View Single Post
  #36 (permalink)  
Old 01-28-2008, 03:44 PM
ebmorgan's Avatar
ebmorgan
Halfway to VIP Status
Offline
Location: Seattle, WA.
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 554
Reputation: 417
ebmorgan is becoming a PPCGeeks regularebmorgan is becoming a PPCGeeks regularebmorgan is becoming a PPCGeeks regularebmorgan is becoming a PPCGeeks regularebmorgan is becoming a PPCGeeks regular
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by klurf8881 View Post
hmm i wont even comment on the honest+lawyer aspect as im finishing up law school here, but you get the drift- there are less of those than honest sprint reps

his thread with the AG was about investigating the Mogul and bugs/defects and sprint's false advertising of the mogul. Hes saying the response letter to this AG complaint had that date on it, but i dont see that as a promise to be taken verbatim. It also may have been the target date at that time and changed. FYI, there's also no legal issue/obligation that is forcing Sprint to release this by a certain date. It was just the response he got to his inquiry made by the legal dept.

Could just be a "leave us alone" brush-off response too, lawyers are good at that. Thats the impression i get off that letter's response at least or it was simply a target date at the time the letter was drafted

im also a lil curious why the legal dept was releasing future ROM dates to a consumer in the first place honestly? they normally never are allowed to do that for software or hardware.
Oh...+1....I totally agree with you. The AGO investigator said that Sprint Legal talked to the engineers for the date. But they are not legally obligated to stick to it. And you're right....the letter was a total "fuck-off" letter.

Rat bastards....
__________________
MPx-200 -> MPx(300) -> MPx-220 -> MotoRZR -> Moto V600 -> SMT 5600 -> PPC-6700 -> Treo 700wx -> Mogul -> Diamond -> Touch Pro -> TOUCH PRO 2 -> HTC EVO 4G
Reply With Quote