Facebook has disabled access to the Oculus Quest hardware the user bought because the Facebook account associated with that headset has been suspended.
The user can't switch Facebook accounts and Facebook sign-in is required now (it used to just require an Oculus account).
This is basically the worst case scenario people were hypothesizing when Facebook bought Oculus.
This is precisely why chargebacks exist. Product not as described/Merchant unwilling to right it. You have no power to negotiate with then. Amex/Visa/MC does. Sic em on it.
It does feel a little wrong to do a chargeback against the retailer when they aren’t Facebook. Like, it’s not Target/Walmart/etc’s fault Facebook sucks. But it could also be argued that if the product sucks this bad, they shouldn’t be entertaining Facebook’s Quest 2.
I guess it just depends on your view of things.
To be clear: I’d absolutely return (or chargeback if necessary) in this case. Your social profile should have no bearing on your ability to use hardware you paid hundreds of dollars for.
In my view, the retailer isn't even legally at fault. Oculus is, for modifying the your device such that you can no longer use it.
Imagine buying a chair. A year later, the carpenter who made it lets themselves into your home and modifies it so it has three legs instead of four. They say it's an improvement because it's lighter now and easier to move around. But your elderly parent can't use the chair any more because it's less stable. Despite both arguments being valid, ultimately they had no right to modify your device.
In the US, they'd probably be able to argue that there's some ToS that permitted this. In most of the rest of the world, I'd argue that there was no ToS at the time of the sale, and that therefore it cannot be valid (especially as there was no consideration (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Consideration) associated with that modification).
Well, they’d argue that, while there was no TOS at sale, they did have a “shrink wrap EULA” that said “agree to these terms or return the item” and the terms included a “we can change these terms at any time but you can’t” clause.
It’s ridiculous, but it’s the way it is now (in the US).
It sucks to get kicked off Oculus for something you did on Facebook, but at least you can get your money back by selling the device. I wonder what they did to get banned from Facebook - that’s a bit unusual.
There’s been quite a few reports of spurious account lockdowns among Quest purchasers, usually among people creating new Facebook accounts to use. Some have had success with Facebook or Oculus support helping to reinstate their accounts.
This should be illegal. This is literally the equivalent of a console manufacturer deciding to brick your entire console if you get banned from their network. I'm sure Nintendo/Sony/Microsoft would love to be able to legally do so.
No, you lose all access to the hardware. Not only is it impossible to sideload games without a Facebook account in good standing, you can't even connect it to a PC and use the device as a mere headset.
15 comments
[ 2.9 ms ] story [ 50.6 ms ] threadFacebook is at least as bad as Microsoft was under Ballmer.
Facebook has disabled access to the Oculus Quest hardware the user bought because the Facebook account associated with that headset has been suspended.
The user can't switch Facebook accounts and Facebook sign-in is required now (it used to just require an Oculus account).
This is basically the worst case scenario people were hypothesizing when Facebook bought Oculus.
I guess it just depends on your view of things.
To be clear: I’d absolutely return (or chargeback if necessary) in this case. Your social profile should have no bearing on your ability to use hardware you paid hundreds of dollars for.
Imagine buying a chair. A year later, the carpenter who made it lets themselves into your home and modifies it so it has three legs instead of four. They say it's an improvement because it's lighter now and easier to move around. But your elderly parent can't use the chair any more because it's less stable. Despite both arguments being valid, ultimately they had no right to modify your device.
This is a Tort (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tort).
In the US, they'd probably be able to argue that there's some ToS that permitted this. In most of the rest of the world, I'd argue that there was no ToS at the time of the sale, and that therefore it cannot be valid (especially as there was no consideration (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Consideration) associated with that modification).
It’s ridiculous, but it’s the way it is now (in the US).
https://teddit.net/r/oculus/comments/k6adej/oculus_admits_th...
https://outline.com/3ntTSK