Ethical Question?

[nimoh]

Just for the sake of discussion, and to play devil's advocate, let's take a minute and look at the practical effect of this action.

Other than the fact that OP is returning a different unit that he purchased, what is the harm suffered by the big box retailer? I'm sure there are some in terms of opportunity cost, restocking, labor, inventory control, etc. But the retailer gets an unused, unopened, product that they can (I'm assuming) put back on the shelf. At worse, it goes into the "returns" pile and is dealt with along with opened returns, right?

Now, compare that to a user purchasing a product from the same retailer, using it, and returning it. Totally within the return policy, but the user sends back an opened, used product that definitely cannot be restocked and sold as new. Retailer reports such as the number of big screen TV sales/returns immediately before/after the Superbowl surely suggests this happens intentionally and with some frequency. And it's probably not just $2000 big ticket items. Some people fully intend to return, some go in with the default position to return unless they are blown away with the product, etc. Is this behavior viewed with the same revulsion? Based on net effect, I would think it should be even more frowned upon. But shops with generous return policies encourage "try before you buy" and some even bank on people who want to return but never get around to doing so.

All this to say that interestingly, the "harm" here seems to be fairly low. The end result is that the user gets what he originally wanted from the dive shop, and the big box retailer gets a new, functional, unopened unit back. A lot of people regularly do worse, with worse intentions, and we don't bat an eyelash at it. Not to say this makes it right, but it is interesting for us all to consider how our own moral compass is calibrated...

it seems to me that you are arguing that since other people do things that are more immoral, then this action must be moral.

 

[Mike]

Not to say this makes it right, but it is interesting for us all to consider how our own moral compass is calibrated...

The declination on many, many people's moral compass seems to vary based purely on the likelihood of getting caught in whatever the situation in question is. There also seems to be a severe magnetic field effect based on a combination of people's ability to apply rationalization, play the victim and feeling of entitlement.

 

[Scubadawg]

Big Box Store Rental Program.....

 

[Mike]

Big Box Store Rental Program.....

Stealth rental program. So stealthy even the big box store doesn't know they are running one.

 

[Gombessa]

Stealth rental program. So stealthy even the big box store doesn't know they are running one.

I don't think you're giving them nearly enough nearly enough credit in their domain of expertise. Best Buy HAD a restocking fee until a few years ago (so did Apple). They're extremely aware of how people use (and abuse) their return policies, and how small adjustments to the policy (restocking fee, intentional understaffing to cause longer return lines/waits, interrogation of consumers for returns, offering store credit only, requiring physical receipts, changing the number of days certain products can be returned) affect that. But they make decisions based on the bottom line, and for many stores, the public perception and convenience of "I can always return it anytime" actually brings more people in, who buy more and keep more product, outweighing the x% that they know will strain or abuse the system.

it seems to me that you are arguing that since other people do things that are more immoral, then this action must be moral.

Nah, I don't see it as so black and white. But I do wonder at what point people who have such firmly stated moral convictions may (unknowingly perhaps) flip around to adopt the "just buy it and return it" mantra based on slightly different (even worse) fact patterns. I do think Mike is really on the right track re. ability to not get caught. OP kind of outed himself, and drew a very public lynch mob to his front door, he "got caught" before even doing it. If we were just driving home from work one day and silently thought about partaking in the "big box rental program" for some minor product, I wonder if any would quietly scoot the soapbox under the bed and "stick it to the man" in a way arguably worse than what OP was thinking.

 

[nimoh]

I think we went a little off topic here

I don't think the question is about whether or not the big box store has a way of catching you, but rather assuming that the big box store is unable to catch you, is it ethical to do it.

 

[Searcaigh]

So let's assume that the OP does return the LDS camera to Big Box and it is sold to customer X

Should the unit malfunction customer X returns it to Big Box and there are some checks done that identify the unit as non-Big Box and they tell customer X to go to hell as it was not purchased from them, even though he may have a receipt, what now? Contact Go Pro direct? They will confirm the camera was sold to the LDS and not to Big Box

Put your self in Customer X's position, would you like to have this dilemma?

 

[nimoh]

So let's assume that the OP does return the LDS camera to Big Box and it is sold to customer X

Should the unit malfunction customer X returns it to Big Box and there are some checks done that identify the unit as non-Big Box and they tell customer X to go to hell as it was not purchased from them, even though he may have a receipt, what now? Contact Go Pro direct? They will confirm the camera was sold to the LDS and not to Big Box

Put your self in Customer X's position, would you like to have this dilemma?

I think that is a good point, although I think that purchasing a camera for the sole purpose of using it on a trip and then returning it, and purchasing the same camera from a another store is dishonest irrespective of the damage that can potentially be done.

However, I would also argue that purchasing a camera, using it on a trip, and finding that it doesn't perform as well as you thought it would, and subsequently returning it, is just fine provided that you aren't lying to get around certain conditions of the store's return policy.

 

[Mike]

So let's assume that the OP does return the LDS camera to Big Box and it is sold to customer X

Should the unit malfunction customer X returns it to Big Box and there are some checks done that identify the unit as non-Big Box and they tell customer X to go to hell as it was not purchased from them, even though he may have a receipt, what now? Contact Go Pro direct? They will confirm the camera was sold to the LDS and not to Big Box

Put your self in Customer X's position, would you like to have this dilemma?

This scenario and many others that can be come up with are irrelevant. They all are based on trying to make the unethical person realize what they are doing is wrong based on the hope of they will wake up if you present to them there is concrete harm to someone else.

An ethical person doesn't need these arguments presented to them, their ethics don't change based on a sliding scale of 'harm' to someone else. You are either ethical or you are not. You do what you do based on what you believe, not based on the chances a hidden camera might be watching you or a cashier hands you too much change you hand it back to them and tell them their mistake, you don't keep it based on -oh it's McDonalds, they are a rich multi-billion dollar corporation they won't miss it, or they should train their employees better...

 

[Gombessa]

So let's assume that the OP does return the LDS camera to Big Box and it is sold to customer X

Should the unit malfunction customer X returns it to Big Box and there are some checks done that identify the unit as non-Big Box and they tell customer X to go to hell as it was not purchased from them, even though he may have a receipt, what now? Contact Go Pro direct? They will confirm the camera was sold to the LDS and not to Big Box

Put your self in Customer X's position, would you like to have this dilemma?

That's assuming quite a lot. I don't mean to be dismissive of an honestly considered question, but IME neither the retailer nor the manufacturer have the time/effort to go to such extraordinary lengths to pin down the original provenance of an item. A consumer with a valid receipt and registration will be treated by both as a valid consumer. Besides, 1) if you're going to throw in the wrench of a detailed check, the best time to do that is at the time of return, before putting potentially faulty product back on the shelves, and 2) corporate return policies take into account the chain of custody; once they accept the return they accept the possibility of shrinkage/damage from insiders, and maybe an unscrupulous employee with access replaced the units before putting it back on the shelf; that's why some places have manager approval for returns when the employee verifies the contents of the package.