Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Ulorian - Agent of Chaos" data-source="post: 9455818" data-attributes="member: 16668">I understand your argument.I'm not a lawyer. I can only comment on what feels wrong or right. The product belonged to Wizards. The store who passed on the cards had no right to do so. The person who had Pinkerton show up at their door may or may not have been aware of this. I suspect that they did know, but that's only relevant if they had a hand in the potential deceit carried out by the party who passed on the cards. What follows is my take on what happened.Either way, Wizards sent a collection agency to recoup their property from a person who may or may have not had a hand in accessing that property. Let's assume this person is an innocent party and had nothing to do with their inappropriate acquisition of these cards. After being contacted multiple times by Wizards (allegedly, I understand), this person still refused to hand over the cards. It would be unreasonable to assume that no contact from Wizards had taken place at this point? Agreed? The 'elderly neighbours' had been contacted re: 'hey, trying to get a hold of these folks'?So this person knows that they have cards that broke the street date. Not their problem right? They can get cred for their channel at this point, super cool? This is an option open to them. What is the ethical stance here? Return the cards without being asked, because you have something that you know doesn't belong to you? Maybe you take the grayer position... let them ask me first. But then they ask you... and you refuse. What are their options now? They've tried to get a hold of you to negotiate something reasonable.At this point, the holder of the cards has been contacted. They understand the ethics involved, but still choose to hold onto the cards.Involve lawyers now? Seems a bit of a nuclear option honestly, despite what I said earlier. The most straightforward approach at the point where this person has refused contact is to send a collection agency to get their property. The problem here is that this person is out actual money for these cards. Sounds like they were offered a full refund though?I guess you can make a case for lawyers before collection agency? Either way, it doesn't look great for dude holding the cards.To me, it's hard to feel sympathy for someone who does something they know is wrong, at someone else's expense, for their own personal gain. It's not okay if it's an individual or a corporation. Just don't do that.Again, these are my particular views, based on the facts I have been presented with. Happy to change these views based on clarification of existing facts or presentation of new ones.</blockquote>

Verification