Good catch - I will look for a US version. Just out of coursity, you believe that a store is required by law to honor all prices on all items in the store, regardless of obivious error, correct? Do you believe website have this same requirement? Does Best Buy and Best Buy .com both have to honor all listed prices?
Just want to make sure I am understanding you correctly.

Actually the consumer has up to thirty days to get their money back. If you poke around the FAQ section of that site, you will find a more detailed description of the process, to wit:

You must notify the seller that you were overcharged, within 30 days of the transaction, either in person or in writing. Within two days of receiving your notice, the seller may choose to refund you the difference between the amount charged and the price marked plus a "bonus" of ten times the difference, with a minimum of $1.00 and a maximum of $5.00. If the seller refuses to give you both the refund and the bonus, you may bring a lawsuit to recover your actual damages or $250.00, whichever is greater, plus reasonable attorney fees up to $300.00. (MCL 445.360a(2).)

Not to turn this thread into a treatise on Michigan consumer protection laws (goodness knows it has morphed into everything else), but it's interesting that the consumer is given a thirty day window to claim an overcharge and the seller is given an opportunity to correct the overcharge without penalty (i.e. no harm, no foul). Seems reasonable, no?

Now let's see, where have we seen a similar thirty day opportunity given to correct a mistake........?

I'm not sure this even applies, but a basic tenet of contract law is that advertisements, displays, and other similar pricing methods are not actually offers, but rather invitations to make offers.

In other words, if a car dealership mistakenly runs an ad selling a Mercedes for $50 instead of $50,000, I can't show up and say "I accept, where's my new car?" Courts consider the mistaken advertisement as an invitation to make an offer. So when I show up and say "I accept..." I'm actually making an offer to the dealership to buy the car for $50, which they will likely reject.

So, taking a fresh, new 50-inch plasma with a $.50 price tag to the register and demanding the TV and change from your $1 bill probably won't work. Now, what happens if the person working the register actually sells it to you for that, I have no idea...

I am not greedy. They can keep the change.

Agreed that one of the keys is the seller's exercise of reasonable care. Agreed also that 17500 is the mother of all run-on sentences.

That other side of the coin is that this very same consumer protection law goes on to state that a consumer must prove that he or she has suffered an "actual injury" and lost money or property as the result of a business' alleged unfair practice.

Who here claims to have been injured in this case?................................Didn't think so

Well, that's called acceptance of the consumer's offer to purchase. The most significant legal issue IMHO is whether or not Amazon's undisputed mistake is grounds to set aside what would otherwise be a binding purchase contract. The practical issue is whether it makes any business sense for Amazon to go after any of its customers who declined to return the DVDs.

he is right... best buy might be stuck selling computer for maybe 200-300 less (normal computer promotions) but no way would they be required LEGALLY to sell for a penny..gosh youve been spewing a bunch of nonsesne recently

o and another thing..some of you probably didnt read this early THERE ARE DIFFERENT LEGAL RULES REGARDING B&M AND ONLINE! know somethin before saying somethin

and yes this might be handled on a state by state basis in the long end..if some sate explicitly prohibits amazon's behaviour

Could you explain why they would be stuck in one case and not in the other?

cause there is a distinction between a misprice on the sellers part which the buyer would assume to be a correct price and a "misprice" the buyer knows is an obvious mistake. if someone was selling xbox360 premium for 349.99 or even 300 that could be a misprice the store would HAVE to honor wheras an xbox360 premium for $99.99 would be an obvious mistake that the buyer knows the seller made. its somewhere in the law book i read earlier i sold the book and can't make a exact reference
-also the store itself might have a personal policy to honor ALL mistakes but thats not neccessary

ie..you guys should go shop at nordstroms because the customer is always right and no matter how much dvdtalkers screw them over they will take all the hit

as far as online mistakes go..they are held to a lesser standard of being honoroed..because a B&M store would only have to honor one misprice before changing the sign/price whereas an online shop doesnt face the same timeframe of doing things..it gets nitpicky

