NODE 0d57f1a5Re: [CNN] Stolen Laptops and lame 'solution'
"William H. Geiger III" <whgiii@amaranth.com>Thu, 12 Jun 1997 09:04:24 +0800
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
In <199706112341.QAA05443@mat.wcs.net>, on 06/11/97
at 05:22 PM, "Raymond Mereniuk" <raymond@wcs.net> said:
>I assume most notebooks which are recovered are found to be in the hands
>of a buyer rather than the person responsible for the actual theft.
>But, the eventual buyer is indirectly responsible for the initial theft
>of the notebook.
How is the buyer responsible even indirectly?
Someone puts an add in the paper NEC Laptop $1,500. I go and check it out
and buy it. Should it be my respocibility to call NEC over in Japan and
find out if it was reported stolen (if they even keep such records).
Should I have to call the manufacture every time I buy a some used
equipment? Perhaps I should have a background check done before I buy
anything.
If anyone is responcible for the theft other than the theif is the person
who was so carless with their equipment.
- --
- ---------------------------------------------------------------
William H. Geiger III http://www.amaranth.com/~whgiii
Geiger Consulting Cooking With Warp 4.0
Author of E-Secure - PGP Front End for MR/2 Ice
PGP & MR/2 the only way for secure e-mail.
OS/2 PGP 2.6.3a at: http://www.amaranth.com/~whgiii/pgpmr2.html
- ---------------------------------------------------------------
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 2.6.3a
Charset: cp850
Comment: Registered_User_E-Secure_v1.1b1_ES000000
iQCVAwUBM59KoY9Co1n+aLhhAQEbLgP/f4DJARITmE0TH2A+unxHpXxLCOllQqCC
rUOATCG215sy6hK4Wy9a3k9AP3T4nAG/JpzAjK0n6Dw4poJLpZXE2PvjU3JGA2bH
vIXSjsBdecksFVFHwJyCKJTbds+TuUKwfRepyMRlhmg8cuJqh34XC037WRxPeE7s
dk9fdmyr1wA=
=XwvD
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
NODE 52f7b272Re: [CNN] Stolen Laptops and lame 'solution'
ichudov@Algebra.COM (Igor Chudov @ home)Thu, 12 Jun 1997 15:06:12 +0800
William H. Geiger III wrote:
> In <199706112341.QAA05443@mat.wcs.net>, on 06/11/97
> at 05:22 PM, "Raymond Mereniuk" <raymond@wcs.net> said:
>
> >I assume most notebooks which are recovered are found to be in the hands
> >of a buyer rather than the person responsible for the actual theft.
> >But, the eventual buyer is indirectly responsible for the initial theft
> >of the notebook.
>
> How is the buyer responsible even indirectly?
>
> Someone puts an add in the paper NEC Laptop $1,500. I go and check it out
> and buy it. Should it be my respocibility to call NEC over in Japan and
> find out if it was reported stolen (if they even keep such records).
> Should I have to call the manufacture every time I buy a some used
> equipment? Perhaps I should have a background check done before I buy
> anything.
>
> If anyone is responcible for the theft other than the theif is the person
> who was so carless with their equipment.
According to the law as I understand it, the stolen goods must be
returned to the original owner with no compensation from the owner. But
the buyer can, in theory, sue the seller (thief) for breach if the
implied warranty of title.
Is that correct?
- Igor.