Keep in mind that this could be and most likely is BS....Anyone that cancels their order because of this is a f*cking idiot...This is similar to the orders before april 1 thingy...but now with CC....again this could easily be made up Original Article: More Netpliance Propaganda DO NOT CANCEL YOUR ORDER-- Same Product, just bait/switch April 14, 2000 Dear Circuit City Customer, We are writing on behalf of Circuit City regarding the i-opener that you recently ordered. The product you ordered has been discontinued, but there is a new model at the same price and includes all the benefits of the i-opener. The difference is that modification of the i-opener in any way is no longer physically possible in the new model. In connection with your purchase of the new i-opener model you will need to activate an i-opener service account to be able to use the i-opener and agree to the Terms of Sale below. The Fee for the service is $21.95 per month and will be billed approximately 2 days after you purchase the product. If you wish to cancel your order, or for a refund if you pre-paid, please contact the Circuit City location where you ordered your i-opener. Sincerely, The Netpliance Team Terms of Sale By opening the i-opener box from Netpliance, I understand and agree that purchasing the i-opener is contingent upon the activation of a new i-opener account. I further understand and agree that if I fail to activate the i-opener account within 30 days of purchase or cancel before 90 days after purchase date, Netpliance is authorized to charge my credit card a $499 fee representin the full value of each i-opener system purchased. I understand that the fee does not apply if the i-opener system is returned to the place of purchase in new condition with all components and the seal on the physical hardware is not broken, within 30 days of purchase. I have read the above conditions and understand my obligations under this agreement. I agree and consent to the delivery and tranfer of my name, phone number, and address to Netpliance to activate my new i-opener account. 7600A N. Capital of TX Hwy, Austin, TX 78731 TEL:512-493-8300 FAX:512-493-8399 www.netpliance.com hrmm...you don't have to contact them about it(keeping it on the order)...there were no terms when you ordered it...so these don't apply to you(see post on binding contracts)....and it's the same product(see Fred M's site) so even if it isn't a hoax, it's just more legal bs from a kid still trying to pass that damn bar exam--hint...just because it says bar in the word, it doesn't mean that you have to be drunk to take it p.s..did a search on the letter and it wasn't here.....if this thread isn't supposed to be here...delete it Posted by Spiff_Anderson on 04-17-2000 04:47:39 A.M. oh yeah...forgot one thing....PAY IN CASH or cancel your credit card because you "lost it" and get a new number 04-17-2000 08:07:16

RE:CC & NP try to apply TOS to pre-ordered units? (modified 0 times) callsignGilligan This was posted on http://i-opener-linux.net/ I put a deposit on mine on 3/15/00 at CC with a CC<G> and have not seen such a letter personally. 04-17-2000 08:17:19

RE:CC & NP try to apply TOS to pre-ordered units? (modified 0 times) Dampier I sincerely doubt the validity of this and would ask the individual who brought this to the attention of the Linux I Opener site to produce a copy of this letter. Circuit City has never before provided this type of information to third parties or CC's vendors. Although the I-Opener site contributor mentioned he thought it all "made sense," I respectfully disagree with him. The purchase of the I-Opener at a retail establishment is a contract between the store and the end customer, not between Netpliance and the customer. For it to be otherwise, a contract must be provided at time of sale, particularly when that item has been prepaid in full. No such contract or service requirement has been enforced at the time of sale, so their attempt to change the terms and conditions of the purchase after the fact is legally untenable at best! An example of a third party service agreement transaction is, of course, cellular telephone service. Completion of the sale at the heavily discounted price on offer is contingent on signing a service agreement AT TIME OF SALE. If one doesn't agree to this condition, the phone is often still available for sale, at a dramatically higher price (many PCS services being the exception.) Let's consider the logic here: - CC would never volunteer their backorder customer list to a third party vendor; - CC would have to generate, on a national scale - store by store, a customer list to send to Netpliance. We would have heard from a CC employee long before if this was occuring; - Since the transaction would be between CC and the end customer, such a letter would come on CC letterhead, not on Nepliance's letterheard as they are not involved in the transaction; - As Netpliance does not ship CC/C-USA product directly to the end consumer, as far as they're concerned, sales are made to the end store, not to the end consumer; - Netpliance cannot deny a sale of a product to an end consumer by attempting to impose TOS after the fact; In short, this sounds like the Hoax of the Day and I would not be too concerned about it until there has been documented evidence and additional verification. CUSA is taking orders today for the I-Opener and still has not become involved in any TOS transactions, with backordered product arriving regularly and being handed out to end consumers. 04-17-2000 08:46:13

RE:CC & NP try to apply TOS to pre-ordered units? (modified 0 times) Dampier I spoke with Circuit City here in Rochester. Here is more information on this: - They don't know anything about a letter from Netpliance regarding their customers and would be very surprised if there was a letter; - The guy I spoke with told me Netpliance would "have to be psychic" for them to discover all names and addresses of CC customers. Their backorder database contact information is kept in-store. The national system does have access to backorder counts numerically, but customer information is coughed up nationally to vendors only after a product is released. Most of the time, CC is the only one who uses this information - to pelt you with extended warranty offers on big ticket items; - They were told the product was to be considered "temporarily discontinued" and they are not taking any orders on it because they cannot get a guarantee on an estimated ship date for a reasonable quantity of product to meet demand. They are offering customers refunds as their backorders reach 30 days old, but they are still filling orders whenever the backordered products trickle in; - CC does not have any information about a TOS obligation for the product. All they were doing was making sure customers understood that the product did require the customer to use Netpliance *IF* they wanted to use it for Internet access. The "if" is important as it specifically doesn't mandate the customer agree to a term of Internet service before completing the sale. He did say that this may not always be the case, but any changes would not be applied to customers who backordered the product; - He also noted that CUSA has been selling the product without any terms or conditions, and CC would be hesitant, at best, to sell a product using different terms than their competitors. Again, this is a case where we need to see a copy of this letter, and then work to verify that the letter is authentic before getting crazy about this. 04-17-2000 09:04:15

RE:CC & NP try to apply TOS to pre-ordered units? (modified 0 times) LetterRip I just recieved the same letter dated April 14. "In connection with your purchase of the new i-opener model" -This presumes that I wish to exchange my modifiable I-Opener for the new i-opener model in which "modification of the i-opener in any way is no longer physically possible." (Mmmph <grin> lol) So, as long as I don't send it in for the new model, they can't do jack... LetterRip 04-17-2000 09:27:11

