on 14-01-2016 18:42
on 14-01-2016 18:42
Solved! Go to Solution.
on 15-01-2016 23:36
15-01-2016 23:39 - edited 15-01-2016 23:50
From what I gather, if Samsung revoked warranty citing a tripped Knox counter and the customer chose to take them to court, it would be up to the company to establish that triggering the Knox Counter caused material damage to the device that directly contributed to the fault requiring repair-in my view, it would be hard for Samsung to argue that a faulty power button or motherboard or any other hardware fault for that matter (unless they can conclusively prove that the CPU was overclocked etc) could be attributed to a tripped Knox counter. I agree with the view expressed in the article that the legal test of whether rooting (or tripping the counter by doing so) alters the viability or function of the device would be if rooting or any other actions causing the trip subsequently prevented the device from being returned to its previous state. Since a temporary root does not prevent the device from being restored to its original state (apart from resetting the counter itself) it would be difficult to argue that a tripped Knox counter in itself constitutes sufficient evidence of misuse that would justify voiding the statutory 2 year warranty against manufacturing defects.
Hopefully I wouldn`t have to deal with such a situation but if I ever did, I would start off by sending the company copies of the 1999/44/EC directive and the article from the link and hope that Samsung would see sense in honouring the warranty rather than risking costly court action...
on 15-01-2016 23:44
The law still applies-if anything it has become more established through case law from what I understand (although I am yet to find specific examples where this directive has been applied-which is never easy without access to legal search engines like Lexis Nexis)
on 15-01-2016 23:48
I've read somewhere that the warranty being referred to in this instance relates to an 'additional warranty' covering software and services related to Knox, which one loses access to when the counter is tripped, and not the statutory warranty itself (which by the very nature of being 'statutory' cannot be voided?)
on 15-01-2016 23:50
on 15-01-2016 23:50
@Anonymous wrote:and hope that Samsung would see sense in honouring the warranty rather than risking costly court action...
I've no idea how this would pan out but I really do know that Samsung are not at all worried about costly court action......
Have you checked how many times they have been in court with Apple
on 15-01-2016 23:59