If that was a male that did that. He wouldn't have been released. Also the "pending sentencing" sounds very lenient for a crime that was worth roughly half a million dollars.

talk about a double standard.

Too bad she might go to jail though. I wonder if this would work for other sites, how long does Newegg give you to cancel an order?

How can QVC get mad, it was a malfunction at there end. I hate that when a politician or big company finds a loophole in a law or system they are allowed to freely expliot it, but when an average consumer trys to do the same thing they are crusified for it.

I think there will be a good amount of people be tempted to exploit the glitch if they know about it. After all, it is the programmers' (or the company's) fault for not finding about the glitch, or having it in the first place. For statistical, purposes they should also have keep track the frequency of people canceling orders.

It appears that this lady has been way to greedy and didn't repackage her items hahaha. However, the ability to get "free items" and sell them back anonymously tempted this crime.

just my thoughts. Who knows what I'll do if i'm given the same situation =(

"QVC was tipped off by two people who bought the goods from Ebay, who expressed concerns when they noticed all the new items with QVC packaging selling at less than the home shopping site advertised them."

Why can't people be happy winning an item less than what it's worth without saying anything?

So much for honesty? Be it a glitch or not, she stole and is nothing more than a thief. She didn't use violence, but she broke the law. I'm surprised at the way many people are looking at her as a victim in this. A glitch.......that's like saying if the sensors at best buy don't work between 4 and 5pm, then you have a right to steal everything you can get your hands on. Come on, stealing to survive is one thing....stealing to the toon of almost a half a million dollars is something else.

Here this women is making free money and she was too greedy to repackage the items before selling them on Ebay.

As for why someone would report the ebay items to QVC? It's literally a qausi-religion. There are millions of people out there that do nothing but watch QVC for hours on end. They eat, sleep, and deficate QVC. I wouldn't be surprised to find out that QVC was overlaying subliminal messages on their telecasts.

Net/net of the story: Lady got greedy and got caught.

...they were raised witha sense of right and wrong. Your "don't snitch" culture doesn't belong in this country, go live with Cameron Giles in some other cuntry.

How the hell is it this woman's fault that QVC sent her this stuff and never charged her for it? You better believe if I can get someone to send me stuff without charging me for it I would. Why does the company that gave away the merchandise bear no accountability in this?

Ok...I'm SO not the person to be saying this, but has anyone ever considered the moral implications of what's being said here? (and no, I'm not holding a bible or other religious paraphernalia in hand)

If I read that article right, the woman was effectively caught STEALING. She acquired product without paying for it. Period. What she did with it afterwards is not relevant.

Oh yeah, it's the computer programmer's fault for not catching the 'loophole'. That's like saying it's the Supermarket's fault for not having everyone strip-searched before walking out the door in case someone might have sampled a berry from the produce aisle to see if it was ripe.

It's that form of logic that also says it's OUR fault the WTC was destroyed because WE didn't spot the terrorists in time..

Come on, people.. The woman was a thief and I hope she gets thrown in a dark cage for a long time.

"Why can't people be happy winning an item less than what it's worth without saying anything?"

I'm sure lots and lots of people WERE happy. However, I'm sure a lot of them put 2 and 2 together, and someone was bound to act on their conscience eventually and let QVC know they were being stolen from.

That's right, I said STOLEN. Let's envision another "loophole." Say you notice that a QVC truck stops next to your house every day. Say you also notice that it's totally unlocked, and the driver is gone for 15 minutes at a time. You've just found a loophole where you can obtain QVC products without paying for them. Does that make them any more yours? Just because something's easy to take doesn't mean it's right to take it.

You guys are idiots. She knew she was stealing; you can't pretend otherwise simply because it was a glitch. If a store's doors remain unlocked at night, the store is surely to blame for the oversight, but the person who walks in at 3 am and takes stuff is still a thief under every applicable law.

If I walk by your car and see the door unlocked and the key in the ignition can I take your car and sell it?

After all, it is your fault for not taking your keys, locking the door, and setting the alarm. I can't help it that I was tempted.

Is that what all of you are saying?

"Hey honey... we got a better deal than we should have on some cheap QVC crap made in China. We better report this to the authorities!"

