MacRumors Giveaways... Why are they only open to U.S. residents?

[djgamble]

I just assume they can't ship me these goods as a customer either... wouldn't wanna get convicted under 'international law'

Magically no other company/individual seems to have this issue though. As their reasoning is so specific, I'm guessing they offended some grunt from Qubec's customs by not having everything in French. Through confusion, MR accepted that it was 'too hard' to send stuff outside the US and Canada (excluding Qubec) and that's been their rule ever since. IMO they're using a flamethrower to cook a lettuce leaf and it's pretty silly. However, MR is run by an American (Arnold Kim... one dude) who is not interested in trying to open this up, so whatever. His blog, his call if that makes it simpler.

As a lawyer it frustrates me seeing such a stupid representation of how 'international law' works (calling 'international law' too complex is a cop-out rather than a sincere attempt to open this up to all readers IMO). IMO the crux is that Arnold Kim doesn't care enough about international readers to find a way forward. That's his call and his call to make. IMO he should own it instead of blaming 'international law' though...

 

[Sheza]

I just assume they can't ship me these goods as a customer either... wouldn't wanna get convicted under 'international law'

Magically no other company/individual seems to have this issue though. As their reasoning is so specific, I'm guessing they offended some grunt from Qubec's customs by not having everything in French. Through confusion, MR accepted that it was 'too hard' to send stuff outside the US and Canada (excluding Qubec) and that's been their rule ever since. IMO they're using a flamethrower to cook a lettuce leaf and it's pretty silly. However, MR is run by an American (Arnold Kim... one dude) who is not interested in trying to open this up, so whatever. His blog, his call if that makes it simpler.

As a lawyer it frustrates me seeing such a stupid representation of how 'international law' works (calling 'international law' too complex is a cop-out rather than a sincere attempt to open this up to all readers IMO). IMO the crux is that Arnold Kim doesn't care enough about international readers to find a way forward. That's his call and his call to make. IMO he should own it instead of blaming 'international law' though...

As a lawyer, I concur.

Successful clients ask me to give them a view on the strict risks and the likelihood of those risks materialising. They make smart, commercial decisions. This site errs on a side of caution that many other sites have acknowledged is just too far lol.

 

[mmomega]

One of you that lives outside of the U.S., ya'll can ship me something to Texas.
Just so you have the actual experience of doing what you are speculating about.

Then I'll ship it to another forum member in another country.

 

[grad]

One of you that lives outside of the U.S., ya'll can ship me something to Texas.
Just so you have the actual experience of doing what you are speculating about.

Then I'll ship it to another forum member in another country.

Sure, give me your email address and I will ship you my commercial app without coming up with 100 excuses.

 

[philip456]

Everytime I see the "US Residents .............." restriction I want to ditch MacRumours and go some other site.

It's so madning and feels disrespectful and insulting. It's horrible to be left out in this way. I hate it.

I'm so used to MacRumours that so far I don't up sticks and go to Macstories instead. Maybe one day I will. I hope not because I love the rest of MacRumours but this just gets up my nose big time.

 

[icanhazmac]

Everytime I see the "US Residents .............." restriction I want to ditch MacRumours and go some other site.

It's so madning and feels disrespectful and insulting. It's horrible to be left out in this way. I hate it.

I'm so used to MacRumours that so far I don't up sticks and go to Macstories instead. Maybe one day I will. I hope not because I love the rest of MacRumours but this just gets up my nose big time.

I guess it is one thing to be saddened or upset that you aren't eligible but maddening, disrespectful and insulting? Seems a bit dramatic.

The eligibility limitations have been explained, get past it or move on, simple as that.

 

[hlorsi]

Hello there!
I read this discussion to understand if I could consider participating in the current giveaway(iPad Air + WALTR PRO), and I could see that the spirits are a little heated.

Hello @arn @Hartley - I understand your complications. Here in Brazil, companies have problems with sweepstakes as well, and usually, they turn them into "cultural contests" to make it work. Please allow me to ask: what if I use one of these services that allow a person to have a "US address," such as MyVIPbox, where you could ship to it, which is totally within US territory, and I would handle the shipping from the service to my location? Would you think that could work?

