Public Forums 71,145 posts

[TomC Moderator TomCJoin date: October 2014Posts: 14077Downloads:58Uploads:137 Thanks: 948 Thanked: 3155 times in 2495 posts]

#265111

<em>@markb1439 73220 wrote:</em><blockquote>There have been many cases in which contracts were found to be null and void because they were not fair and equitable. Many contracts have been thrown out because judges ruled that it wasn’t fair to collect money by advertising something and changing it later, even if the membership terms allowed “change without notice.”[/quote]
Perhaps – But this is not one of those instances. There is nothing that is not “fair and equitable” about the JA membership guidelines, rules, or fees. They are on par with virtually every other Joomla tempalte Club out there. The fact that JA chose to offer two templates per month was an added bonus to it’s membership. They have every right to change the delivery schedule based on reasonable business necessity.

markbBottom line is, JA is still taking money on the promise of two templates a month “every year.”[/quote]
Bottom line, you are incorrect – there is no explicit “promise” indicated anywhere.

markbWhether or not you think they could slip out through legal loopholes or hide behind the fact that they are not U.S.-based, there is still the issue of representing something and delivering something less.[/quote]
Which is why they are giving a one-year notice to the membership of the change – both reasonable and fair.

markb People who signed up under the premise of two high-quality templates per month should be entitled to expect that (or compensation) if their membership runs into the time when quantity is reduced.

And what kind of “compensation” would you suggest?

TomC wrote:

Whether or not JA is legally obligated to do that, they should do it because it’s the right thing to do. Two templates a month is still listed as the main selling point,

Where does it say that it is the “main selling point?” It does not. Further, there is a link posted on the Home Page about the changes to the Tempalte Club.

TomC wrote:

Again, if quantity is not important, why is it the most prominently featured selling point?

It is not – You are trying to create explicit meaning where there is none.

TomC wrote:

It’s clear to me that you are the one with no business sense. It doesn’t take much of a brain to see that someone would be upset if they signed up for a five-year membership at two templates per month…only to find out they’re getting much less than that. Why is that so hard for you to understand?</blockquote>
My my my … look at tle double standard hypocrisy . Was it not you who were getting all bent out of shape because I questioned your business accumen and logic? So, I guess practicing what you preach also isn’t one of your strong suits.

They signed up for MEMBERSHIP INTO JOOMLA TEMPLATE CLUB based on the PRODUCTS THEY SAW. Tell me, would you slap down money for a car that hasn’t even been produced yet? If so, why? How would you know if it would be good or not? What would stop you from ranting and raving when the car is finally released and you decided that you didn’t like the product?

The decision has been made – a lot of people agree with the decision – you’re just going to have to deal with it.

[markb1439 Friend markb1439Join date: August 2008Posts: 124Downloads:0Uploads:1 Thanks: 14 Thanked: 34 times in 11 posts]

#265118

The advertising clearly states what you will get in terms of quantity. It’s a fair assumption that something is the main selling point when it’s listed twice and is the top bullet point. Two templates a month is the most prominently-featured selling point. It is not listed as a “bonus.” I am not trying to create explicit meaning. What would you think you’re getting when a template club advertises two templates per month “every year”?

There is indeed an explicit promise when the site says you will get two templates a month, “every year”. You need to brush up on your law before making claims like yours. This is absolutely considered an explicit promise.

The one-year notice is indeed reasonable and fair, except for those people who have longer memberships. What kind of compensation would I suggest? I already suggested cash or a membership extension.

People didn’t just sign up because they liked what they saw. They liked what they saw, and they also saw the prominent advertising that they would get two templates like this a month “every year”.

The reason I now question your business sense is that you totally discount the feelings of those people who feel shorted because they paid for long memberships and will now get less than they expected. You have no right to say that people shouldn’t feel that way. You can quote all the contract terms you want, and try to pretend that JA doesn’t still advertise two templates a month “every year” prominently. But the fact is that some people signed up with the reasonable assumption that they would get two templates a month. Large numbers of legal precedents would not agree with your position.

The terms that show up before someone subscribes don’t seem to be as lenient as you imply. It is never stated that there may be fewer than two templates per month. Aside from any such stipulation, the advertised quantity prevails. And, as for not being subject to U.S. law…the terms say that the templates are protected by U.S. copyright law (among others, but U.S. is listed first). By wording it that way and seeking protection under U.S. copyright law, JA can be viewed as agreeing to U.S. jurisdiction (and therefore binding itself to U.S. contract law). In addition, there are international commercial codes that are abided by (and enforceable in) most countries.