Pathetic.

don't people know that stealing breaks down society? that this attitude that a company or person not protecting themselves enough justifies stealing from them is the beginning of the end of the world as we know it?
seriously sharing songs and other media illegally is rampant and the attitude is why not. this does not bode well. there will always be people who steal but it is not possible for it to be socially acceptable and still have society. wise up folks.

She owned up to what she did. That was the right thing to do and I applaud her for it.

Your comments paint a sad picture. "How can QVC get mad", "It's the programmers fault...Who knows what I'll do if...", "Why can pople be happy...without saying anything".

What's with you people? Grow up already and pull your a** out of your head. Just becuase you "CAN" doesn't maen you "SHOULD". A store that does not have cameras SHOULD be robbed more than a store that does because it tempts you to steal and it's the STORE's fault that they were robbed? Well who can blame the robber, after all it was so easy becuase there were no guards or dogs or cameras so why not steal. The store was just begging to be ripped off.

An apple falls off the cart and rolls to your feet. Hahah free apple, it's not on your cart so it's not stealing.

Time to buck up and take responsibility for your actions. She purposly stole $400,000 of goods. Period. Why try to spin this story?

As for Crispy, please explain why you are upset that someone contacted QVC about a suspected crime?

You guys are funny. QVC should have had better oversite of what's going out, but she stole the items for profit. I am going to agree on the double standard, because if it was a guy...he would be in jail pending trial.

She exploited a glitch -- you can't compare it to "walking into a closed store that the manager forgot to lock the doors" or "an unlocked car with keys in the ignition". It's not even close to those situations. They delivered the items to her. Their software was faulty.

Should she not get into any to trouble? Of course not. She knew what she was doing, and got sloppy. Is the store at fault as well? Yup. Would a store, bank, utility company or gov't agency steal extra money from each and every one of you if they could get away with it? IN A HEARTBEAT.

That's the same as saying that because a store has a bad lock on their door, that people SHOULD steal from them. This is unacceptable. On the other hand, stores should have good locks and QVC should fix their problem. Either way, she should be punished to the full extent of the law.

How can that be stealing?
She order items...she cancelled them.
She has no more financial responsibility to
paying the item.
QVC should not have mail out the item.
QVC made mistake, they mail it out, they are sending their inventory to her.
If I put a item in your house, you sell it...
are you stealing from me?

Getting items because a delay in the order cancellation doesn't get to shipping before the item ships is excusable once. After that, she knowingly took advantage of this delay, therefore it's theft.

Ah... lighten up, and give her an "A" for creativity.

To all the people that say "its stealing just like if a store was unlocked overnight and you walked in" a: when was the last time you came across a store that was unlocked at night. and b: she 'canceled her order' she told them not to charge her or send it, allbeit knowing they would still send it, but not charge her. how the hell is that stealing?

It is stealing because she continued to do it. She knew there was a glitch in the system and willfully continued to exploit it. 1 or 2 items from one order that you ended up getting for free because of this error. okay fine. 1800 items is stealing.

And yes if you put something in my house and I immediately sell it, it can be considered stolen because you are no longer the owner of it. You can leave something at my house without it being mine. Ever leave a jacket at a friends house or leave a game or movie for them to play or watch? I guess its theirs now and they can sell it according to your "theory".

QVC should have found such a glitch before but irregardless this woman stole from them.

Actually we did have warning of the 9/11 plot, but it was ignored by the FBI. That would constitute our fault. This was not the first time the WTC was attacked. The first attempt was trying to get it to implode on itself in 1993. But it didn't work because there weren't enough explosives to take the building down.

Let me tell you a story...

A man invents the next big thing; you know the one that nobody can live without. In forty years this man is a multibillionaire and another company shows up selling a similar product. Now this company is filthy rich so another group selling a similar product shouldn't faze this man, but it does. Not out of love for his product or his company he decides to hire a flock of lawyers and lobbyists to crush his competition. He uses every loophole in the system, every patent law and runs our new friend out of business. Later he finds out that is product eventually kills people. Does he morally decide to shut the company down, to use his billions to compensate the victims? No, he spends this more of his money on a gaggle of lobbyists and lawyers to change the law or find the loophole to avoid the lawsuits.

My point is these people create these systems to make sure they maintain control and wouldn't hesitate to rip you off, Not that I condone what she did, it's no less than what they would do to you, the consumer.

QVC is half to blame..I never heard of any company sending out products without a charge confirmation of some sort. Paying giving back the money and items is more than adequate.

