Film Score Monthly
FSM HOME MESSAGE BOARD FSM CDs FSM ONLINE RESOURCES FUN STUFF ABOUT US  SEARCH FSM   
Search Terms: 
Search Within:   search tips 
You must log in or register to post.
  Go to page:    
This is a comments thread about Blog Post: Ben-Hur Lives! by Lukas Kendall
 
 Posted:   Mar 9, 2012 - 2:41 AM   
 By:   Stephen Woolston   (Member)

To John Smith,

The UK Sales Of Goods Act, as I understand it, gives consumers the right to claim refund, repair or replacement if the product purchased did not match the description, wasn't of satisfactory quality or is not fit for purpose.

Let me re-iterate: if you think the goods were not as described and are protected by this Act, I think this Act means you can return it for a refund. (Repair and replacement don't seem to apply in this case.)

For Lukas Kendall, this Act (even if it applied) would probably mean no more than he has to change the description of the product. And, oh, he has.

Now, even if you're not protected by this Act because the contract was made on US turf, you could always ask if you would be allowed to return your disc and claim a refund on the basis that it was not as described. No harm in asking.

(I do take it you don't want your Ben-Hur disc any more.)

On the other hand, if you want to keep your Ben-Hur disc, then I believe the Sales Of Goods Act does nothing for you on this matter, even in the UK, because you wouldn't be asking for a refund, repair or replacement. True, I'm not a lawyer and could be mistaken. That's just my interpretation of the Act. You should, of course, research it for yourself if you wanted to try and utilize it in this case.

Cheers

 
 
 Posted:   Mar 9, 2012 - 2:41 AM   
 By:   babbelballetje   (Member)

Are we still talking about the same cd's with music on them that everyone wanted forever? We should be glad that these things still sell.

My world didn't end when more copies of Ben hur got pressed

 
 
 Posted:   Mar 9, 2012 - 2:47 AM   
 By:   JSWalsh   (Member)


You know exactly what I mean and instead in typical FSM board fashion choose to make a personal dig. A little odd and more than a little tiresome, rather than just addressing the point and the POINT is that if another label other than FSM had done this it might not have gone down so well. You know it, I know it, and the man in the moon knows it.


hainesway,

I addressed the idea of folks who're just trying to make a buck on a thread in the other section, but the usual suspects are/will be bitching about it and get it locked, so I'll just say that what you say sure seems to be the case. Except the problem isn't with Lukas or FSM (or other labels). The problem is with folks who make it their life's goal to bitch.

Businesses change strategies all the time based on changing conditions. Neither FSM nor any label SHOULD be bashed for increasing supply to meet demand. But they will be bashed by those who have an agenda other than purchasing music to enjoy.

(I'm not assuming you see things my way, btw, so don't worry, I'm not claiming you as an ally, just using your valid point to comment.)

 
 Posted:   Mar 9, 2012 - 2:48 AM   
 By:   Lokutus   (Member)

The only way you can be offended by this is if it is the limitedness of it which is important to you.

I just don't enjoy being repeatedly lied to.

 
 Posted:   Mar 9, 2012 - 3:19 AM   
 By:   Perky_Norm   (Member)

I fail to see how ANYone could be pissed off that they are making more copies of this utterly wonderful music available to people who'd enjoy it. More people happy in the world = slightly better world in my humble opinion...

Those that are pissed off about this - are you REALLY into the music, or is it the case you are more into collecting, and having something someone else doesn't, so you can then brag about it once said item is sold out? If so doesn't really say much about you as a person does it. How could it possibly bother anyone that they're reprinting an item, as long as they have a copy to enjoy themselves?

This hobby should be about the music, not the collectability/bragging rights!

Perhaps in future labels shouldn't mention whether a title is limited edition or not to stop this kind of childish nonsense.

- John

 
 Posted:   Mar 9, 2012 - 3:25 AM   
 By:   Stephen Woolston   (Member)

SUGGESTION

To avoid this kind of debate in future, I suggest labels add this to their product descriptions:

"We do not rule out extending the quantities pressed beyond the initial limited run, should we feel that is commercially warranted. We also can not guarantee that this title won't be re-issued in the future."

That way, really, no one can complain.

Cheers

 
 Posted:   Mar 9, 2012 - 3:30 AM   
 By:   ZapBrannigan   (Member)

I think it's good to make more units available whenever feasible.

