Slashdot Mirror
California Consumers Settle MS Antitrust Suit
lseltzer writes "According to AP, $1.1B in Microsoft products will go to California consumers to settle antitrust claims against the company. I bet the lawyers don't get paid in software." Actually, the article says that those who apply for some of the settlement will receive "vouchers redeemable for any manufacturer's computer-related products and software."
I'm getting my "vouchers redeemable for any manufacturer's computer-related products and software" made out for an Origin 3000.
In mathematics, one does not understand things, one merely gets used to them.
--VonNeumann
Does no one realize that this ammount of retail cost to Microsoft is pennies in production cost? They're losing virtually nothing in this and it is a complete failure of the political system to prosecute them.
And why doesn't MS have to pay real ca$h damages? What kind of hardship is this settlement? $1.1 billion in software is like $100K in media, boxes and shrink wrap. This is punishment in what way?
I am the very model of a modern major general!
Slap on the wrist to Microsoft, really, the only hope we have of Microsoft being truely persecuted lies in the hands of the European courts.
In college, really poor, need a flatscreen.
"proceeds of the settlement will be distributed to members of the class in the form of vouchers redeemable for ANY manufacturer's computer-related products and software."
notice the word 'any'
"Though the face value of the settlement is $1.1 billion, the actual amount will depend on number of consumers who claim, according to Microsoft lawyers."
How likely is it that enough businesses and consumers will actually make a claim to seriously impact M$? Sadly, not very.
Any other Cali residents should take this as a great opportunity and use their vouchers like I am...to buy a lot of free softwa...err damn...maybe i can buy a game with it
Is have microsoft come in and tune-up the state's computers, install some linux, *nix, etc servers where necessary or applicable, hook them up with some free W3C-compliant (no MS specific html) government websites instead of giving out vouchers to keep people hooked on their overpriced crap.
Why yes I am paranoid! Thanks for asking!
$1.1B in Microsoft products
What's that... a few hundred boxes of MS Office?
"And in other news, the ACME toxic waste company has agreed to settle its lawsuits by giving out $1.1Billion in ACME brand toxic sludge, or vouchers good for any other brand of toxic waste.
Settlements of this sort have zero punitive effect on the defendant. I've received settlements of this sort from NEC, Intel, Iomega, and others. What were the "vouchers" typically? $10 off coupons for my next purchase from the company. The company would still profit from the purchase anyway, assuming I actually made use of the coupons, which I never did. And I doubt most consumers do either. In Microsoft's case, the worst thing that would happen is that they would have to produce a few extra CDs and sell them for a few bucks off. What a rip off!
I am not sure if the Windows ME and Windows NT which came with my desktop and server is refundable...
I am pretty sure that most of their money is made on their crappy OS which I was forced to pay when I purchased my hardware to run BeOS and Linux...
They have so much money so, $1.1 Billion dollar penalty is a drop in the bucket. Let say that parking ticket in the town was $30 per violation.
If illegal parking brings $110 profit because there were no other competitors which knows town officials well enough..and had money to pay off violation.. they still make $80 profit... as long as they make profit...they will ignore the rules and regulations which normal businesses are bound to...
This is really sad...
Well... now we have a tax cut for riches to worry about.
And just why is that kind sir? That's what EVERYONE will be saying: "This isn't punishment it just furthers the monopoly by giving people more Microsoft Software and blah blah blah!" But what they will all fail to notice is the little word ANY in the statement when referring to the software manufacturers.
I think certain posts should be modded up +1 Captain Obvious for pointing out those little details trolls and ACs tend to ignore to further their innane rants.
Today, we have this settlement, which allows consumers to claim a voucher. We also have a request by California Gov. Davis to cut funding to social services and education, as well as to increase state income taxes. Consumers should be allowed to settle their increased tax bill by handing over their settlement voucher to the California government, in exchange for a guarantee that the voucher would be used to purchase computer technology equipment and other educational resources for state schools. Perhaps also the California government should be awarded any unclaimed consumer vouchers after a certain (short) settlement period. This way, schools would be able to purchase whatever resources best fit their needs (instead of having free Microsoft products handed to them), and some of the sting of the increased taxes could be reduced.
Just a thought...
sig my booty, check my website
Yep. There were five posts in a row modded as "redundant" at the very start of the comments. Apparently some /. reader at MS stumbled upon some mod points. Hopefully that particular account won't ever get to mod again. :-)
I'm just trying to get a grasp on what the real financial impact is here (and whether if it is really a penalty)
great, earlier today I got to fraudulently make the RIAA give me money, now I get to do the same to microsoft. It's really shaping up to be a wonderful day.
So Microsoft packs up a CD with software worth of 1000$, gives it to a consumer who wouldn't buy it anyway. With $1.1B you get one million CDs that cost to MS about $100 000. I think that's a very good deal (to MS atleast)!
Hey, where do I sign up for this free vouchers?! I want in on the action! :D
Someone please explain this to me: why is it that the states can accept this settlement, which costs Microsoft NOTHING (aside from lost sales, yadda yadda), and actually bolsters their position by spreading their law-breaking product around, but they won't allow tobacco companies to do the same and distribute a quarter billion packs around the table? I mean, which is a bigger cancer stick, seriously?
n/t
Why yes I am paranoid! Thanks for asking!