Scan of the letter (modified 0 times) LetterRip How do I send a scan of the letter to the doubters? I'll gladly send it in.... For the doubters, it should be noted that it doesn't actually say you have to send it in and exchange, just that my model has been discontinued, and it's implied that I am to send in my hackable model. Its just lawyer legalese to trick the weak minded into either returning their I-Openner, or into signing up for their service, of which they have no commitment to do so. I'm keeping mine just the way it is... LetterRip 04-17-2000 09:34:58

RE:CC & NP try to apply TOS to pre-ordered units? (modified 0 times) Dampier You can use a scanner to scan the document in and then convert it to .JPG. I'm not about to call anyone a 'liar' about this, but after the scores of hoaxes that have surrounded the I-Opener, I do want to make sure that there is confirmation and direct clear evidence before we need to deal with this. 04-17-2000 10:51:45

RE:CC & NP try to apply TOS to pre-ordered units? (modified 0 times) jmh3 email it to me: jmh3@linuxfreak.com and i'll post it for you. john 04-17-2000 11:10:19

RE:CC & NP try to apply TOS to pre-ordered units? (modified 0 times) Kermit I just got the letter in question. I can't scan it but I can fax it if someone can capture that for reposting. I'm not likely to be someone faking this as I'm a bit too well known in the Amiga and Video Toaster communities to play that sort of game. ...and yes, all those arguments against CC providing this information make sense - but nonetheless they obviously have done so. Kermit@novadesign.com www.novadesign.com 04-17-2000 12:31:41

RE:CC & NP try to apply TOS to pre-ordered units? (modified 0 times) Long I preordered and put a deposit on two Iopeners from Circuit City on 3/11/2000. 4/10/2000 I got a message from Circuit City on my answering machine to come in to pick it up. I got them the next day on 4/11/2000. Today (4/17/2000), I get this letter dated 4/14/2000 in the mail stating the new terms. I hope this is just a scare tactic and Netpliance doesn't plan to follow through with charging my credit card $499 fee per system since it's already maxed out and asking for a class action lawsuit. 04-17-2000 12:36:12

RE:CC & NP try to apply TOS to pre-ordered units? (modified 0 times) LetterRip Okie Dokie, I just sent it to you about ten seconds ago... I covered the name, address and tracking barcode on the bottom, but other than that it should all be readable... I'll ttyl, LetterRip 04-17-2000 12:49:00

RE:CC & NP try to apply TOS to pre-ordered units? (modified 0 times) LetterRip Okay the scanned envelope and letter are at http://bell-2216.cheg.uark.edu/~iopener/fstmm/ thanks to jhm3 for posting them... Have fun, LetterRip 04-17-2000 13:36:55

new terms of sale letter (modified 0 times) mike-ro-soft i just got the letter too. its real real STUPID! i have had my i-opener for about 5 weeks now and i just got this the letter is worded as if i still have it on order. NetPliance as been downplaying the "hack" for there product, and now this! So now NetPliance is going to get nasty about there own mess up. all this is going to do is bring more attention to the problem and blow up on them. the best part of the letter is where is states they will charge your credit card $499. ever hear of an unauthorized charge? First off we should all e-mail, call, & wright Circuit City and tell them how much we dislike them sharing/selling our name & address with a 3rd party and how much trust we have lost in them. For every one who gets a letter you should mark it return to sender and send it back or better yet burn the letter and send back the ash! 04-17-2000 13:51:22

RE:CC & NP try to apply TOS to pre-ordered units? (modified 0 times) Pissed Off The letter is real...I got one today, too, about the I-Opener I pre-paid for at Circuit City on 03/13. Some thoughts: - First and foremost, I'm pissed off that Circuit City disclosed my customer information to a third party without my consent. I can only hope that they did not share my credit card information. Are there any lawyers out there than that speak to the legality of 1) sharing personal information, and 2) sharing credit card information? - This letter is dated 04/14, and retro-actively applies terms of sale upon a purchase made better than one month prior. - Netpliance's letter is strange - "service...will be billed approximately 2 days after you purchase the product." Well, I purchased the product on 03/13... - This is the point that scares me: Since I purchased my I-Opener on 03/13, does that mean that Netpliance can now charge me $499 for not having activated my account within 30 days of purchase? - Another scary point: "I agree and consent to the delivery and transfer of my name, phone number, and address to Netpliance to activate my new i-opener account." Thoughts? 04-17-2000 14:02:54

RE:CC & NP try to apply TOS to pre-ordered units? (modified 0 times) SteveInNC Nah, this is beyond stupid. How will they prove that you ever got this letter (not that it matters anyway)? I'm sure it wasn't sent registered mail or return-receipt. You just assumed it was junk mail and tossed it unopened... right? In any case, they certainly can't retroactively change, no wait, CREATE new terms of use for something you've already paid for. This scam of claiming it is a "new" model is bull. They just don't expect anyone to take them to court. I personally tend to push back when someone trys to push me. If they unilaterally decide to charge my card, with no TOS signed by me, I believe that constitutes "obtaining property under false pretenses..." Since it's interstate commerce, it's probably a federal offense... If they do attempt to charge your card, dispute it with your credit card company. The card company won't charge you interest on the item while it's under dispute, and if they suddenly start getting lots of disputed charges against Netpliance, they'll suspect that something fishy is up, and will call Netpliance on the carpet about it. They could go so far as to pull NPLI's card merchant agreement. Now wouldn't THAT bomb NPLI! Their billing model is based around card charging. Of additional note, from Visa's web site, front page: "When you use your Visa card to shop online, in a store, or anywhere... you're protected from unauthorized use of your card or account information. With Visa's new Zero Liability policy*, your liability for unauthorized transactions is $0 - you pay nothing! Visa takes online security very seriously so you can focus on your shopping." (went into effect 4/4/00) See this link for more info: http://www.visa.com/av/zero_liability/faq.html I looked for equivalent info on the Mastercard site, but it basically sucks in comparison to Visa's site w.r.t. telling you any useful consumer info. They ARE involved with something called the Internet Fraud Watch, at http://www.fraud.org/, but that ONLY deals with Internet fraud, not retail store sales, so this is not helpful if you bought from Circuit City. I assume that the direct Netpliance web orders would be covered here. If you DO get charged, in addition to disputing that with your card company, immediately notify your state's Attorney's General office (they usually have a Consumer Affairs division). They tend to notice trends in complaints. If several people suddenly file the same/similar complaint in a very short time, they notice. I've had very good luck talking to the NC AG's office on the phone on occassion. They're very ready to help. It's very important to follow up in writing to the AG's office. They may have a special complaint form to use, so ask. I'll be really interested to see if they try to follow through on this. The best that they could hope to do would be to have CC cancel all existing orders outright, then institute a presale TOS. I would think that they would then be subject to bait-and-switch issues, particularly when we can easily demonstrate that the "old" IOs are physically equivalent to the "new" IOs. 04-17-2000 14:52:42

