The expensive Ti 4600 listing is not exploitative in the sense that someone will ever be in such dire straits that they need the card to pull themselves out of a hole. That law would apply if the listing was like $150, then somehow the seller found out that I desperately needed the card or I was mentally stunted in some way or just plain dumb, and he decided to jack the price up to $600 because of that.
if something is exploitative as the word is defined in jurispridence can only be determined in a concrete case, and you have to read up on the latest court verdicts and comments, and not invent something you would like to have or which is based on your personal opinion.
and if any price for any product may be made to any buyer there would not be a laws of that above wording.
think about it: online the seller has no way to see and check if
"die Unerfahrenheit, den Mangel an Urteilsvermögen oder die erhebliche Willensschwäche" applies to the customer who clicks "buy". but it is the other way round as you think: he is obligated to not conclude such a contract, and as a result, he has to make offers which can not lead to the situation.
I realise that you're emotionally attached to this hardware
i am politically attached to millions of such offers on ebay and couldnt care less about a single one.
imagine you buy a 16 TB SSD tomorrow and later you notice that you now have to pay $139599 to the seller because you did not see that there is no comma. you contact the seller and ask to correct that or cancel the contract and he tells you no, sorry, that wasnt a typo, this is our price!
what would you expect from a judge when the seller now sues you to pay the price? that he protects the "free market" you have heard about on TV? which doesnt even have any reasoning in federal laws?
If selling stuff at crazy high prices was illegal, Rolls-Royce and Mercedes-Benz would never have sold any cars.
i´ve never seen rolls royce themselves selling a rolls royce for more that 10 time of the average price, and it is highly unlikely that a dumb person, who is not able to check the price before he buys a luxury car could be harmed from that.
and your argumentation shows that you have zero idea about how legal science and legal practice work - it is already inappropiate to argue.
if you want to win a case, you have to understand the laws and prove what you say, not make excuses, comparisons or present your ideas how it could work.