Mod this, you pinko.
Should that be "any of the manufacturer's [ie.M$] ... products" or "any manufacturers' ... products"?
This is not very clear from the article.
Pershino
It's like insightful and stuff
Law's don't change when you settle a suit. You just get money. Now, if you were to actually go through with it...the potential damage in law would do exponentially more damage to Microsoft than a drop-in-the-bucket lump sum of cash value.
In SOVIET RUSSIA... erm...NSA AMERICA, the Internet logs onto YOU!
How can anyone let this happen? The resolution is to provide software to the retail value of $1.1B, but the cost to the convicted is that of producing the CDs and boxes that accompany the product. I thought the damages were meant to punish the convicted, as much as compensate the victims. A convicted monopolist is allowed to pay the damages by providing more of the software which has been deemed anti-competitive by the very same courts. Apart from vague 'because it's Microsoft' comments, can anyone please enlighten someone from outside the US as to why?
..k
The Mothership
This is almost as silly as forcing drug lords to give away vouchers for free drugs. Not quite that bad, but similar effect.
California: "Microsoft, we are going to sue you because you use unfair business practices by giving away your product to destroy your competition!"
Microsoft: "As a punishment, you should make us give away our products. That will teach us!"
California: "Sounds good to me!"
DOH!!!
Yeah, yeah, yeah. The story is a dupe, the topic is boring, the facts weren't checked. WE GET IT!!
Lame ones at that too. With two cent tricks that aren't worth jack squat. All you do is complain. Without even reading the posted article... or even the summary. The summary for christ' sake! It says 'ANY'.
But nooooo... you guys wanna spurt out your pseudo intelligence by posting the obvious, yet stupid comment that 'it doesn't cost them anything'!
Because, in fact, that same argument has been used for the past 5 years now, and you think you're going to get modded up 'insightful' for making a highly thought out remark about the world.
Guess again you losers. I feel like filthy critic complaining about the 'grass fuckers' in Hollywood... everything you say about MS is straight out of a mold.
Push button, inject polyurethane into die-cast mold... and presto: an insightful karma whoring MS-bashing comment.
</rant>
In other news, Microsoft released a new Special Edition of Windows XP, priced at $0.1B. Only 11 units are ever made, get yours now! (Those buying with vouchers get a free tricycle!)
As some have already noted, the actual wording is that the vouchers are good for ANY computer product. I propose that people use these vouchers to fund your favorite linux distribution or open source group. Let's use Microsoft's money to fund their competetion.
There's no sig like SIGSEG
See here .
How about if the entire microsoft headquarters was set ablaze and all the states attorney generals got to roast marshmallows on the remains? Of course not we all would think that was "unfair".
BUT MS having to give 1.2 billion dollars to the people of California, that's just not good enough.
So here's the question for all of you who think that this "isn't enough". What is enough? I'm meerly trying to spark discussion here, not put anyone down. I would really like to know what people think should be the punishment of microsoft.
Weigh in the amount of damage they've done, business lost and lives lost. Information stifled to just being at the right place at the right time. Explotation of the weak, or creating a market where there was none. I really want to know what the slashdot community thinks.
Ignore the "p2p is theft" trolls, they're just uninformed
How does one actually qualify to make a claim for a voucher, especially if you double or triple purchased a Microsoft license. Most companies have a hard time just knowing what their current licensed products are, not to mention knowing how much they are eligible to claim going back to 1995. I can just imagine the helpline: "okay let the BSA do an audit and they'll tell you what we owe you (er, you owe us!)".
And did anybody else catch that of the unclaimed refunds schools get 1/3, and of that amount half will be for vouchers of MS products only.
So To Punish them for using there monopoly.
they are going to force an expansion of there monopoly.
good work guys
--meh--
"Vouchers for some, little American flags for others."
Man, with one of these vouchers and my RIAA settlement check, ya think I can buy one of those cool transdermal food patches from ThinkGeek?
money rules the world, thats why !
This may be slightly off-topic, so mod me down accordingly, but isn't it a little inappropriate to equate Microsoft with the Borg? I mean, that would be suggesting that the technology that they create is actually superior to all other technologies out there, which we all know on
Instead, why not use the aliens of 'Aliens' fame for the metaphor? They're ravenous, all-consuming, and wouldn't know a proper operating system from a hole in the ground. Plus, they're bugs, something that Microsoft software has been equates with more times than one can shake a stick of RAM at...
Does it make a difference? I'm sitting here running Debian and listing to Rambling Jack Elliot does Woody Guthrie. What can Microsoft do to intrude on my mood?
Let's give you some vouchers for free software that you can install and let us continue our crimes, but to a greater extent. I say they include a "the EULA on software purchased with this voucher is considered null and void" However, something like that can be considered in this analogy: Said Agreement:Microsoft::Molten Lead:Human Esophagus.
Now watch this drive.
This costs Microsoft less than three cents on the dollar of their approximate $40 billlion cash on hand - which they don't bother to pay as dividends to their stockholders either.
Microsoft must be laughing their asses off. They've got a world economy nearly dependent upon them, and they will go on doing exactly as they please, admitting no wrongdoing.