It was fraud. Please get your felonies correct.

Stealing or theft is illegally taking without that person's freely given consent. Fraud is a deception for personal gain.

if I buy something from a store and the clerk gives me ten cents extra in change than I am supposed to get and I realize and choose to keep it then that is stealing. I am taking/keeping something that is not mine.
however the law classifies it is irrelevant. if you owned the store you would want to keep that ten cents even though it is only ten cents. truth is someone is going to have to pay for that ten cents and it will be other consumers.
Nothing is free someone will be paying the price. she stole half a million dollars knowing full well that is was stealing. She was to blame for her actions not those she stole from. sure you could criticize for the glitch but it was her choice to exploit it.
for those who think my ten cent example is extreme it is not. stealing is stealing no matter the amount. stop thinking of it in terms of amount the action is the same.

I agree it was not right what she do especiely repeatedly, but if i order something and then cancel order and its still delivery to me and without bill i gues i will not complaint about it, but i will also not try abuse it.

I completely agree with SilverDraco

"I hate that when a politician or big company finds a loophole in a law or system they are allowed to freely exploit it, but when an average consumer tries to do the same thing they are crucified for it." - quote

Those of you who say she is stealing must be the CEO's e.t.c (the people making the big money) in these companies who pay lawyers to accountants to find loopholes. You want to make sure only you can do this. Or a corrupt lawyer (then again you can say all lawyers are corrupt, since the majority are in it for the money not to help others).

What she is doing is quite similar to all those millionaires who LEGALLY evade tax by paying smart accountants who advise them on how they can pay less tax.

"Those of you who say she is stealing must be CEO's e.t.c (the people making the big money)"

No, we're not. We're just not theives like you. I'm as financially strapped as the next guy, but had the whole 'order/cancel/recieve product' thing happened to me, I would NOT have abused it. In fact, I would have called QVC up and told them what happened. Just because you would have stolen doesn't mean everyone thinks like you.

Oh, and by the way, your logic that since big companies/politicians 'steal' from the little guy then you can steal from them doesn't carry a grain of salt. Bad behavior is NOT justification for bad behavior.

Good job people! It's amazing how many think it was ok for her to do what she did. I'm sure the first time it happened was an accident but instead of returning or paying for the item she took advantage of the problem, over, over, and over again. It's not like she clicked ONCE and $400K item showed up at her door!

Others faults do not relieve us of our obligations.

"Bad behavior is NOT justification for bad behavior."
Bad behavior not being justification for bad behavior only applies in cases where the behavior is not socially accepted (e.g. I kill your mom you kill mine). On the other it is socially accepted for someone to pay less tax than they would normally through use of loopholes in the system.

A prominent example of Bad behavior being justification for bad behavior is the Kyoto Protocol. Your country (I automatically assume you live in the US due to my biased views, I could be wrong but I don't care) is not ratifying the Kyoto protocol because it doesn't agree with countries like China classified as developing not having to adhere to the same guidelines as the US which is classified as developed. Bad behavior in developing countries is used as justification for bad behavior by the US. The truth of the matter is that the US will be less "competitive" in the world stage (economically) if it ratifies the protocol and that is the reason the US is not ratifying the protocol.
This is the world we live in face reality and stop living in your fantasy world. There is more than enough food produced to feed the entire population of the world yet a significant percentage of the worlds population is in poverty. The world we live in is ruled by greed and selfishness, deal with it.

It is a world full of competition notice the "competitive" above and as such one needs to do everything they can to look out for themselves. Those who don't see that live in a illusion and either don't do well in society as in they will never become a millionaire or lie to themselves repeatedly so they don't have to see themselves for what they really are. PEOPLE WHO ARE BAD NEVER SEE THEMSELVES AS BEING BAD. Instead of accusing others of being immoral you should look more closely at yourself.

"I'm as financially strapped as the next guy, but had the whole 'order/cancel/recieve product' thing happened to me, I would NOT have abused it."
From my assessment of this reply and your other replies you are either a good person living in a illusion or someone who repeatedly lies to themselves and others. If you are the latter, you are not very far from a fundamentalist. Which would classify you as not that far from those suicide bombers, e.g. the people who took down the twin towers in the US.