RE:CC & NP try to apply TOS to pre-ordered units? (modified 0 times) Lotsamula Thanks go out to LetterRip for the scan of the letter. However the letter is 1.7Mb in size. I took the liberty of resizing the letter for the people who are still stuck at 56K. Sorry, I don't know how to do links yet. http://members.aol.com/lotsamula/letter.jpg Lotsamula 04-17-2000 15:43:26

RE:CC & NP try to apply TOS to pre-ordered units? (modified 0 times) Fred+M. Netpliance Sends Letters To Circuit City Customers Do you value your privacy? If so, Circuit City may not be your best choice for your next consumer electronics purchase. Many Circuit City customers who purchased i-openers were surprised to receive letters from Netpliance (see below). These letters start off "Dear Circuit City Customer, We are writing on behalf of Circuit City...". Apparently, Circuit City has revealed the names and addresses of many, if not all, i-opener purchasers to Netpliance. More information and image of the letter appear on my web page: http://www.geocities.com/iopener_hack Regards, Fred M. 04-17-2000 16:52:45

RE:CC & NP try to apply TOS to pre-ordered units? (modified 0 times) Kallisti I, too, just got "the letter." I think my favorite part is where it says, "by opening the i-opener box from Netpliance, I understand and agree that..." I opened the box more than a week ago -- several days before this letter is even dated. Also, "the product you ordered has been discontinued, but there is a new model..." No, the product I ordered is currently sitting in my lap. I did not receive the new, physically-impossible-to-modify model. (Who wrote this thing, anyway? "Modification of the i-opener in any way is no longer physically possible"!? Somebody's just beggin' for the i-openers to be messed with.) I plan on calling the company tomorrow to bitch, but only as a matter of principle. Personally, I'm not worried; despite all of the big talk, I can't seem to take this letter seriously. All the same, though, if anyone who received this letter sees any unauthorized Netpliance charges on his/her credit card, I'd really like to know. =] 04-17-2000 16:57:58

RE:CC & NP try to apply TOS to pre-ordered units? (modified 0 times) Smrf_Slyr I got the same letter today, April 17th. I picked up my I-Opener from CC on 4/13, last Thursday. The letter was postmarked 4/14, Friday. I'll be calling my Visa company tomorrow. This is B.S. "NOW WE HAVE A CLASS ACTION SUITE" for changing a TOS AFTER you have recieved the product. Do NOT tell them your name when you call to complain about the "bait and switch after you pickup your product". It is irrelevant. Your reciepts are the proof you need. I'm talking to them now. I told the lady that the last line "I agree and consent to the delivery and transfer of my name, phone number and address to Netpliance to activate my new i-opener account". What? Now CC is giving out our info? HOW ELSE WOULD THEY GET IT? I'm lucky, I PICKED MINE UP PRIOR to the NEW "TOS" being mailed to Me. Here's what she told me... Since I picked up my I-Opener prior to the new TOS being Mailed from Texas, that it didn't apply to me. She watned my name and information to prevent me from being charged. I refused to give it to her. I also explained to her that my prood is the reciepts of ordering on the 12th of March, and pickup on the 13th of April, and the letter being MAILED and DATED April 12th. Even I had recieved it prior to picking it up, I still think it is a violation of the TOS that I "in effect signed" when I signed the Visa Receipt on March 12th. We need some Attorney's to look at this. Before it was "iffy", now I think it is a BLATENT and ILLEGAL business practice. BTW - I told her it was for a gift for my parents. That, in fact, is *IRRELEVANT*. Thanks, Smrf_Slyr My reciept says I picked it up 4/13, 1 day before the letter was sent from Texas (to Arizona.) 04-17-2000 17:33:03

Got mine today - cancelled my order (modified 0 times) BLKMGK Yup, I cancelled. It says the previous model was discontinued but is offering me a "new" model with a different TOS. Yeah, I could fight this tooth and nail and maybe get my credit card involved too. I prepaid my entire amount too and the CC guy I spoke to said he felt this company was about to collapse. They've had a grand total of 5 units come into the store and it's been on "critical backorder" for over a month. So far none of those 5 units has apparently been picked up (Tysons Virginia BTW). So, why did I cancel? Because this isn't fun anymore. I've already got 7 computers and this one would've been a toy, something to hack aorund with. However with the goo they've put in, the BIOS reflash I'd have to do (risking one my boards), and the possibility that I'd have to fix the IDE interface (some are clipped?) I just don't see the point. I'd also have to buy a HD and ethernet interface on top of all of the other work. Sure, it can still be done but for me it just wasn't worth it. Netpliance has lost me as a customer and I'll be speaking to a large group of techies at work tomorrow to also tell them the news. I run a forum for about 10K people at work who've been waiting for my IOpen to show up to see how it worked - tomorrow they get the news - it ain't worth it and Netpliance will NEVER get any money from me or anyone I know who considers their product. Letter was dated 14 April and reads just like the first post said near as I can tell - it's no hoax. You all HAVE brought up an interesting point though - NetPliance has apparently gotten my address from Circuit City and possibly more. I WILL be speaking to them about this. Do note that the information on the letter did NOT use the name on my credit card but instead used the name the store has on file. I have to wonder how Netpliance got this information without my permission! 04-17-2000 17:38:54

