Windows Refund Day II
pbody writes "Sorry if this is rehashing an old topic, but I was looking for advice on how
to try to get a refund for the copy of XP that is coming with the laptop I
just bought when I came across this on LinuxJournal
about windowsrefund.net. They are
organizing "Windows Refund Day II" on January 23, 2003 -- which coincides
with the LinuxWorld Expo in NYC. Knowing how the first refund day turned
out, how many out there are going to the Expo and are thinking about
participating? For that matter, has anybody had any luck at all getting a refund from a vendor lately?"
Then you wouldn't need a refund.
mbbac
...my birthday is September 11th. I don't want to hear about how your birthday sucks because it coincides with a "geek protest"...some of us are much worse off when it comes to crappy birthdays.
Captain Quick jumped on the Obvious Boat!
Pff! You live in the United States, where lawsuits rule
Wrong, I'm in France and Dubya is the worst idiot that earth ever had
Build your own laptop computer for less than a fiver (no technical knowledge required)
Fact is not only did the US drag Europe kicking and screaming to republics from kingdoms, we then promptly dragged your sorry butts out of two world wars (well ok I wont count WW1), so one world war and protected the west from the Soviet empire.
As for W being an idiot, he seems to have wrapped the UN security counsel around his finger. Under Clinton they sat idle for years while Iraq told them to shove their resolutions up their rear, and within two years in office Bush has got inspectors back in that nation.
He also got more than half the Democrats in the House and most of the Democrats in the Senate to vote for giving him almost everything he asked for in regards to Iraq. Don't get me wrong I have serious issues with the mans "homeland security" nonsense but to call him an idiot shown little knowledge of the facts.
BTW seeing he wanted to throw away late Military ballots because the armed forces tend to be more Republican shows he was no more interested in counting every vote than Bush was.
Gore/Lieberman 2000 = Sore/Loserman 2000
Well that's great, but Microsoft (and many others) argue that you need to agree to the EULA to use the software. It's even law in some places.
Not in the US, it isn't.
So if he doesn't get a refund, he's paid the "Microsoft tax": he's paid for Windows, even though he won't use it and doesn't want it, purely because they have a monopoly.
If you don't like it, don't buy, it's really that simple.
Here, the "return it" refers to the software product. Why should Microsoft be able to prevent the sale of the computer (or put another way: why should Microsoft be able to dictate the terms of the sale of the hardware - what authority gives them the right to say to the vendor "you must refund the whole package, not just our part")?
Microsoft shouldn't be able to dictate the terms of the sale. That's why their EULA is not binding on the person who sold you the software. As for the authority to tell the vendor what the vendor can and cannot accept, if Microsoft actually does that (and I doubt they do), the authority is a contractual agreement.
Perhaps he assumed there was a EULA that was acceptable.
Perhaps so, but I doubt it.
That makes you sound pretty prejudiced - assume he's a dick because he wants his money back for something that he bought in good faith?
I doubt he bought it in good faith.
In any other industry, dictating terms after the sale would be considered amazingly poor business, doubly so if you refused to take back the goods.
The only one trying to dictate terms after the sale is the purchaser. The seller sold a computer system with a CD, nothing more. Copyright law places certain restrictions on what can be done with that CD, which you need a license in order to do. But none of that is applicable for most users, because most users don't need to agree to the EULA in the first place.
It is quite common to sell things which can't be used for their intended purpose without obtaining a license. Car manufacturers do it all the time.