 
 Posted:   Mar 9, 2012 - 3:32 AM   
 By:   Hopkins&Sterne   (Member)

Oh, for goodness sake! Anyone still hoping for a Treasury repress must be despairing! I'm glad, however, that the balloon who brought up the UK Sale of Goods Act has been so comprehensively punctured.

There's a perfectly simple and workable solution that I think would please everyone (well almost), although it's not really necessary and would be further nuisance for Lukas and FSM.

If the artwork for the new run has not already been printed (and the order could be in progress if not finished) then perhaps a note such as "Second printing" could be placed next to the number 2000? That way 4000 music lovers get the exact same listening enjoyment (as "Danny Ormondroyd" says in "Brassed Off" "it's music that matters!") and the pedantic collectors have their first edition, or can pay a slightly less exhorbitant price for one from a still happy speculator if they so choose.

It really saddens me how the nicest and most decent folks get accused of lying just for being far too open and honest for the cynical, suspicious element among us.

 
 Posted:   Mar 9, 2012 - 3:36 AM   
 By:   Hopkins&Sterne   (Member)

(Duplicate post, sorry).

 
 Posted:   Mar 9, 2012 - 3:38 AM   
 By:   Peter Greenhill   (Member)

The only way you can be offended by this is if it is the limitedness of it which is important to you.

I just don't enjoy being repeatedly lied to.

--------
Lukas didn't lie. I suspect that he didn't expect 2000 copies of Ben Hur to sell out within two weeks. Therefore he changed his mind and printed more. He has put his own money on the line for this hobby of ours and if he can make some money from printing more of Ben Hur and meet demand then good luck to him.

 
 
 Posted:   Mar 9, 2012 - 3:42 AM   
 By:   JSWalsh   (Member)

Lukas didn't lie. I suspect that he didn't expect 2000 copies of Ben Hur to sell out within two weeks. Therefore he changed his mind and printed more. He has put his own money on the line for this hobby of hours and if he can make some money from printing more of Ben Hur and meet demand then good luck to him.

Well done.

 
 Posted:   Mar 9, 2012 - 3:44 AM   
 By:   Dr. Lao   (Member)

I thought I got in under the wire with my Intrada order. I just sent them an email asking them to cancel it. I'll buy it later and put the money toward other bills for now. How about manufacturing more of the Miklos Rozsa Treasury? Ben-Hur is described as being a "capstone" to that collection. Kind of implies that the limited edition number for Ben-Hur and the Treasury should be the same, no?


Looks like you prefer doing things at the very last possible moment, eh? When something went wrong, you can blame others.

 
 
 Posted:   Mar 9, 2012 - 4:03 AM   
 By:   John Smith   (Member)

To John Smith,

The UK Sales Of Goods Act, as I understand it, gives consumers the right to claim refund, repair or replacement if the product purchased did not match the description, wasn't of satisfactory quality or is not fit for purpose.

Let me re-iterate: if you think the goods were not as described and are protected by this Act, I think this Act means you can return it for a refund. (Repair and replacement don't seem to apply in this case.)

For Lukas Kendall, this Act (even if it applied) would probably mean no more than he has to change the description of the product. And, oh, he has.

Now, even if you're not protected by this Act because the contract was made on US turf, you could always ask if you would be allowed to return your disc and claim a refund on the basis that it was not as described. No harm in asking.

(I do take it you don't want your Ben-Hur disc any more.)

On the other hand, if you want to keep your Ben-Hur disc, then I believe the Sales Of Goods Act does nothing for you on this matter, even in the UK, because you wouldn't be asking for a refund, repair or replacement. True, I'm not a lawyer and could be mistaken. That's just my interpretation of the Act. You should, of course, research it for yourself if you wanted to try and utilize it in this case.

Cheers


Mr Woolston,

You're absolutely correct in your description of how the Act works. However, what prompted my response was the following comment from Lukas:

"The repressing (identical content and packaging) will be in stock at SAE next week. We're making another set of 2,000."

As you can see from the above statement - and contrary to what you claimed in your post - Lukas has NOT changed the description of the product on its packaging. This would, in the UK, constitute a contravention of the Act.

All he would have to to do is to change the legend from the original Ben-Hur packaging to something like "Second Edition", which is exactly what Doug Fake did with the reprint of Explorers.

 
 
 Posted:   Mar 9, 2012 - 4:17 AM   
 By:   John Smith   (Member)

Oh, for goodness sake! Anyone still hoping for a Treasury repress must be despairing! I'm glad, however, that the balloon who brought up the UK Sale of Goods Act has been so comprehensively punctured.