RE:CC & NP try to apply TOS to pre-ordered units? (modified 0 times) BLaw This is my take on the letter. After close study this is how it appears to me. I hope this helps. I had a class in business law when I was getting my business degree. Man we would have had a fun time discussing Netpliance!! The letter applies to units that are "ordered". It clearly states this in the letter. It does not mention "received", "bought last week", "bought a month ago." So if you had it in your hands and opened the box prior to receiving this letter, Netpliance does not have a leg to stand on. For those who fall under the "ordered" category (meaning you do not physically have the hardware in your hands) Netpliance is fair by giving you a way out by either cancelling the order and\or getting a refund at CC. However if after receiving this letter (which I still do not understand how they can prove you did unless they sent it certified mail)you will be under the new TOS if you choose to take delivery of the IO. In reading the TOS they do not go into effect until you "open the box". Once you open the box you have 30 days to not modify the hardware, disable it or break the seals. If you do not sign up for the service within the 30 days they will "slam" your credit card for the cost of the IO. You get a 90 day reprieve if you did sign up for the service and choose to cancel. However, they again give you a way out by allowing you to return the unmodified, unbroken, no warranty seal voided IO for a refund. There is no way this letter can be retro active to those that already have the IO. The problem that exists is that this letter needed to be presented at the time of sale for it to be in effect for those units already delivered. Netpliance management incompetency displays itself again!!! The letter is legal it covers up management's incompetence, but clearly applies to those units on order at CC. Netpliance if you are reading this don't even try to apply this to people that have already taken delivery of their IO. First YOU have to PROVE that those that purchased the IO received the new TOS and agreed to them prior to purchase. This could have been accomplished by either requiring a signature of the purchaser on the new TOS or by placing a clearly worded, clearly visible letter that appears immediately upon opening the box giving the customer the option of returning the IO immediately before breaking the inner seal of the bag that wraps around the IO (just like the software folks do). TO NETPLIANCE>>> You are lucky that I do not work at Netpliance because I am not afraid to let management know the truth. You would be catching hell from me!! Most likely you would have fired me by now because you would not know how to handle the truth. How could you take a good business idea and blow it all to hell!! By incompetence and lack of common sense that's how!!! You think you know it all. Well it is quite obvious you don't!!! Incompetence and lack of responsibility is one of my pet peeves. The Lord gave you a brain...USE IT!! I feel sorry for those that are employed under you because I bet you there are employees that are highly disappointed in the last month's actions of management.Companies fail because of lack of Vision...Mission...Management and Leadership. Without a vision the people will perish. Companies rarely fail because employees do not care. They fail because management does not get it. Management chooses to listen to themselves and not their market nor subordinates that have excellent ideas. They choose to surround themselves with other incompetent individuals to protect their weakness this is quite obvious at NP. It is not unique to NP it happens in corporate America everyday. Sooo...Netpliance step back get a good look at the big picture and stop being so incompetent. Guys and Gals I am sorry for ranting and raving, but managment incompetence just chaps my hide!! I deal with it everyday because people do not use their brains. Sure we all make mistakes, but three strikes and you are out!! It looks as if NP has finally figured out a way to reach their intended market from this point on. I do not believe they can retro actively apply the new TOS to those that already have your IO. They are only trying to protect their interests which is their buts and their shareholders. NP Management...why do you still insist on selling a product through retail outlets without enforcing the new TOS at time of sale??? Why can one still walk into Comp-USA and walk out without agreeing to the TOS?? I paid by cash so good luck in trying to tack it on me!!! You still don't get it do you?? Please do not flame me the new TOS was going to happen sooner or later. 04-17-2000 17:53:26

RE:CC & NP try to apply TOS to pre-ordered units? (modified 0 times) Old+Crow The invalidated revised ToS contained in the letter notwithstanding for those who already had their IOs, NPLI shot themselves in the foot with both barrels on the following: "The product you ordered has been discontinued, but there is a new model at the same price and includes all the benefits of the i-opener. The difference is that modification of the i-opener in any way is no longer physically possible in the new model." Barrel one: *Never* say such a thing as 'physically impossible' when dealing with an item like this. It only serves to change the the words "no longer physically possible" into "not only possible, but certain" in even less time than previously imagined. Barrel two: If I received a unit that, say, had glue on a chip and socket, and one heatgun+Xacto knife later said glue was gone and the chip placed into, say, one's Data I/O Unisite device programmer and then back into the socket, then I suppose this must NOT have been one of the units that "no longer physically possible" to modify. That being the case, the next paragraph of the letter states: "In connection with your purchase of the new i-opener model you will need to..." Since this statement specifically refers to the new model, and the new model is no longer physically possible to modify, then by inspection my unit, being successfully modified, could not be the new unit spoken of in the letter and thus not subject to any terms they might fantasize to employ. Q.E.D. Crow /**/ 04-17-2000 18:34:10

RE:CC & NP try to apply TOS to pre-ordered units? (modified 0 times) BLaw Old+Crow Are you an attorney?? You sure sound like one. I like your way of thinking!! Good Points!! 04-17-2000 18:44:34

RE:CC & NP try to apply TOS to pre-ordered units? (modified 0 times) Dampier Thanks to everyone who made the letter available online. It's obviously real at this point, but it is patently ridiculous and Netpliance is going to have a lot of problems attempting to enforce it. First, for those with product still prepaid, we need to discover whether this letter means Circuit City has now rejected/closed all prepaid orders. In my conversation with the store today, they knew nothing at all about this letter, and I haven't received one personally and I have a unit on order there. One really has to wonder who at Netpliance is doing their "legal thinking" because they just don't have a legal leg to stand on. Unless you live in a state where laws are basically at the whim of the business community, Netpliance cannot legally change the terms of a purchase after the fact. You don't have to be a lawyer to figure this out. You could watch a few Judge Judy's and learn that the basis for any contractual agreement is a meeting of the minds between the two parties. Because Netpliance decides to make changes after the fact does not bind you to those terms, period. The company cannot obligate you to a $500 fee unless you agreed and were willing to accept those terms at the time of purchase. In fact, Netpliance could never, ever ever charge your credit card or withdraw funds from your account based on some purchase you made at CC. It would be credit card fraud. I guess I would file this under the category of "ridiculous scare tactics" a-la "our units cannot be modified." The only fear you should have as a CC customer is whether CC has cancelled your backorder. If you get a letter from Netpliance, I'd mark it "refused - return to sender" or "addressee unknown" or just toss it in the trash unopened. Or, for more fun, make a copy and send it to your state attorney general's office and question whether a company has the right to require you to agree to terms after you have made your purchase. This company is just asking for legal hassles, especially in New York and California where the AG's office is packed with media whores who especially despise negative option agreements foisted on unsuspecting consumers. All of my original arguments still stand. I am beginning to wonder if the CC people even knew what has been happening. Obviously, CC did release customer information to Netpliance under their program of allowing companies to pelt you with extended warranty offers. I would be interested to learn if CC has an opinion on this company notifying their customers that their orders have been "vaguely" cancelled. Just amazing stuff. By the way, if you are bored with all of this stuff at CC, just go to the home of the disaffected shoulder shruggers - Comp USA where never has been heard a discouraging TOS word. 04-17-2000 18:52:20

