Isn't the fact that he bought something that wasn't then delivered upon a "loss"? I.e., if I buy a year's worth of coffee from you for $5,000, and you only give me a month's worth, I've lost 11/12 of $5,000, right?
Just because it's a 'bonus/bundle/offer' doesn't mean he didn't buy it and is not obligated to receive it. In fact, an "offer" and an "acceptance" constitute the fundamentals of forming a legally binding contract in the US and many jurisdictions globally.
Unless you're a lawyer or very well-versed in the UCC, I'd avoid trying to make conclusive statements like that about this topic.
Absolutely not, nor was I drawing any definitive legal conclusions. I have run through bar flash cards on the UCC so I have some idea of what I don't know and that there can be a lot of complexity. For example, I vaguely recall an ad in a newspaper is not an offer, but an 'invitation to an offer.'
For example, I vaguely recall an ad in a newspaper is not an offer, but an 'invitation to an offer.'
I think you mean an 'invitation to treat'. A price sticker in a store can be an 'invitation to treat', i.e. you can look at a price sticker in a store and have a reasonable expectation that if you offer the teller the amount on the price tag, then that teller will accept the price.
It's more like an 'invitation to offer [verb]' than an 'invitation to an offer[noun]'.
A newspaper advertisement can be considered an offer, though. I don't know much about US law, but there is a famous case from the UK in which a lady claimed some money from a company on the basis of an advertised reward. They didn't pay and said it wasn't a serious claim. She fought in court and won:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carlill_v_Carbolic_Smoke_Ball_C...
US law schools often phrase it exactly as invitation or solicitation to an offer. I definitely don't claim to have any authoritative knowledge on its applications in any jurisdiction.
I bought a really expensive coffee maker that comes with a 3-month supply of coffee beans from a 3rd party supplier. I chose this pricier coffee maker over a competitors because of that included supply made up the difference.
That supplier is refusing to send me the coffee beans, so I now have a loss.
He bought a product that clearly promised something he is not getting. That is a loss. Amazon or Samsung should be liable. (Unless they can legitamitely deny him service because he waited a year to activate it).