If I were Grey Davis, I'd have told Bill "settle" Lockyer (CA state AG) to help balance the state budget by trying to get a few extra billion outta Microsoft's war chest.
But then again, I'm not Grey Davis - I have ethics and accountability.
How much do you want to bet that the MS vouchers will be full of those colorful MS holographs and other ultra-paranoid anti-counterfeit measures, and will probably require an activation code to use. I noticed they're even putting holographs on the bottom of mice, even though I've never heard of a pirated mouse. Watch out US Treasury Dept., MS is getting in the business of printing money now!
More seriously though concerning the distribution of these vouchers. How much of the potential claims were for all the silicon valley dot-coms which no longer exist? (hey they may have a new revenue model now!) Or what about all those PC's with Windows preloaded that were ordered from the many CA mail order vendors which were bought by out of state purchasers? Are they entitled to some refund too? Or businesses that bought Windows multiple times, perhaps without even knowing. I truly suspect that very little of the earmarked amount will actually be claimed. And the left-over pretty much goes back into MS's pockets.
I'd rather they keep their money and send me file format specs instead.
Holy Shit! Another Rambling Jack Eliot Fan! I saw him in Santa Cruz a couple of years ago with Guy Clark...what a great night.
Like a drug dealer that runs a self-sufficient operation... grows, hangs, dries, cuts, packages, and sells.
Let's see... make him give it away for free. How is this punishment? Don't they do that anyway?
"Here ya go, kid... first one's always free..."
If you think this is bad... ...Their first offer was to port the "dancing paperclip" to FreeBSD, Linux, and Solaris.
-- Terry
And a link to the article
main(c,r){for(r=32;r;) printf(++c>31?c=!r--,"\n":c<r?" ":~c&r?" `":" #");}
Wouldn't it be appropriate to use as many as possible of these vouchers for a purchase from FSF? Perhaps the FSF could make some sort of micro-edition of Gnu software to be bought for download (i.e. minimal cost for FSF)?
The certificates are good for any software or computer hardware, not just Microsoft's.
That comment was moderated "redundant" because there's no way to mod something "retarded". (No, it wasn't me, but I can sure sympathize. Learn to read.)
- A.P.
"Remember when the U.S. had a drug problem, and then we declared a War On Drugs, and now you can't buy drugs anymore?"
is this "voucher" shit? Does Hewlett Packard make beer??
Motherfuckers...
"Prosecuted"
Microsoft gets persecuted all the time, right here on Slashdot.
Information doesn't want to be anthropomorphized anymore.
Yes it would appear a few of us missed the fact that the vouchers could be used for any computer related product. However, there is a potential weasle-clause in there.
"Two-thirds of any unclaimed settlement proceeds will be donated to California's most needy public schools in the form of Microsoft educational and productivity software..."
Let's hope everyone who is entitled to really does make their claim. Any one know how likely that is?
Otherwise, the Monopoly will simply extend itself into the need public schools "in the form of Microsoft educational and productivity software", and we don't want that now, do we?
A large proportion could (and quite possibly will) go unclaimed because of people being unaware, clever wording on the vouchers leading people into thinking that the vouchers are useless, or clever wording leading people into thinking that they are only redeemable for Microsoft products. Also, the possibility for Microsoft to adjust the numbers of vouchers actually 'used', according to their definition of 'used' (sitting in someone's bottom drawer?). maybe.
$25/$0 =
Divide by zero error. Post terminated.
Read reviews of shopping cart software
1. Break up company into separate companies (OS, Office, Internet). Separate companies have non conflict of interest and independant boards and management.
2. Disgourge majority of company profits realized over the monopoly period. Disgourged profits used to fund public education (not computer specific education, but math and science education via books and teachers)
3. Open all MS undocumented APIs (both recent and historic), and open all MS file formats. Let the spin off companies keep thier *coughccough* great source code.
4. Rule that all MS spin off companies can not finance any political campaigns or lobby groups. In fact, let's just eliminate soft money in the US altogether from any company!
Those four are starter points of what I think "is enough" for the bit bully of our day.
Real men don't need signitures!!!
"feeling stomped about us neutralizing your company?! No worries! As a consolation prize, we will give you vouchers good for any purchase of any of our software or hardware, especially the one that stomp your ass to the ground."
"No longer use computers? No problem! They serve as great reminders of your inevitable beating"
fineprint: redeemable in california where we can keep a close eye on you.
pain & suffering involved in using MS products haven't been factored in
haha, like your beloved capitalism has good voting right?
"those who apply for some of the settlement will receive "vouchers redeemable for any manufacturer's computer-related products and software" Let's see...a few million $ for the lawyers and a bunch of cardboard and polyethelene (shrink wrap) for the rest of us.... Sounds fair to me!
In other news....
Microsoft announces new licensing fees for government institutions within California -- a single copy of Windows will now cost $1.1B.
Not to this degree, but can anyone else see how this "expense" could be manipulated by Microsoft?
To paraphrase Mayor Quimby:
"Vouchers for some, little American flags for others."
That wasn't Mayor Quimby, it was Kang (of Kodos and Kang fame).