RE:CC & NP try to apply TOS to pre-ordered units? (modified 0 times) mickey mouse I just sent them this sub please read by opening this e-mail you argee to give eveyone in the usa a i-opener at no charge and you also argee that you will send eveyone in the usa $1000,000 and you will send your wecare team to ever one house to clean up for a year 04-17-2000 19:46:53

RE:CC & NP try to apply TOS to pre-ordered units? (modified 0 times) Bill+in+Va+Beach I got my "scarey" letter today from NetAppiance. They have my name, I don't care. My box was picked up, paid for, and OPENED before their letter arrived. There were no terms of sale when I picked up at CC. But, I think I will write them; turn down their ISP service and state that I really like their equipment and am modifying it to surf with a cable modem since I am using COX Cable as my internet provider. Btw, I also have DSL in the house beside COX, but my DSL has been down for a week (can't get a sync between the modem and the main office). Bell Atlantic as "esculated" my problem every "working" day since last Tuesday. Since I first day, each time I checked back the new guy at the other end would tell me the guy the day before didn't do it right and he would have to my problem "esculated" AGAIN. I got both DSL and CABLE for a test, after two weeks CABLE is WAY AHEAD. BELL ATLANTIC (DSL) is: 20 dollars more per month that COX, much slower uploading, won't give me a perm IP Address, and has been down now for the past week. Other that they are just about equal. :) Bill in Va Beach 04-17-2000 19:53:12

RE:CC & NP try to apply TOS to pre-ordered units? (modified 0 times) Rockster2U Profile Think about it for a minute. Unless CC changed their own designated SKU# for the i-opener during this time frame (we'll leave that time frame undefined for now), there is no such thing as a new model. Thats the first legal arguement. Secondly, your transaction and purchase agreement was with CC, not Netpliance. If you want, you can stop reading this post now because thats all the ammunition you need. CC is right in the middle of this if Netpliance wants to make an issue because you were not advised of any such "condition of sale" at the time of purchase. But hey, it gets better. CC takes ownership of the device from Netpliance and then sells it to you. Netpliance may have a beef with CC but they certainly have no beef with John Q Customer. He bought something that was offered for sale by CC for $99. Thats where his obligation ends. Its not like CC is selling the iopener for Netpliance and acting as an intermediary or an agent. CC owned the unit you bought and they are the company your purchase transaction was with. Netpliance is only the manufacturer and you have not entered into any type of contractual agreement with them. This is very different than most cell phone transactions where CC, Radio Shack or XYZ Store is acting an "agent" of the service provider. So far, neither CC or CompUSA is an "agent" of Netpliance. They could have set it up that way but, the fact is, they didn't. (Netpliance's lawyers must have slept through class that day) Sorry guys....too late to make a case after the fact. As to passing your name, as a purchaser, along to Netpliance ......its a big problem for CC, especially in light of the letter from Netpliance (if its not a hoax). Now, if Netpliance wants to bill you or try to enforce TOS....it becomes a REAL BIG LEGAL PROBLEM for CC. I wouldn't worry too much, I think CC's lawyers will put this puppy to bed real quick. Otherwise you just might get both an iopener and a fistfull of dollars for being in the right place at the right time. (Nice though......buy an i-opener and get a P III for your troubles) This thing is laughable. When have you ever seen a company that continues to shoot themselves in both feet. Netpliance needs to hire someone with a little more business saavy and learn to think before they shoot. And, as for their legal department .... Ouch! Its almost as bad as their marketing department and that speaks volumes. Relax......this is Total BS. Any first year law student could litigate this successfully. 04-17-2000 21:42:26

RE:CC & NP try to apply TOS to pre-ordered units? (modified 0 times) Dampier Circuit City actually does have the right to sell not only your name and address, but your past purchase history to third parties. The legal language is found at their website along with an opt-out address. Of course, it's a little late for this after you get the letter. But what they attempt to protect legally doesn't necessarily protect ethically. The point of my sample letter (see CC Contact Info message) is to illustrate the damage to customer relations this antic has caused and provide them with some headaches. If they hear from enough people, they will have to deal with it. Again, at this point, I wouldn't be worried one bit about retroactive TOS from CC. Just throw it in the garbage, use it with your state's Attorney General, or put it away. Nobody should spend more than three seconds contemplating an attempt by Netpliance to enforce the thing. They don't have a prayer. 04-18-2000 04:46:30

RE:CC & NP try to apply TOS to pre-ordered units? (modified 0 times) Mikey CC passing name and other information to Netpliance is not illegal. CC passing your credit card number to Netpliance is likely a violation of credit card merchant agreements. Netpliance charging your credit card when it was received from CC without your approval is fraud. When you buy anything from anybody, they are all tracking and exchanging your personal information. If you dont know this, do some simple research and find out! 04-18-2000 05:28:00

RE:CC & NP try to apply TOS to pre-ordered units? (modified 0 times) mac ack That's it. I've had it with these guys. I don't care how far I have to drive, I am going to get every unit I can, make them into MP3 players or anything else people want. 04-18-2000 08:24:43

RE:CC & NP try to apply TOS to pre-ordered units? (modified 0 times) Rockster2U Profile No arguement on CC's legal right to pass along certain information, however, as has been stated, it becomes a legal problem for both CC and Netpliance if Netpliance bills you using a credit card account originally given exclusively to CC. 04-18-2000 09:09:24