"Just because you would have stolen doesn't mean everyone thinks like you." I never said everyone thinks like me, I just gave my opinion and that was what she did was not wrong, it was bad behavior but not wrong. On the other hand if rather than exploiting a loophole she instead had actively tried to hack QVC I would have an entirely different view.

"Oh, and by the way, your logic that since big companies/politicians 'steal' from the little guy" I never mentioned that they steal from the little guy. They are simply not contributing fully in a financial respect to the government as a whole. They probably contribute financially to individual political parties who agree with their views though. Although even then it would most likely be significantly less than what they would have contributed financially to the government without resorting to various loop holes. I wouldn't consider that stealing. I wouldn't consider the government the little people either but rather the whole country.

You totally missed my point about bad behavior justification. There is no justification for bad behavior. If you see someone doing something 'bad' (not what you'd consider immoral) and say "If he can do it why can't I?", then you're just making things even worse for everyone.

Here's a good example along the lines of 'bad' but not 'immoral'. Traffic laws. Say you see someone drive right on through a 4 way stop, ignoring all the other cars that should have gone first. You see that and say, "If he doesn't have to stop then why should I?" Well, you should stop because it gets everyone where they're going faster. Sure, YOU would get there faster if you ignored the traffic laws, but others would be delayed. Is that OK with you? According to your comments, you're just looking out for #1 and that makes it ok. Well guess what. If everyone thought and acted like you then nobody would stop at the intersection and traffic would be congested senselessly.

I could give many more examples. Oh, and when I say YOU I mean you helms. Your response pretty much showed what kind of character you have.

In this QVC case, the woman was taking steps to aquire very valuable items that she did not own or pay for, knowingly, and selling them for pure profit. You think that's ok. Most people consider that theft. Those that don't consider it theft are the reason insurance rates are higher and people are uneasy about leaving their doors unlocked.

Anyway, your lenghty post gave me plenty to go on and on about but why bother. I think you'd fall under the category of 'deaf ears'.

Most of the analogies above seem to be tragically flawed - making use of the loophole is not the same as theft, else tax lawyers, accountants and politicians would be out of work. In relation to the case above I firmly believe that responsibility should reside with the company. Admittedly, sometimes software ‘breaks’ and systems can fail – but for the company itself not to be aware of $400,000 worth of items being shipped off without payment is gross negligence.

I also agree with the points raised by helms.

Like someone said..what she did was fraud not stealing. On top of that QVC is half to blame b/c of software. That is how it is in the programming world..if there is a glitch the developer is responsible for the issue not the consumer. If QVC bought there system, they are well in their right to recoup losses from the developer. If it is in-house then it falls on them.

Um, CJ. To your comment that what she did was fraud, not stealing. Fraud is illegal too. I checked.

I'm no saint, but come one guys. She exploited the glitch to the tune of $412,000. I admit it, once Amazon sent me two copies of a book I ordered. I gave the extra copy to a friend. I don't think Amazon would ever come after me for one book. I certainly wasn't criminal enough to exploit my newly discovered loophole to get $412,000 worth. Seriously, once is perfectly excusable. The glitch is their problem, not mine. If they wanted the extra copy back, they would send me a prepaid envelope and I'd send it back.

Intentionally using that glitch to get merchandise without paying for it is theft. That's like shaking a soda machine to get free sodas. You're stealing that soda.

To Helms and all the crackpots who want to say that big business is evil and uses loopholes so we should to, you need to get over yourselves. The top 1% of earners in this country pay 36% of the taxes. The top 5% pay 50% of the taxes. Go ahead and say they are crooks and they get out of paying taxes. the fact is they pay more taxes than you could possible imagine. Legal loopholes are one thing, exploiting a computer glitch for personal gain is completely different.

"To Helms and all the crackpots who want to say that big business is evil and uses loopholes so we should to, you need to get over yourselves."

I have said enough, there will always be a MAJORITY who take things at face value. After all its easy to accept a beautiful mask as reality.

random useless links:
http://me-letmebme.blogspot.com/2007/08/face-value.html
http://www.business.uiuc.edu/publications/News_Item.aspx?ID=245

I firmly beleive that if comppany screws up and gives upu product for for little or nothing its not on you to do anything about it. But to expliot it over and over is crime to me.