Thanks anyway.

 

[icanhazmac]

Please allow me to ask: what if I use one of these services that allow a person to have a "US address," such as MyVIPbox, where you could ship to it, which is totally within US territory, and I would handle the shipping from the service to my location?

Interesting, thanks for bringing a possible solution to the conversation instead of just complaining over and over and over and over again. Curious to hear what MR has to say about this.

 

[ApfelKuchen]

Hello @arn @Hartley - I understand your complications. Here in Brazil, companies have problems with sweepstakes as well, and usually, they turn them into "cultural contests" to make it work. Please allow me to ask: what if I use one of these services that allow a person to have a "US address," such as MyVIPbox, where you could ship to it, which is totally within US territory, and I would handle the shipping from the service to my location? Would you think that could work?

Thanks anyway.

The simple answer is, the rules as posted don't say "a US address" the phrase is "US resident"

[emphasis added] Due to the complexities of international laws regarding giveaways, only U.S. residents who are 18 years or older and Canadian residents (excluding Quebec) who have reached the age of majority in their province or territory are eligible to enter.

Your suggestion may be a feasible evasion of the rules, but it's certainly not in the spirit or letter of the rules.

 

[hlorsi]

The simple answer is, the rules as posted don't say "a US address" the phrase is "US resident"


Your suggestion may be a feasible evasion of the rules, but it's certainly not in the spirit or letter of the rules.

I get it. I know: it clearly says “US resident”. I was hoping that by having an US address would, at least, avoid all the legalities and complications from international shipping and other countries’ customs.

Anyway, it’s not the end of the world. Definitively. It’s a giveaway.

Let’s see what the site owners say. If they chose to do so.

 

[ApfelKuchen]

I get it. I know: it clearly says “US resident”. I was hoping that by having an US address would, at least, avoid all the legalities and complications from international shipping and other countries’ customs.

Anyway, it’s not the end of the world. Definitively. It’s a giveaway.

Let’s see what the site owners say. If they chose to do so.

It would avoid the legalities and international shipping issues for the site owner. I'm not sure most of the prizes are worth the bother for the winner - paying for the delivery address, the packing and shipping, preparation of customs forms, duties (if any), etc. Seems to be more about the principle of winning, rather than the prize itself.

I'm consistently cynical about giveaways (well, it's not really a giveaway, because the site and "donor" are getting something in return - useful data, visitors, etc.). To me the odds of winning are rarely good enough to seem worth the bother of entry or the personal data I provide.

In this particular case, opening the giveaway to all global visitors will undoubtedly make the odds of winning even worse. There's little chance that proportionality will be taken into account (more participants = more prizes given).

And then there are the businesses that offer the prizes - not all of them have worldwide distribution, so they don't necessarily benefit by seeing the prize go to countries where it can't be purchased. Not only from the standpoint of the promotion at the web site, but any word-of-mouth that might be earned when the winner shows the prize to their friends.

 

[hlorsi]

It would avoid the legalities and international shipping issues for the site owner. I'm not sure most of the prizes are worth the bother for the winner - paying for the delivery address, the packing and shipping, preparation of customs forms, duties (if any), etc. Seems to be more about the principle of winning, rather than the prize itself.

I'm consistently cynical about giveaways (well, it's not really a giveaway, because the site and "donor" are getting something in return - useful data, visitors, etc.). To me the odds of winning are rarely good enough to seem worth the bother of entry or the personal data I provide.

In this particular case, opening the giveaway to all global visitors will undoubtedly make the odds of winning even worse. There's little chance that proportionality will be taken into account (more participants = more prizes given).

And then there are the businesses that offer the prizes - not all of them have worldwide distribution, so they don't necessarily benefit by seeing the prize go to countries where it can't be purchased. Not only from the standpoint of the promotion at the web site, but any word-of-mouth that might be earned when the winner shows the prize to their friends.