I can see the 'obvious mistake' affecting expectations: that is, if I go to the store with their mispriced ad saying this 1000$ computer is 10.00, they can and should say, Um, no, and I'd walk away. But once they sell it to me, that's agreeing to the price, right or wrong. Sure, I may have thought the price was wrong, but since they sold it to me, obviously it was right.
I have an issue with the 'obvious mistake' thing. What's obvious to some is not obvious to others...as evidenced by this thread. Especially when it comes to loss leaders, both at the store and the manufacturer level. IANAL, so if you can quote a legal reference that discusses the 'obvious mistake', I'd like to read it.
And yes the etailer can get hit more on one misprice than the B&M....but they've also got , as far as I know, the opportunity to run their business for a whole lot less overhead, so it seems like it would be a wash to me.
And again as far as I know, no retailer is 'stuck' selling anything--they can refuse to sell anything to anybody for virtually any reason other than that of protected classes.

But if they do generate the price, accept your offer to buy at that price, accept your payment, do not notify you of a higher charge or cancel the order as per their stated policy, and proceed to verify your order, accept your payment, and ship the item to you? What then?

In total agreement.

By the way, anyone get charged yet?

Interesting example. Wasn't Amazon running a promotion around that same period where they were selling a limited amount of 360's for $100?

I was injured. I could have gotten some of these titles cheaper at the time at other stores than via Amazon's "correct" pricing. Those opportunities no longer exist.

But moving the 10,000 copies of Blue Thunder hurt my lower back!

In most states, I don't think a store has to honor an obvious misprice (e.g. a DVD for $.01). Thought I learned that in law school, but I could be wrong. Contracts was not my specialty.

No clue. But if it was advertised as "SPECIAL DEAL: X-BOX 360 FOR $100", then they would be obligated to sell it at that price.

I don't think anyone's arguing they "have" to honor it.
But they did. What's being argued is that they can't honor it, then say, Whoops, never mind, changed our mind.

Yes, they had a very limited quantity of hot items drastically reduced for a very brief amount of time.

If amazon does decide to charge those that don't return the DVD's, then couldn't you just turn around and return them after the charge for a refund? If you are being charged on 02/04/07, then it seems like that would be the start of when you could return for refund. I mean, amazon is making up the rules as they go along, so theoretically, this could NOT work, but it also seems as though you could say, well I was charged this and I decided I don't want it. Of course, if you want to fight the charges, that is another thing all together. Me, I'm just waiting to see what happens, I'm not calling my credit card company.

I'm waiting to see what amazon does next. Way back when this first started someone mentioned that had amazon been nicer about it, then they would have felt bad and returned the DVD's, but because of the tone of the e-mails, it makes you a little more defiant. I think I would agree with that contention. People can try and "refute" my position all they want, but it is what I would actually do, what you would actually do is different and that is your position. You can be skeptical, but I know that had amazon sent a "nicer" e-mail then I would have returned the DVD's without question.

I'll go ahead and make other's arguments against that and say, "Why should amazon be nice, you ripped them off?" One, I don't see that I have ripped amazon off. I see it that they have charged, had five days to correct it and decided to ship it anyway. They knew about the glitch, problem, whatever you want to call it and decided to ship them anyway. Two, they should be nice because that is what a respectable, reputable company does and I have no problem saying that I expect the best out of amazon. If this were happening with other e-tailers (who will remain nameless) it would be par for the course. However, I believe that amazon could have sent out an e-mail that was apologetic in tone rather than accusatory.

Those are just my two cents.

Apparently some people do believe that stores are required to honor price mistakes.

Its funny how strong one's standpoint seems when they omit certain facts that support the opposite stance.

"As i see it, it was the other guys fault cause he got in the way of my fist"

So, does anyone know what is ACTUALLY happening with this? Has anyone gotten charged yet? Wading through these incessant posts spouting the same holier than thou attitudes is getting a little old. Would just like some actual info on the situation rather than some idiot on a soapbox posting his ramblings under multiple usernames.

No charges yet, I assume since the date has been changed to Feb 2nd

I made one order(Rescue Me 1/Rescue Me 2) and received both e-mails stating that they were going to charge my card if I don't return the items. I have yet to contact Amazon at all regarding this whole thing(I decided to take the wait and see approach). As of right now, my credit card has not been charged, nor are there and holds for this order.

Welcome to the Internet JJ! It's the home of incessant posts spouting the same holier than thou attitudes and idiots on a soapboxes posting their ramblings. I find it amusing, entertaining, and occasionally enlightening.