Quote:
Originally Posted by SolApathy
I didn't pay $150 more lol. I ended up paying the same price so that is not an issue for me (as I posted long ago in the "What did you pay thread")
Another analogy would be finding something for $100 at Walmart, and then finding an ID on the ground for Sams Club, gaining access by using that card & getting the product $15 cheaper.
Now based on your example you would have taken the price tag off another device that was for "employees only" and placed that tag on your item to get the lower price. It's not your fault they had something on the shelf marked "employees only" They should have kept it locked up, right? It's not your fault you stole.
Regardless of your credentials, it is considered fraud. While Sprint may rework the scripting simply because litigation is financial irresponsible for them to pursue, it does not mean the actions you are taking by exploiting the system are legal or morally right.
Electronic Fraud: The use of a computer to take or alter data, or to gain unlawful use of computers or services.
Fraud:
- intentional deception resulting in injury to another person or entity
- imposter: a person who makes deceitful pretenses
- something intended to deceive; deliberate trickery intended to gain an advantage
You can find additional references here:
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&s...e&ved=0CA0QkAE |
your reasoning is baffling. I think this is incredibly simple and I think you are on the wrong side of the argument here. I think there may be a moral issue ( not morale) that is bothering you and that is understandeable. A person sees a mistake made by another person/company and uses it to his or her advantage. Ok. If you wanted to preach morals , join the ministry. I cannot fault you on that issue but to argue like you have is silly. Sprint posted a publicly accessible weblink offering a phone for a discounted price. At no point in the screening/checkout process did it ask if you are an employee, ask for an employee email address, ask for an employee id , or anything else related. Therefore, Sprint did nothing to verify or screen buyers of the phone at this price, period. It would have taken a good software engineer or web developer about two minutes to incorporate a simple screening or preauthorization question to filter buyers. It is incumbent on Sprint to do this when this was public. You may have a moral issue with this, but there was no need to take it to the level you say. I wonder have you ever been given too much change back at a store after buying something, gotten home before you realized it ? Did you bother going back to the store after you were already home?? Doubt it,,,maybe when I am at the counter but not after getting home. Cmon, get outta the glass house .