In that case, if MacRumors chose to accept people outside US to participate, it would be up to them to consider all the points you listed.

 

[djgamble]

It would avoid the legalities and international shipping issues for the site owner. I'm not sure most of the prizes are worth the bother for the winner...

I'm consistently cynical about giveaways (well, it's not really a giveaway, because the site and "donor" are getting something in return - useful data, visitors, etc.). To me the odds of winning are rarely good enough to seem worth the bother of entry or the personal data I provide...

1. If I buy something from overseas, I still have to pay the shipping (usually only ~$10 including tracking for tech gear). All of the gadgets I've seen on offer have been worth more than $100 and small enough that you'd only pay ~$10 worth of shipping. Frankly - international buyers know way more about shipping costs than you do and woulda already factored it into the value of the goods.
2. IMO part of the issue is that there is no 'international law' saying 'you cannot send people gifts in another country'. It's a matter of fact (i.e. lazy 'law') and international readers feel like 3rd class readers because they're being excluded from part of the fun of reading MR.
3. MR used to include non-US readers. In fact, I previously won a copy of Blue Label back in the day (still got it). How it worked was that I received a promo code, went to Blue Label's website and then I ordered the goods. A 100% discount was applied to the value of the item and (after I'd paid the shipping), they sent it over as a 'commercial gift/sample'. It worked seamlessly.

 

[TiggrToo]

2. IMO part of the issue is that there is no 'international law' saying 'you cannot send people gifts in another country'. It's a matter of fact (i.e. lazy 'law') and international readers feel like 3rd class readers because they're being excluded from part of the fun of reading MR.

You’re right, there isn’t an international law prohibiting these.

There are however a myriad of national laws that make giveaways to foreign residents difficult for companies in other nations. It’s up to the company in question as to if they want to tackle those issues or not. MR has decided it’s not worth the hassle - the few folk here complaining to the contrary.

International users should first be looking at their own governments and complain to them.

For example MR would be required to file sweepstake rules with a French bailiff to make them legal in France.

Mexican giveaways require a permit from the Federal Consumer Protection Agency.

Spain just flat out prohibits international giveaways.

In Germany MR would be required to show compliance with data protection laws.

Italy requires local officials pick the winners.

And the list goes on.

Sure MR could choose to ignore these laws. They could also hire international sweepstake companies. But these options carry risk and cost.

 

[burgman]

You’re right, there isn’t an international law prohibiting these.

There are however a myriad of national laws that make giveaways to foreign residents difficult for companies in other nations. It’s up to the company in question as to if they want to tackle those issues or not. MR has decided it’s not worth the hassle - the few folk here complaining to the contrary.

International users should first be looking at their own governments and complain to them.

For example MR would be required to file sweepstake rules with a French bailiff to make them legal in France.

Mexican giveaways require a permit from the Federal Consumer Protection Agency.

Spain just flat out prohibits international giveaways.

In Germany MR would be required to show compliance with data protection laws.

Italy requires local officials pick the winners.

And the list goes on.

Sure MR could choose to ignore these laws. They could also hire international sweepstake companies. But these options carry risk and cost.

17 pages later an adult answer vs pages of MacRumors hates and disrespects other countries. I imagine if the total cost of all the giveaways were added up it won’t equal the lawyer and business fees to setup the giveaways for just one country, Such pettiness from some on MR

 

[zombierunner]

giftcard for international winners instead of shipping it?

 

[Apple_Robert]

giftcard for international winners instead of shipping it?

After 6 years, you don't think all angles have been called for by those who can't participate? The companies offering prizes are doing so as a matter of publicity and tech goodwill. If MR gets involved even with changing to gift cards, that would still require overcoming International laws and regulations, not to mention more paper administration and storage with possible retrieval later on. And if the paperwork wasn't right, that might cost MR money.

MR doesn't want the hassle and I don't blame them. It isn't worth it to them.

Time for the international community members to let this particular topic die unless MR makes an announcement stipulating otherwise.

