I was sorta bored, and decided to take a look at the SEC filing by Netpliance (you can take a look at http://www.edgar-online.com/bin/edgardoc/DocMain.pl?nad=&nav=&doc=A%2D1097297%2D0000930661%2D00%2D001993&coname=NETPLIANCE%20INC&ftype=10%2DQ&fds=Y&fdate=2000%2D08%2D14%2008%3A19%3A00&fdfmt=Aug%2014%202000&cik=1097297&fmt=text&nf=1 )
Anyway, what seemed interesting to me was the following quote "The Company subcontracts the manufacturing and assembly of its i-opener Internet appliance. In the past, the Company exclusively arranged for the Company's overseas manufacturer to ship the appliances directly from the manufacturer to the customer or a retailer, with the Company never taking title to the appliances. The Company has restructured its arrangement with the manufacturer of its i-opener Internet appliance and, in the future, the Company intends to take title to the appliances from the manufacturer. In addition to continuing direct shipments to customers and retailers, the Company has begun warehousing an inventory of its i-opener Internet appliances with a third-party warehouse facility in the United States to ensure that it will have an adequate supply during periods of peak demand."
Now how the heck can they enforce terms for opening a box, when they never owned the box? Could this be part of the reason they never tried to enforce anything?