Great reference, tho!
wait, did you mean your post, or the one you were replying too?
Man.. they are so obviously trying to bribe the public that it is ashaming!? What is wrong with that law system that a big company can buy free from whatever it gets in their way????? There is no doubt that Microsoft is having a monopole... why people dont act !? why doesnt the justice take appropiate action against it?
Spelling errors were made for your amusement only...
As a professional programmer, I refuse to let someone else's politics dictate how I feed my family
what are you really trying to say with that one?
There are places where the networks are not touching,and there are places where they are-Boeing's Lori Gunter
I'm sure IBM will give you a $10 discout on an AS/400 should you produce the voucher.
There are places where the networks are not touching,and there are places where they are-Boeing's Lori Gunter
Entrepreneurism is all but dead because we have welfare across the board: the military budget, wealth transfers, and corporate welfare.
We have transfered risk from individuals to the system. Bailing out companies, countries, and attempting to bail out risk itself. Moral hazard has reigned and something new is about to reign.
We've gleefully allowed CEOs to take huge sums of capital when they are essentially employees of a company. But we chalk it up to "free markets" nonsense when it is really just stupidity and ignorance.
It is fine when a real inventor can make billions but it is an obvious symptom of a terminal disease when Iococca, Eisner, Gerstner, Welch, and thousands of like others can.
Shareholders have been doped, drugged, giddy, and asleep at the switch. They have been sold out to a handful of hogs.
TELL 'em robbIE.
I think it should be the duty of everyone in California to use this opportunity to inflict the maximum financial damage against Microsoft. Maybe we need more details of the settlement to determine how this will be done. I have a few thoughts on it so far.
1. We MUST not let any of these funds go unclaimed. Don't forget to file your claim. Tell all your friends. Tell your friends to tell their friends.
2. Don't treat this voucher as a freebee. Only use it to purchase software that you would have purchased had you not received a voucher in the first place.
3. If you absolutely must purchase a Microsoft product, be sure and use it for something like an Xbox or something that has a high per unit production cost, not software licenses.
4. Use it to purchase software from direct Microsoft competitors.
5. If they are allowed to redeem it for cash, donate your voucher to an organization that creates free software, such as the FSF.
I hope others of you out there will have some suggestions as well.
-- Knowledge shared is power lost. -- Aleister Crowley
You guys are exactly what the Penis_bird said you were ... a bunch of easily riled idiots.
Lame ones at that too. With 2 cent posts that aren't worth mod points. All you do is complain.
But nooooooo you wanna spurt your pseudo intellectual criticism by posting the obvious yet stupid comment that people don't read the articles.
Because, in fact, that same argument has been used for the past 5 years now, and you think you're going to get modded up 'insightful' for making a highly thought out remark about the world.
Guess again you losers. I feel like an Anonymous Coward compaining about trolls. Everything you say about Slashdot is straight out of a mold.
Push button, inject polyurethane into die-cast mold... and presto: a moaner with a Slashdot-bashing comment.
</tag>
There are places where the networks are not touching,and there are places where they are-Boeing's Lori Gunter
on the prize, of your eyes.
if va lairy's payper goes pottIEer, does fuddles get the saycrud kode of the forge(ry)? or, will robbIE zap it back into cybearia, in a last gasp attempt to rescue his soul? stay tuned......
look for va.msn.?net?, ticker: (VAST)
their is the possessive
there is the directive
What's that over there?
It's the class with their horse on a string.
It's about attitude not achievement.
"Resistance is futile"
and once again here we have a demonstration of that.
The US's bungling of keeping their own house in order is no suprise. Hipocrisy is the stock in trade of the leaders of the "Democratic Nations"
jeesh
There are places where the networks are not touching,and there are places where they are-Boeing's Lori Gunter
Asshat. Make a completely bogus statement, get a 5. Notice the part where they mention you can buy any hardware or software, i.e. NON-MICROSOFT? Yeah, that's why the California settlement is, how you say, better than the DoJ one. Hooray for my state!
I was trying to find stories about counterfeit mice but I could only find stuff about that here and here
but
This story is much better
A Seattle jury called it misappropriation of trade secrets and last month [Dec 2001] awarded a $16.5 million in damages to Fernando Falcon and Federico Gilligan.
The Argentine inventors Falcon and Gilligan invented a computer mouse that allowed concurrent pointing and scrolling. They showed their work in 1993 to KeyTronicEMS, a computer electronics manufacturer in Spokane, Wash., and helped the company build two prototypes. Together they planned to take the mouse to market.
At the time, KeyTronic was struggling to overcome an $8 million loss and hoping to land a lucrative contract making keyboards for Microsoft Corp.
KeyTronic's then-director of research and development, Charles Fauble, assured Falcon and Gilligan that he would show the mice to Microsoft developers at a December 1993 business meeting. That was the last time anyone remembers seeing the devices.
KeyTronic couldn't explain in court how it lost the devices, and Microsoft couldn't explain how the inventors' technology wound up in its Intellimouse, which hit store shelves in 1996.
Here's what was clear: KeyTronic scored a $160 million keyboard contract from Microsoft, and Microsoft raked in roughly $650 million from one of the best selling mouse products of all time.
