You're the idiot, the answer was very specific with links to provide a source to the following;

How do you know if the contract takes away your statutory rights?

If the person who sold you the goods or services has taken away your statutory rights, there should be something in your contract about this. For example, it might say  the seller isn't responsible for goods that are unsatisfactory, don't match their description or aren't fit for purpose. Or it might say that the seller isn't responsible for any loss you've suffered because of their lack of care or skill. This type of content in a contract is called an exclusion clause.

BTW Section 75 was initially raised prior to business to business sales being a term of KnC's, but as you can see such protection does indeed cover unless there are exclusion clauses in their contract. I don't know how much more specific I can be, I've literally spelt it out for you. At no point have I said section 75 has any purpose outside if the UK, I've always stated it was a UK rule. I haven't a scooby why you've brought Belgium into this other than you make assumptions without reading.

This still doesn't address why I'm explaining this to someone with no interest in purchasing from KnC, let alone someone with enough consumer problems of their own with missing Avalon chips and funds you spent with a non-secure payment method?!

What really perplexes me though is why someone who cares so much about consumer protection and buyer recourse, especially for us (thanks bro ), is totally content with f**king coupons!?

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=270897.msg2911391#msg2911391

Go away KS.

P.s. the draft is a revision of an ACT that's existed since 1975, the revision is mainly clarification purposes and for virtual goods since the advent of the Internet.