I have no problem dealing with the decision. I am not heartbroken over it, and I may renew my membeship (as long as they don’t implement the planned automatic licensing). I just think that it’s not the best thing for JA — no matter what was said by the people who participated in the discussion. I welcome you to disagree with that opinion, but respect my right to voice it.

I retire from this discussion. I have businesses to run and family to enjoy, and I don’t have time to butt heads with you any more. Of course, you’ll probably say that means that you won. Whatever.

3 users say Thank You to markb1439 for this useful post

1. ErikThorsen
2. tanisha
3. VisiGod

[cgc0202 Friend cgc0202Join date: August 2007Posts: 2244Downloads:0Uploads:3 Thanks: 206 Thanked: 262 times in 1 posts]

#265121

And, I hope that ends the extended intercourse.:) Or was it more like two guests on TV or radio talk shows these days where people really have no intention to come to an understanding but just stating their positions — no matter what the other may in turn state.

Cornelio

[markb1439 Friend markb1439Join date: August 2008Posts: 124Downloads:0Uploads:1 Thanks: 14 Thanked: 34 times in 11 posts]

#265122

Cornelio,

Good point. 🙂

[TomC Moderator TomCJoin date: October 2014Posts: 14077Downloads:58Uploads:137 Thanks: 948 Thanked: 3155 times in 2495 posts]

#265131

<em>@markb1439 73230 wrote:</em><blockquote>
There is indeed an explicit promise when the site says you will get two templates a month, “every year”. You need to brush up on your law before making claims like yours. This is absolutely considered an explicit promise.[/quote]
Between the two of us, who went to Law School? . . .. oh, that would be me.
Southwestern University School of Law – Class of 1997 – Thank You very much.

markbPeople didn’t just sign up because they liked what they saw. They liked what they saw, and they also saw the prominent advertising that they would get two templates like this a month “every year”.[/quote]
So, the gallery of templates had nothing to do with it whatsoever, eh? I put to you that JA would have just as many members today if they had always been offering one template a month. Again, it’s a quality issue, not a quantitiy issue.

markbThe reason I now question your business sense is that you totally discount the feelings of those people who feel shorted because they paid for long memberships and will now get less than they expected. [/quote]
Really … They won’t be getting the kind of templates from JA that gave them cause to join the group in the first place?
That’s news to me. Is JA going out of business?

markb Large numbers of legal precedents would not agree with your position.[/quote]
Really? …. Please feel free to cite them.

TomC wrote:

The terms that show up before someone subscribes don’t seem to be as lenient as you imply. It is never stated that there may be fewer than two templates per month.

Nor is it stated that there indefinitely will be.

TomC wrote:

Aside from any such stipulation, the advertised quantity prevails.

The absense of a stipulation does not give rise to the creation of another one that is not explicitly indicated within a legal and/or contractual agreement.

TomC wrote:

I have no problem dealing with the decision. I am not heartbroken over it, and I may renew my membeship (as long as they don’t implement the planned automatic licensing). I just think that it’s not the best thing for JA — no matter what was said by the people who participated in the discussion. I welcome you to disagree with that opinion, but respect my right to voice it.

Fair enough.

[cgc0202 Friend cgc0202Join date: August 2007Posts: 2244Downloads:0Uploads:3 Thanks: 206 Thanked: 262 times in 1 posts]

#265132

Have both parties given their summation already? Then Hung, as “judge”, shall make the decision? Do we still need a jury — US style? Where I came from there is no jury.

Cornelio

[oavs Friend oavsJoin date: June 2008Posts: 12Downloads:0Uploads:0 Thanks: 3]

#265136

<em>@Menalto 73111 wrote:</em><blockquote>Keep this post on its subject, if you have problems with a template use the forum board for the specific template, not here.</blockquote>

Sorry, newby here. Anyway problem sorted for the others to know. After re installing Joomla from v 1.5.3 to v 1.5.5 problem has gone.

[ErikThorsen Friend ErikThorsenJoin date: December 2005Posts: 1098Downloads:0Uploads:7 Thanks: 22 Thanked: 10 times in 1 posts]

#265138

Why did I sign up for 5 years developer membership?

1: 2 templates each month
2: Quality templates

I have been following Mark and Tom during their discussion. I don’t know why Tom is 100% pro Joomlart and I am not going to argue or extend the debate too much ( I hope )

Just a few points. How hard is it to make 1 OUTSTANDING TEMPLATE? Provided you have a general idea of what the template should be about, ie shopping template, business template, then I would say it should take me about 2-3 days to design the layout in Photoshop. So, humm, to the coding? How long time? Well, it usually takes about 20-30 hours when I develop a template. Add another 20 hours for debugging.