 

[tobefirst ⚽️]

Time for the international community members to let this particular topic die unless MR makes an announcement stipulating otherwise.

What a strange take. Shouldn't it be the other way around: users are able to voice their opinions until MR makes an announcement stipulating otherwise?

I mean, there's upside for those users posting here: perhaps, just maybe, with the smallest hope, if they complain loud enough, long enough, and often enough, by enough people, they could theoretically effect change. However, what is the upside to you telling them to stop? Couldn't you just avoid the thread instead?

 

[Apple_Robert]

What a strange take. Shouldn't it be the other way around: users are able to voice their opinions until MR makes an announcement stipulating otherwise?

I mean, there's upside for those users posting here: perhaps, just maybe, with the smallest hope, if they complain loud enough, long enough, and often enough, by enough people, they could theoretically effect change. However, what is the upside to you telling them to stop? Couldn't you just avoid the thread instead?

My take wasn't strange. I voiced an opinion you didn't agree with and that is your right. I didn't tell anyone they can't continue posting an opinion. If that is what you got from my post then you need to read it again. If you don't like my post and have a problem with me voicing an opinion as others have done for 6 years on both sides of the aisle, put me on ignore.

 

[tobefirst ⚽️]

My take wasn't strange. I voiced an opinion you didn't agree with and that is your right. I didn't tell anyone they can't continue posting an opinion. If that is what you got from my post then you need to read it again. If you don't like my post and have a problem with me voicing an opinion as others have done for 6 years on both sides of the aisle, put me on ignore.

"Time for the international community members to let this particular topic die unless MR makes an announcement stipulating otherwise" is a direction, not an opinion. You very much ARE telling people to stop posting about it. Perhaps I'm not the one who needs to reread what you wrote.

 

[Apple_Robert]

"Time for the international community members to let this particular topic die unless MR makes an announcement stipulating otherwise" is a direction, not an opinion. You very much ARE telling people to stop posting about it. Perhaps I'm not the one who needs to reread what you wrote.

I was voicing an opinion, Tobe. I am not going to argue with you. I know what I meant and I know what I wrote. What I meant is an opinion and what I wrote is an option.

In my opinion, those complaining about not being eligible should stop complaining. That is the same opinion I wrote earlier. I am done debating my post with you.

 

[wwinter86]

International giveaways please

 

[NightFox]

You’re right, there isn’t an international law prohibiting these.

There are however a myriad of national laws that make giveaways to foreign residents difficult for companies in other nations. It’s up to the company in question as to if they want to tackle those issues or not. MR has decided it’s not worth the hassle - the few folk here complaining to the contrary.

International users should first be looking at their own governments and complain to them.

For example MR would be required to file sweepstake rules with a French bailiff to make them legal in France.

Mexican giveaways require a permit from the Federal Consumer Protection Agency.

Spain just flat out prohibits international giveaways.

In Germany MR would be required to show compliance with data protection laws.

Italy requires local officials pick the winners.

And the list goes on.

Sure MR could choose to ignore these laws. They could also hire international sweepstake companies. But these options carry risk and cost.

I wish this response could be pinned, highlighted in red, or mandatory reading before anyone was allowed to post on this thread. I'm guessing there'd still be plenty of opinions posted, but at least they'd hopefully be informed ones.

Maybe one of the people who strongly feel that limiting its competitions is a lazy cop-out by MR could take the list above as a starting point, add every other country in the world, research the applicable restrictions in those countries and post the results back here, just to show how 'easy' it is.

 

[Phone Junky]

These giveaways are for tech-related products, not oxygen, vital organs, or other life necessities. Not eligible, so what? Move along. The outrage on this boggles my mind. Nobody is entitled for any of this stuff.

 

[mavis]

These giveaways are for tech-related products, not oxygen, vital organs, or other life necessities. Not eligible, so what? Move along. The outrage on this boggles my mind. Nobody is entitled for any of this stuff.

Exactly. Neither are Americans, yet somehow they're entitled.