Vickrey said there was no evidence that Microsoft knew it was getting Falcon and Gilligan's confidential technology.
There are places where the networks are not touching,and there are places where they are-Boeing's Lori Gunter
For instance, would it be feasable for me to mail my licenses/software to a cali resident, for them to claim a voucher? how does that work?
~/ssh slashdot.org ssh: connect to host slashdot.org port 22: too many beers
...will probably be as easy to spend as the refunds for unwanted copies of Windows bundled with PC's.
Vendor: Here's your copy of Photoshop, how would you like to pay for it sir, cash or credit card.
Me: Well I've got these vouchers from Microsoft.
Vendor: Like I said sir cash or credit card.
Well, would you accept a promisory note from Microsoft? So, if the vouchers aint worth much, what does the new deal amount to. It's just give stuff to schools. New deal, same as the old deal, just dressed up in the hope that they can sneak it past the court.
Hopefully the lawyers will get paid with copies of Microsoft Bob.
The classic example of Anti-Trust is Kodak creating a new type of battery for it's cameras. If Kodak can't show that there is any advantage to the consumer and that the only purpose to creating an camera incompatible with existing accepted battery standards is to limit consumer choice then they are in violation of Anti-Trust laws for forcing the sale of Kodak batteries as part of buying Kodak cameras.
Xbox software key signing is part of the anti-piracy system. For a large part, that means that key signing is for the benefit of MicroSoft and possibly other game publishers, not the customers that purchase the console. MicroSoft may be able to show that other game publishers would be unwilling to produce games for the Xbox if the key signing anti-piracy system was not in place. However, history has shown that even when game publishers are aware of methods of piracy for game consoles they continue to publish games for that console anyways. Also, it has been shown that the key signing part of the anti-piracy system has not been effective in stopping the creation of mod-chips for the Xbox. So, it is even debate-able how effective a benefit key signing is to other publishers of Xbox content. Hence, the only thing that key signing has been effective against is artifically forcing software, a "'plug-in' component that 'powers' what the Xbox does," to be only available if it has been signed by a single source (MicroSoft). In several ways, I think the Xbox signed software mirrors the Anti-trust issues created by Kodak creating a camera that requires a special type of battery.
Californa courts have shown themselves willing to enforce anti-trust law, even against the US big giant. Rather than working on silly attempts to "crack" the 2048 bit key, why not get some lawyers to "ask" for the private key. Can MS prove that there is a benefit (directly or indirectly) to the consumer that every piece of software that loads on the Xbox is signed by MS?
Governments and politicians have proven to be quite ineffective (what did the "Monopoly" status get us?), so we need to react as consumers, and we need to STOP BUYING MICROSOFT PRODUCTS!.
Microsoft has said that their bread and butter is Windows and Office, so above all else, those two products should be avoided. ... now I understand that they are difficult ones to avoid, but lets face it... the government can't do anything, so what are you going to do?
Oh yeah - I walk the walk, baby. (And now I'm off to install Mandrake 9.1b1, viva la resistance (er, something)!)
Of course, how much does it actually COST microsoft to stamp out $1.1B "worth" of software? A full copy of office is what, $750? It costs them what, $5 to package it?
Microsoft gets to write of $1.1B in losses, but it only costs them about $1.5MILLION to do it. That's going to be great for shareholder value!
Plus, they'll probably book $50 per copy for support at one point or another.. So this is just another great money-making scheme that is good for M$ and BAD for consumers.
What Microsoft should be forced to do is buy each and every californian a nice retail packaged copy of RedHat with OpenOffice, along with 4 hours of RedHat phone support and a decent linux book for newbies (if there exists such a thing).
That would teach M$ a lesson. This settlement will actually turn out to be very profitable for them.
I know it's off topic but... The slashdot quote of today was "Knowledge is power -- knowledge shared is power lost. -- Aleister Crowley." Bit of a strange quote for a site that pushes open-source, no?
"We can't give you your money back sir. We can only give you in-store credit. [I understand we sold you a piece of shit. But our policy is to screw the customer. You can only receive credit to buy more shit.]"
I know it's happened to me at various stores.
There is no penalty here. Microsoft will get all the money back that they settled on.
I am pretty sure that most of their money is made on their crappy OS which I was forced to pay when I purchased my hardware to run BeOS and Linux...
If somebody forced you to buy something, you should go to the police. That's assault and possibly battery. Because after all, somebody held a gun to your head and forced you to buy the particular computers you did, right?
So, Microsoft is found to have unfairly leveraged their monopoly, so the request is: "Um, hey, can we have some more of that software 'ya got there? It's just the best darn thing we could thing we could use."
Just imagine if this form of punishment were applied to other organizations acting in a criminal manner:
A mob being asked to offer it's "protection services" at no cost for one year.
Politicians found to have taken bribes being asked to serve without their official pay for the remainder of their term.
A drug cartel being asked to provide half it's crop to the state for free the next year.
A corporate polluter punished by being forced to create more product next year.
Ryan Fenton
oh well
keep burying your heads
There are places where the networks are not touching,and there are places where they are-Boeing's Lori Gunter
I haven't bought any Microsoft shrink-wrapped products but have bought several new computers with Windows preinstalled. I never tried returning the stuff, Windows Refund Day notwithstanding. Can I get some vouchers?
