#450 Enviales esto
Had to gather some information.
Normally, an online retailer will protect itself by claiming an exclusion to contract if the pricing is in error. There is no such language here.
There is some more information here: http://www.wilmerhale.com/pages/publicationsandNewsDetail.aspx?NewsPubId=91329
In some cases they are bound, but a great deal of the law tends to indicate that action (a refund) must be issued in a reasonable amount of time from the point the error was found. That is, an auto-reply constitutes a contract, and can only be voided in cases where it was an obvious mistake. If GamersGate had taken action within 24 hours to refund, rather than stating it would simply be a month to get the keys and offering refunds if that was not OK, then they would have more of a legal leg to stand on.
As it is, they acknowledged that although the pricing was lower than it had been supposed to be, they also stated that they were still honoring the deal until this point.
That is:
They issued a sale.
They realized the sale was in error.
They had stated an intention to honor the sale after knowing the sale was in error, just that it would take more time.
Several days later, they back out of the sale.
The issue is point 3 leading to 4. They functionally agreed to the completion of the contract at that point, and here is where legal action against them would target.
They validated their auto-reply similar to an agreement from a representative by both not issuing an immediate (within 24 hours) refund, and by stating that the deal would simply take longer to get the keys. They then reneged on that agreement after validation.
European law allows for the customer voiding the contract in such a circumstance, but generally not the seller unless the seller is a private entity (which GamersGate is not).