So, I have a great looking template. It took me some 16-24 hours to design, maximum 30 hours to develop and 20 hours for debugging. This for 1 person doing the job. This amounts to less than 90 hours work. Usually my working week is about 40 hours, which means less than 3 weeks of work. For 1 person doing the job.

Naturally we can argue that I am not developing or adding any “outstanding” add-ons, like JA-Highslide (developed by a Norwegian guy, slightly modified by JA)

My point is not to say JA is not doing “their best” or that quantity above quality, what I am saying is that when a company grows in customer base, they need to do something with their support and how many employees they have, NOT reduce the quality of what they deliver to their clients (not in terms of quantity or quality)

I am sure Tom that you would agree that if you go to your store and buy milk (coupon with buy 1, get 1 free) then you would naturally “hope” that both milk bottles would be of good quality? This is what JA have been doing. They have been offering twice as much for the same price. Lowering the quality has just been happening down the road because they don’t have enough staff!! That is all. Not that it is too demanding to create 2 new templates each month. Trust me, if I had 4 skilled developers, focusing ONLY on creating new templates it would not be a single problem in the world to make the deadlines.

However, if I had 1 designer and 2 developers and 2 support people and about 20.000 customers, I would be in deep problems. This is where JA is currently and why they are changing to 1 template a month. Not because it is hard to make 2 completely new and spanking outstanding templates.

With this being said, what will you say TOm, if the support doesn’t get better with 1 template per month. Or if the quality doesn’t improve???

My biggest fear isn’t that I will be getting only 1 template a month, my fear is that it will be a “repackage” of an old one.. So when the only template released is a “old” one, what would you say then? (I am not claiming this will happen, I am only saying what if… )

Let me know your thoughts and ideas on how it would look if the quality and support doesn’t improve when decreased to 1 template per month. This is perhaps my only concern at the moment….

2 users say Thank You to ErikThorsen for this useful post

1. TomC
2. VisiGod

[TomC Moderator TomCJoin date: October 2014Posts: 14077Downloads:58Uploads:137 Thanks: 948 Thanked: 3155 times in 2495 posts]

#265158

<em>@ErikThorsen 73255 wrote:</em><blockquote>
With this being said, what will you say TOm, if the support doesn’t get better with 1 template per month. Or if the quality doesn’t improve???[/quote]
Then I will say that JA had their chance, dropped the ball, and would no longer be deserving of the respect and benefit of the doubt consideration that so many here will have given them.

1 user says Thank You to TomC for this useful post

1. ErikThorsen

[antoniu1 Friend antoniu1Join date: July 2006Posts: 349Downloads:0Uploads:5 Thanks: 29 Thanked: 40 times in 1 posts]

#265167

Good decision. IF the designs will become more HQ. I care less about the bugs here and there.
I am looking forward to the enhanced designs that are on the way now!

[TomC Moderator TomCJoin date: October 2014Posts: 14077Downloads:58Uploads:137 Thanks: 948 Thanked: 3155 times in 2495 posts]

#265178

<em>@antoniu1 73294 wrote:</em><blockquote>Good decision. IF the designs will become more HQ. I care less about the bugs here and there.
I am looking forward to the enhanced designs that are on the way now!</blockquote>
Bear in mind, the new schedule will not start until August 2009.

[solsikkehaven Friend solsikkehavenJoin date: January 2007Posts: 60Downloads:0Uploads:3]

#265196

could you please elaborate on this:

”
From September 2008 (or earlier), a new license & domain management system will be introduced. You will not have to add domains to the license system.It will automatically be registered once you install the template.
”

Is this some kind of selv-registration system (call-back) to your server. are you introducing “spyware” into our systems now ?

I will not be renewing my membership if you are going to introduce this.

[markb1439 Friend markb1439Join date: August 2008Posts: 124Downloads:0Uploads:1 Thanks: 14 Thanked: 34 times in 11 posts]

#265197

I can live with the reduced number of templates, but the automatic registration will be enough to make me NOT renew my membership. I will not risk my mission-critical sites being taken down if there is a malfunction in JA’s phone-home mechanism.

[questbg Friend questbgJoin date: May 2008Posts: 1912Downloads:0Uploads:1 Thanks: 146 Thanked: 339 times in 197 posts]

#265202

If this is what I think it is, I don’t like the sound of that at all 😮

[perdu Friend perduJoin date: June 2007Posts: 227Downloads:0Uploads:26 Thanks: 10 Thanked: 20 times in 1 posts]

#265258

Exactly.
Most of this thread has focused around the change from 2 to 1 templates a month, I think now’s a good time to focus on the ‘new improved licence’ system which probably has more serious implications.

Perhaps JA could elaborate exactly how this will work?

2 users say Thank You to perdu for this useful post

1. ErikThorsen
2. VisiGod

[Author]

Posts