MS is not giving California up to $1.1 billion in MS software, it is giving California residents up to $1.1 billion in coupons that can be redeemed against any software/hardware manufactuer's products.
/. reader.
Reaction to this little piece says something about the attention span of the average
-- Slashdot: When Public Access TV Says "No"
if i was living in california i would pay my annual tax income in "hello world" binary currency to protest. That is the only real democracy power that really exist.
.... ok, and cause no protestation.
Seem the only thing citizen really care about lately is children raping, all under that is
I was in California and bought Microsoft Office when I was there. Since this purchase was made in California, could I get part of this even though I reside in Texas? Was I a 'California' consumer at the time of purchase?
"BUT MS having to give 1.2 billion dollars to the people of California, that's just not good enough."
Microsoft isn't required to give 1.2 billion to anybody.
Here are the facts:
1/3 of the settlement may go uncollected and goes back to MS. So we're down to 800 Million.
The rest of the settlement will either go back to themselves (probabaly at least 400 million) in the form of people claiming MS product for their vouchers or it goes to direct payments to california's schools.
I predict the real cost of this to MS is more on the order of $100M tops.
Plus, by essentially "giving away" their products to dimwits MS is locking out someone else from the market. "Gee, I got a voucher good for $100 from MS!" "Great, lets go buy a copy of MS office for $400 and use this voucher to pay for it!".
You are so freaking stupid.
If California had any balls they would've said: $1.2B fine. Pay up now."
Let see, CA declaired that MS couldn't force a return on the
MSN $400 Rebate and now they declair MS owes another $1.1B. Is it just me or does CA courts really enjoy cashing-in at MS expense?
Has anyone in CA goverment consider putting together a 1-800-R-U-ATRUST so that those of us that are sick of the MS 800-RULEGIT have an alternative number to report "activities" too?
Sorry. That was either kang or frogos(sp?) the 2 space aliens who pretended to be clinton or dole. It was the Dole look-a-like who said it.
I wasn't replying to a post, but thanks for caring.
I can't tell you how sickened I am by all this. First I read what has happened then I read people here arguing about what kinds of things people should buy with these vouchers.
The problem is that THIS IS NOT A SOLUTION. Microsoft violates anti-trust laws as a matter of standard operating proceedure, and a slap on the wrist is all they get? Nothing is done to remedy the problem of their ill-gotten market position. A billion dollars is chump change to them when it is a one time "fine," Even if the "fine" were ten billion dollars, how long will it take them to recoup it due to their ill gotten market position?
This is just a bunch of sick bullshit that California has agreed to so they wouldn't go home completely empty handed.
Am I the only person who sees this?
Muslim community leaders warn of backlash from tomorrow morning's terrorist attack.
i saw your post re: theBrain.com. i have a similar, better interface-patent pending- for your commercial site... :) get in touch please-davidmatthews_com@hotmail.com
So you're telling me that the punishment for acting like a monopoly is for Microsoft to freely distribute its software, thus proliforating its monopoly even further?
I think Microsoft won this round.
Be, Inc.'s lawsuit against Microsoft is still on.
(From OSnews.com)
This voucher entitles you to get free software(*) or products(*) of your choice for the amount of 100 US$.
Signed: Microsoft
(*) only applies to Microsoft products, not deductible, only one voucher per family.
--- I am known for the ones who want to find me on the net. Is that a privacy risk or a privilege? One might wonder..
The kicker is, however, $1bn is about as much as Toshiba had to pay for shipping supposedly defective floppy disk drives on their laptops.
I think this is absolutely evil. Even if Microsoft had to pay everything in cash, it would be peanuts. Instead, they'll be able to further contaminate schools with their proprietary software, something they have already volunteered to do as a "donation"--a tax sheltered marketing ploy.
Another article says that any remaining money would go to schools in the form of software or hardware ... it is easy to guess where these products will come from.
...
So result of this "trial" will be to do exactly what microsoft has been criticized for and reinforce its position in schools and among future buyers
It would had seemed too suspicious if microsoft had funded directly $millions worth of software, I suppose.
And this is called justice ?
until a group of class-action defendents sue their class-action lawyers for taking better care of themselves than their clients. I've received coupons that aside from the fact that I don't need the item, would cost more to use than just going out an purchasing the item. And the lawyers walk away with millions.
The other winner is the record industry's price fixing scam where they overcharge $100's of millions for years and receive $1-2 million in fines (1-2%) or something equally ridiculous.
Something ain't right.
Of course, what would be nice would be if the AP actually reported some USEFUL information, such as the court the case was settled in, the docket number, who the presiding judge was scheduled to be, links to the filings, and so on, so people can get the -real- information about the case rather than the crappy filtered AP version, which has no useful information whatsoever.
It's common in these kinds of settlements for manufacturers to give vouchers for their own products. This is likely no different: you can probably use the vouchers to buy Microsoft software and hardware running Microsoft software. Non-redeemed vouchers will be given as 1/3 in Microsoft software and 1/3 in hardware (presumably, PCs running Microsoft software) to schools.