RE:CC & NP try to apply TOS to pre-ordered units? (modified 0 times) jamie Profile Just thought I'd point out something. CC doesn't need to pass on credit card information to cause trouble. Netpliance can easily bill you the old fashioned way and send the account to collections when it's not paid. If you want to avoid this possibility, take care of it now. That doesn't mean I didn't call my the CS department of the card I used for this purchase. I don't think CC would have been stupid enough to pass on credit card information but, if they were, I _DO_ think Netpliance is stupid enough to try and use it. I made it clear to my credit card company that Netpliance is not authorized to make _any_ charges to my card. (If I ever decide to try their service, I'll use another card.) If Netpliance tries to charge that card, I'll be getting a call on my cell phone. What am I doing? I'm working my way up the ladder at CC. I started with the local store where I was told to call back in the morning to speak with the store manager. They weren't open when I got to work so I called 800-251-2655 and they transferred me to "a" (not "the") manager at my local store. All he could do was fax me a copy of the product tag which says, "Requires Netpliance i-opener service, only $21.95 a month". He admitted that this certainly did not have any sort of minimum commitment or mention a $499 penalty. He then suggested I call the 800 number again since, as he can only speak for the local store, there was nothing else he could do for me. I called back and spent quite a long time (~10 minutes) on hold while the customer service rep tried to get my local store's head cheese on the line. No luck there so she created a case and tried to transfer me to her supervisor. After about 20 minutes on hold, another rep came on and asked for a number where I could be reached. She said that the call volume was extremely high and the hold times were extremely long. I was promised a call within an hour. It's been 35 minutes. I have a feeling I'll be calling back after lunch. Netpliance reminds me of DirecPC. Just when you think they've done the dumbest possible thing, they manage to surprise you...and not in a good way. :) Jamie 04-18-2000 11:21:11

RE:CC & NP try to apply TOS to pre-ordered units? (modified 0 times) mrbuick To: lotsamula/LetterRip The SMALLER scanned in Netpliance/Circuit City letter looks real ... I noticed the leter had clear FOLDING marks where the letter would have been folded to fit in an envelope! If this is FAKE someone was VERY clever! Comments?? 04-18-2000 11:34:48

RE:CC & NP try to apply TOS to pre-ordered units? (modified 0 times) Datoyminaytah >the product tag which says, "Requires Netpliance i-opener service, only $21.95 a month". This just means the i-opener "requires" the service in order to operate AS DESIGNED. It does not in any way state that the buyer is legally required to subscribe to such service. 04-18-2000 13:00:52

RE:CC & NP try to apply TOS to pre-ordered units? (modified 0 times) jamie Profile After-lunch followup: I actually _did_ receive a callback from one of the supervisors at CC. Unfortunately, every person I've talked to at the 800 number has said, "let's get the store manager on the line" despite the fact that this issue goes far beyond the local store. So Diane is under the impression that the head honcho at my local store is going to call her when he gets back from lunch. Then she'll get me on the line and we'll talk about it. I've faxed the letter to both the supervisor at the 800 number and the local store so everyone should be on the same page when this happens (no pun intended). So far, Circuit City's only defense seems to be that their tag says that the service is required. However few of the reps have had much to say when I point out that there was no minimum commitment, immediate activation, or $499 penalty mentioned at any time when I purchased the IO on 3-12. The delivery date is irrelevant (although I received it two days before the NP letter was mailed). Every person along the line has apologized profusely regarding the release of personal information. I'm not sure if they're sorry they gave it out or if they're sorry it was used in this way. And, yes folks, the "we are writing on behalf of Circuit City" letter is real. It was mailed from Austin, TX on 4-14. I recieved it in CA yesterday. It should make its way to the east coast by Wednesday if they haven't already been delivered. If you gave a real name and address when you placed the order, your mailing info (and possibly more) is in the hands of Netpliance. Jamie 04-18-2000 13:37:50

RE:CC & NP try to apply TOS to pre-ordered units? (modified 0 times) Starman97 I called my CreditCard Co, if I havent signed any agreement for service, they cannot add charges to my card. To do so is fraud. I'll be calling the dispute resolution dept. in the morning to resolve what my rights are as a backorder purchaser of an IO from Circuit City. Can they present me with a new purchase agreement that was not in place when I bought and paid for my unit, but did not take possession of at that time. This should be interesting. Bottom line, if you bought your unit from Circuit City or CompUSA, and did not sign any service agreement at the time that you picked up your unit(s) They cant do a thing (legally). Those of us with back-ordered units may be in a different boat. 04-18-2000 15:45:32

RE:CC & NP try to apply TOS to pre-ordered units? (modified 0 times) smogbound I paid cash, but... they didn't have any so I gave them my phone number to call when they came in (they never called). I paid the balance in cash when I picked up my unit. So I thinks I'm in the clear. Then my friends asks ... ever buy anything else there ? Yes I says ... Pay cash then also ? No I says, ... it was an expensive office stereo I paid with my CC. Did you notice they looked you up in their computer by your phone number ? Oh #### I says... Anyway no letter here yet. 04-18-2000 17:02:27

RE:CC & NP try to apply TOS to pre-ordered units? (modified 0 times) DoctorJ The letter from Netpliance is certainly real. I received mine yesterday. And today I went to Circuit City to find out how it is that Netpliance has my name and address! It is not Circuit City's (at least the individual stores) policy to distribute customer information to 3rd party vendors. It appears that Netpliance is the exception. Apparently the corporate offices of Circuit City have provided this information to Netpliance in response to all the headaches they've had with getting units and unsatisfied customers. I believe their response was one of dropping Netpliance and the resulting customer complaints and simply getting this thing out of their hair. I too had already picked up my I-Opener, and paid cash to avoid any later hassles. But, alas, it must have still appeared that I had the I-Opener on order. In fact, when I went into CC with my receipts, I asked first if their computers showed that I had an I-Opener on order. The clerk said that my I-Opener was there and ready for pick-up! Apparently on a second screen, it showed that I had picked it up over a week ago. But I can see how there could be confusion. While I do think that it was wrong of CC to provide my name and address to Netpliance, I can see some logic in sending a letter like this. Rather than suprise everyone with the new Netpliance TOS when they pick up their I-Opener, an advance letter was sent. The letter I believe was intentionally formatted to infer that someone who already received their IO was subject to the TOS and had the option to return it to avoid being charged more. An attempt by Netpliance to strike fear into people and sucker them into returning their IO. I certainly think this letter should have come from CC instead of Netpliance. If it had come from CC, it would indicate that the new TOS was only provided to show what you would have to agree to prior to purchase. By Netpliance simply sticking the TOS at the end of the letter with no foreword, it appears quite menacing! Again, I am certain this was intentional. But the TOS itself has nothing whatsoever to do with the letter. Regardless, the letter is of absolutely no consequence to anyone who has already taken delivery of their I-Opener. In fact, it has no consequence on anyone who has not signed a document stating that you agree to the new TOS. As stated here, there is no legal recourse for Netpliance. If you purchase a "doorstop" from CC for $99 and sign no agreements or contracts, there is no possible way that Netpliance can legally charge you for not using said "doorstop" as Netpliance intended it to be used. Don't be intimidated. Netpliance knows they screwed up. Instead of rolling with the punches and coming up with an ingeneous solution, they are resorting to intimidation. If they were really smart, they could combat this situation. Increase the price slightly and count on increased volumes to bring the price down. Team up with AOL, a company that everyone has heard of, and provide a box that will get you online. Something along those lines. Instead, they have delayed deliveries to their intended customers, alienating them, and persued deperate measures to thwart the "hackers." A force that has far more resources than they ever could hope to have. They have instituted a TOS that would scare away even the most "legit" customer with the fear that they will be charged $499! A suicide attempt IMHO. Anyway, the letter is legit (i.e. it does exist and was sent) but of still no consequence to anyone who hasn't signed a contract stating that you agree to the new TOS. Now... back to reality.... 04-18-2000 17:05:48