There's a perfectly simple and workable solution that I think would please everyone (well almost), although it's not really necessary and would be further nuisance for Lukas and FSM.

If the artwork for the new run has not already been printed (and the order could be in progress if not finished) then perhaps a note such as "Second printing" could be placed next to the number 2000? That way 4000 music lovers get the exact same listening enjoyment (as "Danny Ormondroyd" says in "Brassed Off" "it's music that matters!") and the pedantic collectors have their first edition, or can pay a slightly less exhorbitant price for one from a still happy speculator if they so choose.



It's a pity Lukas didn't do exactly what you suggest. It would have obviated a lot of hot (balloon) air smile

BTW, thanks for the quote from Brassed Off. So very apropos. Here's my own from Dr Crell Moset (ST:Voyager):

"Ethics, morality, conscience... Funny how they all go out of the airlock when we need something."

 
 
 Posted:   Mar 9, 2012 - 4:29 AM   
 By:   theMaestraX   (Member)

Lukas said in the FSM Ben-Hur Thread:

'To answer a question: no, we will not be repressing this after the 2000 copies sell out.
We have, I think more than any of the other labels, tried to press our titles in
sufficient quantities.

NOW he has bowed down in re-issuing this title; I suppose a title like this is WORTHY
of a re-issue! But a LIMITED EDITION? is well over-used; like saying 'ALL SALES ARE
FINAL!' Maybe its to do with demand & supply!

Anyway keep up the great work Lukas....!

 
 
 Posted:   Mar 9, 2012 - 4:32 AM   
 By:   JSWalsh   (Member)

Someone didn't read what was after the jump.

 
 Posted:   Mar 9, 2012 - 4:33 AM   
 By:   Stephen Woolston   (Member)

Mr Woolston,

You're absolutely correct in your description of how the Act works. However, what prompted my response was the following comment from Lukas:

"The repressing (identical content and packaging) will be in stock at SAE next week. We're making another set of 2,000."

As you can see from the above statement - and contrary to what you claimed in your post - Lukas has NOT changed the description of the product on its packaging. This would, in the UK, constitute a contravention of the Act.

All he would have to to do is to change the legend from the original Ben-Hur packaging to something like "Second Edition", which is exactly what Doug Fake did with the reprint of Explorers.


I disagree.

I would agree if you were purchasing the product on seeing the product.

However, if you are purchasing the product from a description of the product, which is how this one works (a web site page with an order form), I believe it is sufficient to simply tell people on the description page that there are more than 2,000 copies.

Here's why I think this:

It is stated (though not in these exact words) that if a product is defective but the defect is mentioned in the product description when you purchased it (e.g. the web page), then you can't ask for refund, repair or replacement under SOGA -- because you were fairly told.

In this case, the 'defect' would be the product says it's limited to 2,000 when it's not. I interpret that that as long as the description at point of order tells you it's not really limited to 2,000, it's okay.

People who purchased before the description was updated might (if it was the UK) be able to make a claim. But not those after, I don't think.

If you were buying it off the shelf without an advisor, then the product packaging (not the web site) becomes the description and then you might have a claim. (In the UK.)

Now, as I said, I'm not a lawyer so don't take this as reliable legal advice. I could be misinterpreting. All this is interpretation by me, albeit based on looking at official sources. As I mentioned above, everyone should research for themselves.

Cheers

 
 
 Posted:   Mar 9, 2012 - 4:43 AM   
 By:   John Smith   (Member)

If you were buying it off the shelf without an advisor, then the product is it's own description and then you might have a claim. (In the UK.) Cheers

There's no "might" about it. Last time I looked, the HMV in Birmingham (where I buy many of my soundtracks) doesn't have any leaflets appended to its CDs. The law acknowledges that customers making purchases in brick & mortar stores cannot be expected to apprise themselves of online disclaimers every time they pick something off a shelf.

 
 
 Posted:   Mar 9, 2012 - 4:47 AM   
 By:   theMaestraX   (Member)

Hear, hear Lukas please take the stand.....answers required>!>>!
Maybe alot of hot air over PANIC BUYING!

 
 
 Posted:   Mar 9, 2012 - 4:56 AM   
 By:   Nick Haysom   (Member)

Is this the Second Coming? smile


The way I see it, the first pressing was limited to 2,000 copies and the second pressing will be limited to 2,000 copies.

 
You must log in or register to post.
  Go to page:    
© 2014 Film Score Monthly. All Rights Reserved.