Even $1.1 billion in cash would be a slap on the wrist. This "settlement" is an insult: it's a marketing promotion for Microsoft and a means by which they can get more of their software into the education market.
Microsoft raises the price of all of it's products on sale in California to $1.2 Billion dollars.
~ kjrose
" Notice the part where they mention you can buy any hardware or software,"
No, I didn't. It had way more qualifying words than that.
MS should've been fined $40B with the proceeds givem to the US government to spend more money to prosecute MS.
He has laid out why this is a non-punishment.
He's nailed it. Hit it on the head. BOOM.
So you and three buddies formed a startup company in 1998 and bought some Microsoft software for your startup. In 2001, when you finally realized you weren't going to make any money selling used AOL CDs over the web, you dissolved the corporation. So technically, the purchaser no longer exists. Can you still file a claim?
(I guess the same issue exists if you are deceased, but then you probably don't care quite as much about getting your voucher.)
He looked at me and said, "Kid, we don't like your kind, and we're gonna send your fingerprints off to Washington."
I think the public should sue M$ for spreading AIDS thru windoze.
Law's don't change when you settle a suit.
A "settlement" in legalese means that the parties drop the charges and agree to a private contract. On the other hand, the "settlement" in the federal antitrust case against Microsoft wasn't a true settlement but rather a judgment. Judgments do create legal precedent.
Will I retire or break 10K?
The transcript between MS legal and the press is here. Includes q/a on how vouchers can be used by consumers and education for _any_ product, as well as clarifying that reimbursement of legal fees is in addition to the $1.1B: QUESTION: [...]I just want to clarify if it does indeed apply to any vendor's product. For instance, if the school wanted to go out and buy a PC that had LINUX, would this be covered? TOM BURT: This is Tom. Absolutely. The school can use those vouchers. There are some restriction in terms of types of technologies, such as desktop, personal computers, laptops, tablet PCs, or competitive similar technologies that may be developed over the period of the settlement. However any platform, any manufacturer, that hardware or software that runs on any of that hardware, the vouchers, both the consumer's voucher and the school's voucher can be used for those purposes. In addition, the school vouchers can be used for a wide range of professional services and other initiatives the schools may need to deploy their technology broadly. So the consumers get vouchers. They don't get cash. The consumers will get vouchers that they can use towards the purchase of similar kinds of products. QUESTION: From any vendor? TOM BURT: From any vendor. Once they purchase the product, they return proof of purchase with the voucher and then they get cash. see also TOM BURT: No. This is Tom Burt. No, absolutely not. The vouchers are entirely neutral in terms of vendor and platform in all respects. The services that the schools can use the vouchers for are entirely up to the schools. There are certain categories of services that are defined in the settlement. But they cover a wide range of the services that the schools would need to deploy technology solutions for any platforms of hardware and software. The California Department of Education will be working on compiling a list of approved vendors for those services. So Microsoft will not have control over any aspect of that, which is one of the concerns that was raised about the prior settlement.
...the part where it says, "vouchers redeemable for any manufacturer's computer-related products and software."
I hope there aren't a bunch of Californians rushing out to use the vouchers on XBoxen and MS mice because they didn't realise they could use them for, say, O'Reilly's _Learning Red Hat Linux, 2nd Edition_ instead.
...or is this a form of "poetic justice"? Being "paid off" with M$ software for having experienced the punishing use of it seems somewhat like being given a dose of AIDS to combat a case of gonorrhea.
In, of course, California.
Let me make sure I understand this. Microsoft decides it wants to make money. Microsoft does this by making products people buy and use. Microsoft's customers all buy Microsoft's products of their own free will. Microsoft becomes very good at what it does. Microsoft gets punished for the crime of competency.
That doesn't make much sense to me. Perhaps I'm missing some details?
Hell, yes, that was sarcasm. I fail to see what Microsoft has done to be punished. It simply happens to be very good at what it does. There's no reason to want to punish that unless you're so lazy and incompetent you couldn't achieve their position yourself.
Fucking commie bastards...but what do you expect from California?
"Other than that, Mrs. Lincoln, how was the play?"
I submitted this same story 12 hours before slashdot posted it, and it was rejected.
Repeal the DMCA!
I was born in San Diego, California, and this upsets me greatly. The amount of aggravation caused by Microsoft's software has cost me both monetarily and mentally. Crashes, data loss and lost time due to poor programming has taken its toll. Now your going to tell me that my payback is some fsck'n coupons for more worthless software? No, the people of California lost today, and as usual the liars... err lawyers have won.
God, you make me sick. You're so pathetically happy to see the state of Socialist California hit Microsoft that you're drooling all over your pocket protectors. Those that aren't don't think it's harsh enough - they want literal blood. How dare MS sell their own product as they see fit!
Most of you claim to be libertarians except when it comes to MS - you want your little pet nerd OS (Linux) to win at any cost, even your fleeting capricious political ideals.
You pathetic nerds really make me sick - I'm glad you all got beat up in school, you deserved it.
Regardless of what one thinks of M$, this looks like the tobacco shakedown to me. (I don't smoke, never have, and wouldn't miss Philip Morris and the rest if they were gone tomorrow.) In my view, the state of CA went to M$ and said "Pay off and we will stop bugging you." Later the AG will run for governor, bleating about his "big win."