As for the tax thing. Yexs the top 5% pay 50% of the taxs, but they also have 90% of the money. You seem to leave out that part. It not total amoun they pay it the amount of thier money they are paying out. And really they can afford to 25% of in taxes alot more then a middle class people. I spent 1 year of my life running my own business and the year i paid tax as if i made 20K and I brought home over 100K. The tax loop hole are just too big. And i left the business because too many of my contracts was to be supporting the war and I didnt feel that was something I wanted to do.

Stop justifying someone who's stealing by saying it's OK because they can. She agreed to payment when she clicked the buy button. Just because your word is worthless doesn't mean you're not liable for the promise you made.

I don't think this qualifies as stealing. Technically she DID cancel the order. It's not her fault that QVC still sent the items to her. Once she cancels the order the ball is in QVC's court not to charge the customer, and to halt the shipment.

Now I agree that it was immoral of her to take advantage of this loophole but it is not stealing.

She did not hack QVC's system or anything. She did everything that everyone else shopping at QVC is allowed to do "Place an Order" and "Cancel an Order". It's QVC's own fault for not having better software and not having a more robust order processing to catch orders that aren't suppose to go out.

If amazon.com had a price mistake and was selling something for $0.00 and you order it, is it stealing? No, you're just taking advantage of a mistake by the seller. If you order 10 of it is it stealing? No, you're just taking an even bigger advantage of the seller. The glitch is on their end. It's their responsiblity to catch it and fix it. If they can't then someone from their IT department should be fired.

If the person had done it once and then notified the store i wonder what would have happened. Still, that's a whole other kettle of fish.
As it is, the lady stole and kept on stealing so it became quite premeditated and calculated. i don't think one could accidently steal 1000 times in a row, do you?

It is stealing because she intentionally took their product without paying for it. This was not an accident. She did it over and over again, getting goods without paying for them.

Just to give you the official definition of fraud which is what she is charged with:

a misrepresentation or concealment with reference to some fact material to a transaction that is made with knowledge of its falsity or in reckless disregard of its truth or falsity and with the intent to deceive another and that is reasonably relied on by the other who is injured thereby

I know it's a little wordy with all the legalese, but her acts follow the definition. She misrepresented herself as intending to purchase the item, she then deceived them by canceling the order while still collecting the goods. She knew she was committing a crime, and she knows she's guilty.

if something was worth more and listed as free then you should notify amazon of the mistake. there is a difference between something being wrong and wanting to justify your actions. just because you would do it does not mean that it is ok. instead of admitting to it being stealing people blurt out it isn't stealing. well hello yes it is. you are taking away someone's money.
"don't put a stumbling block in front of the blind." means they aren't aware of it and it is going to hurt them they are blind to the fact they are being ripped off.
also "do unto others as you would want done unto you." hello you want someone to tell you if you had a pricing error or a computer glitch.
and for those who think these sayings are religious nonsense try to realize they are the basis for law in this country (U.S.) and for societies in general. Societies, where everyone only looks out for themselves and they cheat and steal all the time, cannot stand.

"Societies, where everyone only looks out for themselves and they cheat and steal all the time, cannot stand."

Sure they can, look at Russia and China. You could argue the poor (whom appear to be a significant percentage) in Russia don't only look out for themselves but thats why they are at the bottom = poor.

http://the88s.blogsome.com/2007/01/10/suffer-the-little-brats/
read comment 11 by davesgonechina (an example of everyone looking out for themselves)

The people at the top in the US also only look out for themselves. Wow you argue they donate huge sums to charity, they only do that to make themselves look good. In reality they know exactly what they are doing and that is not being generous, by donating to charity it probably makes the general public feel good about the company they head and as such are more willing to trust their company.

Lets examine MacDonald's before super size me came out they went to court against 2 people because they were handing out leaflets about how MacDonald's was bad. As the court case proceeded MacDonald's was getting anxious and offered to settle out of court. Anyway the defendants didn't settle and ultimately won the court case but that is not the point. The point is that those at the top will do anything to maintain their position at the top.

Too many people take whats happening in the world at face value and don't ask if that is really what is going on. Yes continue calling me a crackpot.

I should really stop posting, its just a waste of my time. Sheep will always be sheep. Oh by the way if World War 3 (or some other man made catastrophe) really breaks out I hope you all think back and start questioning whether I was right all along.

helms you add so little to this discussion. where the heck are you coming from?
learn a little about argumentation. where's the logic?
I see the world is going to hell let me take my piece. what an attitude. self fulfilling prophecy, dumbass.