If it is not already happening, can we expect more arbitration clauses in purchase agreements, or does the law already rule that out? (There will be different answers in different jurisdictions, I expect.)
For example, "extended warranties" you pay for are considered useless, and the ACCC recently did a public awareness campaign against them.
Why? Products are guaranteed to last a "reasonable lifetime", where precedent determines reasonableness.
Precedents I know:
* "Dumb" phone, 10 years
* Smartphone, 5 years
* Fridge, 10 years
* Car, 8 years
* Laptop, 5 years
* Tablet PC, 3 years
Personally, I've never needed to test it, as mentioning the Consumer Rights Commission is enough to make the worst of businesses suddenly become your best friend.
However, a little research shows:
The ACL will assist if the business refuses to honour the guarantee. [0]
> "If we find that a retailer is not honouring the obligations imposed on the retailer under the consumer guarantee provisions of the Australia consumer law then the ACCC will take action to deal with those issues," Mr Samuel said.
Optus, a sizeable telecom, got a decent fine for hiding stuff in fine print.
> The ACCC has already been busy enforcing a prohibition on false, misleading or deceptive claims, with Optus recently agreeing to pay $178,200 in fines for potentially misleading consumers with some of its phone cap advertising.
There's actually a TV show revolving around this stuff [1], so I'd say its relatively enforced.
[0] http://www.abc.net.au/news/2011-06-07/broken-but-out-of-warr...
Its against manufacturing defects, and designed to fight planned obsolescence.
EDIT: Most warranties here don't cover consumer-caused damage either. If they do, extended warranty makes sense, but it's few and far between.
What goes into deciding reasonableness usually involves:
* Cost of product vs average income of average household
* Reliability advertised
* Average income of the targeted audience
* Audience reliance upon the product
As a quick example, an iPhone sells for about $1400, which is about 2% of the average income, and is a daily use item.
The device breaking causes disruption to the consumer, and has already cost a somewhat sizeable part of their income.
They're entitled to the time necessary to offset such a purchase, and interest rates and insurance rates are used as the guide here. Both of which use 4.8 years for 2%.
However, you're pretty much guaranteed to get nowhere unless the company, or a subsidiary, resides within Australia.
But, if in doubt, report to the ACCC, they handle the legal legwork for you, even to see if you have a case.
EDIT: I've had a few Arduinos from dealxtreme be shoddy. The ACCC got them to send replacements.