It may sound strange, but I still don't see how M$ is a monopoly. You say yourself that you reloaded the OS on your systems, so how is M$ able to enforce its "monopoly?" Well, you were "forced" to buy the preloaded version of Windows.
What's not recognized, IMHO, is that if it were not for the cost/feature ratio of Windows 3.X, 9.X, and NT, PCs would have been sold in much lower volumes, for much higher cost. In addition, if it weren't for AOL (gasp!), Internet usage would never have taken off the way it did. So, in essence, that copy of Windows you are "forced" to buy probably is a much cheaper alternative than if M$ never existed.
I started programming *nix in the 80s, and always thought Windows was kind of a joke, especially given the segmented memory addressing requirement. When it came time to beef up the computer at home, I thought Sun box, OS, maybe gcc and an X/Motif GUI tool. Then I priced all of this... I've been mostly programming Windows ever since. (Did some OS2, firmware,and occasionally *nix.) For me, Linux is compelling as an embedded OS, not on the desktop. If I use an install of Windows and office for a few years, the license cost is more than offset by the global compatibility with drivers, hardware and in the case of Office, others I may wish to communicate with. For some strange reason, *nix people and IBM (in terms of OS2), never figured this out; they tried to extract maximum dollar from the customer and killed their markets. If Linux is ever going to make it on the desktop, there can only be one distro that matters.
Now to get back to that part about the shakedown: Whether talking about M$, tobacco, asbestos class actions, medical malpractice insurance or unintended negative consequences from telecomm anti-trust activity, I note a pattern of abuse by some trial lawyers and their political cronies that is damaging our economy. Before everyone jumps up and down about every settlement M$ makes or other penalties it faces, think about these events in the broader context of litigation in general.
Imagine how much harder physics would be if electrons had feelings! -Feynman, maybe
Yes, they have put Linux on Pocket PCs, but Microsoft only makes the OS that goes on them, HP and Toshiba and other companies make the hardware. I was thinking about trying it on my Ipaq.
Link: http://www.handhelds.org/
1) Are the lawyers paid in vouchers? If not, then why are the plaintifs they represent? Sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander, after all...
2) Maybe I an dense, but this is different from the national class action suit settlement - that was rejected - exactly how? It still has the effect of forcing Microsoft into an area they want to be in - the Apple area of schools and education. "Oh please brer fox, don't throw me in the briar patch!!"
3) "...may be used on any product..." just a) get the voucher, b)buy the product, c)send the voucher and proof of purchase to us, and d) wait for payment in the mail. Yeah, sure. "The check is in the mail." and "Of course I will respect you in the morning..."
4) This is what I call real deterence, and I an sure BG&Co are shaking in their boots at the thought of paying out a max of $1.1 Billion, and a minimum of $733,333,334 (2/3 of the $1.1 B) - or, from their 10-Q fileing, between 19 and 29 days cash income. NOT! This is about what Bill et al gave to charity anyway, AND THEY STILL GET THE CHARITABLE DEDUCTION ON THEIR TAXES (corp taxes, not personal taxes, but still a deduction...)
don't you just hate it when you go to court, LOSE, and get exactly what you wanted anyway?
Acts of massive stupidity are almost never covered by warranty. --me.
It is important to draw distinctions between the lawsuits being discussed - Federal AntiTrust; State AntiTrust; Private (class action or private). None of the suits against Microsoft was pursued for purely anititrust reasons. There were, and are, very political agendas behind these events. Major MS competitors were agitating for years to get the feds and/or states to act since they had no luck with private lawsuits. With enough campaign dollars and the right spin it does not matter. State AGs are now addicted to the big lawsuit (remember tobacco) to boost their political capital and perhaps contribute to the treasury. As far as class action - the lead law firm will get paid over $100 million in fees. Don't ever think that "consumer good" and the free market make this happen. These are slogans used to defend an otherwise sordid shakedown which occurs all too often. The consumer rarely benefits since all costs get passed doen to them. The holdup was consummated. MS paid. Now we can go on to the next...... .
but one can't avoid it
if you work for anyone you are pushing their political agenda. Using Microsoft products, even if you warezed them, is pushing their product and their politics.
Every HTTP_User_Agent entry is a political statement / marketing tool.
If you think that oiling the wheels of capitalism isn't dancing to someone else's tune then I suggest you re-evaluate.
There are places where the networks are not touching,and there are places where they are-Boeing's Lori Gunter
Yet, I would guess that whatever amount I can claim under this judgement will be much lower than this amount. (And actually, I'd rather have the cash returned, as opposed to getting vouchers for future purchases.)
Consider also the recent music industry settlement. If you bought CDs between 1995 and 2000(?) you can get between $5-20 back, depending on how many people participate in the settlement. That's like the over-charge on a single (OK maybe two) CDs. So if you bought dozens of CDs during that time, your compensation is grossly inadequate.
These kind of settlements just let the infringers halt the legal proceedings against them by paying a minor fee. They don't come close to paying back the monopolist-driven price gouging committed by the offender(s).
Whew! I feel [just slightly] better now.