RE:CC & NP try to apply TOS to pre-ordered units? (modified 0 times) imp-village The letter is legit. I have a copy of the letter in my grubby little hands. I plan to reply to them that they are SOL because the sale has already been consumated and they can't change jack now. 04-18-2000 17:08:41

RE:CC & NP try to apply TOS to pre-ordered units? (modified 0 times) imp-village OK. My wife is taking a buisiness law class, so the following isn't legal advise, but merely reprensets the understanding about what the law likely is. The Uniform Commercial Code states that once a sale has been consumated, neither party to the sale can modify the terms of the sale. Once payment has been made and delivery has been taken, the sale is complete. So right off the bat Netpliance has two problems. First, my IOpener was purchased days before the letter arrived. The sale was already consumated, they can't change the terms that were present at the time of sale. They are SOL. Second, Netpliance was not party to the sale. The sale was a transaction between myself and Circuit City. Even if one could change the terms of a sale after it was consumated, Netpliance would not have standing to do so as it wasn't party to the sale. This letter is BS and I have retained the services of a lawyer to draft a response to it that tells Netpliance to get bent. 04-18-2000 17:18:40

RE:CC & NP try to apply TOS to pre-ordered units? (modified 0 times) hackin joe After you get your IO from CC or compUSA, make them take your name / address off the computer. Tell them you like your privacy and understand that they are giving your info out to thrid parties, you don't like junk mail. You could say your address is wrong, you moved and give them some non existant one. My order has no address, I told them I don't like junk mail. Worked like a charm so far. They have ph # but I will ask for that to be removed after order comes in (or change it, say I moved). The geeks there said over and over "we don't do that, its just for our use", talk about a privacy lawsuit. 04-18-2000 18:03:52

RE:CC & NP try to apply TOS to pre-ordered units? (modified 0 times) Mikey Can we get refocused? There is a lot of misunderstanding about consumer rights and so on. 1) It is not illegal for CC and/or Netpliance to exchange personal information on those of us who have done business with "either" of them. 2) It is likely a violation of CC's credit card merchant agreement to give Netpliance our credit card numbers without our permission. 3) It is fraud for Netpliance to use a number given to it by CC without your permission. 4) As far as TOS, I believe it really comes down to whether we can prove that it is the same model or if it *truely* is a new model. 4a) If it truely is a new model *and* they did not conspire to make the old model unavailable, then we are likely SOL. 4b) If it is not a new model, they are likely in violation of several state and federal consumer protection laws. Can we as a group look at the units from various dates, particularly their serial numbers and their motherboard silk screen version information? Any ideas how to prove that it is the "same model"? 04-19-2000 05:34:42

RE:CC & NP try to apply TOS to pre-ordered units? (modified 0 times) Datoyminaytah >Any ideas how to prove that it is the "same model"? Netpliance has as much as admitted so in their own letter. "...there is a new model at the same price and includes all the benefits of the i-opener. The difference is that modification of the i-opener in any way is no longer physically possible in the new model." So, the new model includes ALL the benefits of the old one, and NO new features. The only "difference" is their attempt to make it unhackable, which we all know is just an epoxied-in BIOS which halts the system if it doesn't find their QNX stuff on the sandisk. Sounds like the same thing to me. "Unhackable" (yeah, right) isn't a new feature. 04-19-2000 05:50:59

RE:CC & NP try to apply TOS to pre-ordered units? (modified 0 times) oh boy "Any ideas how to prove that it is the "same model"?" It says "I-Opener" on the front. Are you blind? 04-19-2000 06:24:37

RE:CC & NP try to apply TOS to pre-ordered units? (modified 0 times) Mikey For those of us who have fully paid for an iOpener but not yet received it, the "same model" vs "different model" argument is THE ONLY LEGAL ARGUMENT that can be made. If they can argue that it is TRUELY A NEW MODEL, then we have NO BASIS in apealing to FTC, consumer affairs, or the legal system with regard to the new TOS. Companies have the right to change specifications, and apply different terms of sale on a different model of their product. Since the unit's hardware is apparently the same except for Netpliance vandalism of the IDE connector (cut pins and glue), AND that the unit is *designed* to be remotely software updatable (making their claims that the software revisions make it new model false) -- it appears that one could make a good case in court (likely small claims court naming local CC as the defendant) that it is the same model and that the origional TOS (actually lack thereof) applies. I applaud those who did the intial hack and those who have provided useful information. Gread job! Thanks! I am very frustrated by all the other idiots that are so stupid that they dont understand legal commercial use of personal information or the law as it relates to consumers. Those individuals are doing us a disservice by cluttering up these lists with misinformation, which does none of us any good. Americans now days are really stupid about the rights that they have given up regarding privacy, and their understanding of the law is terrible. 04-19-2000 09:56:50

RE:CC & NP try to apply TOS to pre-ordered units? (modified 0 times) Fudge For those who have not yet received their IO's from CC, I don't believe you need to worry about whether it's the same model or not. As imp-village stated above, Netpliance is not party to the CC sale, and therefore has no grounds on which to change the terms of such sale. Here's what I think - Netpliance purchased the i-opener order information from Circuit City (perfectly legal), cross-referenced that list against people who haven't yet signed up for the service, and sent the letters out (perfectly dumb). I don't believe for a second that CC passed on credit card info. They have their flaws, but no company would manage to build themselves up to the size of Circuit City with blunders like that (Please, no divx references). 04-19-2000 12:06:40

RE:CC & NP try to apply TOS to pre-ordered units? (modified 0 times) Same_Model For those that CONTINUE to ask is it the same model?? Look where the wire stand is attached to the back ...(NP-1000) Same model number in my view point! ..comments welcomed! 04-19-2000 15:03:35

RE:CC & NP try to apply TOS to pre-ordered units? (modified 0 times) AsicGuy Got my letter today. Interesting thing is that I had an I-opener on order and it did come in. However, I cancelled it the day I picked it up, never taking posession of it. I never even saw it, yet I need to activate this service :) Let me know when the lawsuit starts. I got my letter, now I can get in on it too. I personally would like to see CC and netpliance both suffer for this. BTW, anyone think about trying to bring this to the attention of some investigative news show. Seems like a good topic for one of these shows to drum up paranoia about companies giving your name to other companies to bully you into paying fees which you never agreed to pay. 04-19-2000 15:38:16

RE:CC & NP try to apply TOS to pre-ordered units? (modified 0 times) jamie Profile I was called by a supervisor from CC's "cool line" call center this morning. Yesterday she'd sucessfully managed to put me off until today. This morning she said it would take another two to three business days to get the answers to my questions. Those questions being... Why was my private information given to Netpliance? WHAT private information was given to Netpliance? Who authorized the release of information? She wouldn't tell me _anything_. They've given my personal information to a company that is using it maliciously (in my opinion) and they won't even say what this company knows about me. Did they also get my phone number? My credit card info? (Yes, it would require an amazing level of stupidity to do that but it sure wasn't very smart to give out home addresses of customers without autorization.) Am I going to have a collection agency beating on my door next month? I think this delay is very irresponsible on the part of Circuit City. I called the local network affiliates (ABC, CBS, FOX, NBC) and all four were seemed very interested in a story about Circuit City giving home addresses of their customers to product a manufacturer. They all got copies of my story, recipt and credit card statement (with the private bits blocked out), the envelope (with a mailing date of 4/14), and the letter from Netpliance trying to change the terms of a sale in which they weren't even involved. We'll see if any of the networks is willing to give it some air time. And, yes, I did it at the local level for a reason. At the local level, I'm much more likely to get the attention of some young up-and-coming reporter who's just itching to break a national story. Jamie 04-19-2000 18:08:28

RE:CC & NP try to apply TOS to pre-ordered units? (modified 0 times) Datoyminaytah Ooh! So the model number on the back is still NP1000? So, the one sitting on my desk can't be a "new" model then. ;) Huh. Watch out for a "new model" soon with a different sticker on the back. You know they're reading this. 04-19-2000 19:07:17

RE:CC & NP try to apply TOS to pre-ordered units? (modified 0 times) AsicGuy Jamie, Good job on contacting the news. What area of the country are you in? I'm in the NE. Reason being, is that it might add weight if more people back you up. I'd be more than happy to contact my locals if we are in the same area of the country. Follow up here w/ who to contact if you can. I personally would really like to see CC and NPLI get hit hard for this. I really think NPLI hasn't got a clue and CC isn't too far behind them for doing business with them in the manner that they are. 04-19-2000 19:39:25

RE:CC & NP try to apply TOS to pre-ordered units? (modified 0 times) jamie Profile I'm right between LA and San Francisco in CA. They call it the Central Coast here but, geographically, it's not really the center of the state. :) I'm billing the story as a privacy issue with Circuit City. Netpliance is doing a good enough job of digging their own grave that they don't need any help. Circuit City, however, needs to be kept in line. They deal with everything from cassette tapes to big screen TVs. If they're handing out personal information to all (or even just a few) of their manufacturers, people need to know. Jamie 04-19-2000 20:41:14

RE:CC & NP try to apply TOS to pre-ordered units? (modified 0 times) jamie Profile Oh. And if anyone wants to call the networks in my area to follow up, here are their numbers... ABC/KEYT 805-882-3933 Elliot(? Not positive. Can't read my own writing.) CBS/KCOY 805-925-1200 Ron Fischer NBC/KSBY 805-541-6666 Susan Tripp FOX/???? 805-685-7070 Ed Foley If they get enough calls, maybe they'll bump it up to a national story. (After all, people across the nation are getting these letters.) If you do call, ask for the news desk and tell them that you're calling about a consumer privacy issue regarding Circuit City. Have your details ready (better yet, have them written down and offer to send fax). Remember, this is about Circuit City's negligent release of private customer data, and the direct result of that action. The legality of Netpliance's actions is a completely different story. Circuit City gave out our names and addresses and now we're facing a potential $499 bill from a manufacturer that is trying to change the terms of a sale which has already been completed. Also, if the local affiliates get annoyed because they're getting too many calls, POST A REQUEST TO STOP THE CALLS. :) Jamie 04-19-2000 20:54:28

Reply to Thread | Printer | All times are PST Powered by UltraBoard v1.62

I-Appliance BBS General - NEWS, Breaking NEWS - linux-hacker.net BBS on CD Questions - User Groups in Your Town - E-Bay, Yahoo Auction LINKS ONLY (MODERATED) - Jokes & Humor - usdtv box I-Opener Areas - I-Opener General Posts - I-Opener Technical Stuff - I-Opener Technical Info Reference (MODERATED) WebSurfer Areas - WebSurfer General Posts - WebSurfer Technical Stuff - WebSurfer Technical Info Reference (MODERATED) Other I-Appliances - Virgin Webplayer - WebPal - MailStation - 3Com Audrey - ThinkNIC / Oracle NIC - Gateway/AOL Connected Touch Pad - Philips/AOL-TV - ACER NT-150 STB - MSN Companion - Compaq IA - Emachines IA - IBM NetVista IA - Intel dot.station - MSNTV2 Network Computers - Fujitsu-Siemens Scovery Linux Net Computers - GallantWeb Server Consoles - Dreamcast - xbox hacking Web Pads - Epods One General Post - Panasonic CF-01 - Fujitsu Stylistic 1200 - Cybiko Thin Clients - Thin Clients DigitalVideoRecorders - DTV Recorders, Replay, TiVo, Etc... - Tivo Hacks Linux - Midori Linux General Board - ITX MotherBoards Single Board Computers - Earth Computers mARMalade Elite Member Area MISC Areas - The Swap Meet WE TAKE NO RESPONSIBILITY FOR ANY TRANSACTION HERE AND NO COMMERCIAL POST PERIOD !!! - Wireless Net - Cameras - Robotics - Routers/Gateways - Mattel JuiceBox