Slashdot Mirror
Slow And Steady Leads To Windows Refund Success
linuxwrangler writes "By proceeding carefully, documenting everything, being persistent and keeping his cool, Steve Oualline was awarded a $199 refund for his unused copy of Microsoft Windows XP. See his Linux Journal howto for the details. Hopefully this is the first of many victories."
I noticed that the title of the story is HOWTO: Getting a Windows Refund in California Small Claims Court
Is this going to make it into the official HOWTO archive?
For those of you with ADD, let me sum the article up with the following chosen quote.
;)
"Me: I installed Linux.
Judge: Judgment for the plaintiff."
It isn't everyday you get to see those two statements so close together! Very interesting (and long) article that details a process that personally, I wouldn't want to go through.
I don't think the process is the point of the article, however.
Unique signatures are rare.
If I didn't pirate my software?
Oh well.
What percentage of people who intend to install Linux are going to jump through these hoops?
1%?
KARMA TAG! You're it.
...I know a warez site that has copies of Linux on it. I could download a couple and take them to PC world where I could ask for my money back....little do they know I didn't payt a thing!
What about a refund for Windows Me? I installed it but still couldnt use it. :)
It _IS_ meaningful though. I'm going to assume the copy the plantiff had was an OEM copy, so Microsoft didn't even make $200 off it-closer to $20 prob to begin with. By the time all of Microsoft's costs were added up, I'm sure it was at least $2000. In other words, if one out of every 100 people that have Windows forced upon them do this, Microsoft breaks even. If enough people do this, it will stop us from have Windows forced upon us by computer OEM's.
For the love of Mike, most Slashdot readers here are geeks; they build their own machines, not buy machines bundled with Windows. All jokes/flames aside, just how many of you out there are actually using a machine that came with Windows, but you never used that copy?
Thanks to good records and a Small Claims judge, Steve Oualline got a $199 refund for his unused copy of Microsoft Windows XP. One Linux user's story shows how to establish a good refund case.
Getting a Microsoft Windows refund from a manufacturer is seldom easy to do. In this article, I describe some techniques you can use to get your refund, including how to deal with the manufacturers (and all their excuses) and going to small claims court.
The first step to getting a refund is to ask for on. In most every case, you immediately hit a wall of stupidity and evasion when you do this. Dealing with this part properly is important, though, because you are building a record for the court case that may follow. Your job is to be as reasonable as possible and to make them look as dumb, inflexible and unreasonable as possible.
It's important to know what excuses the manufactures will come up with and how to counter them.
Excuse: You aren't entitled to a refund.
Answer: Then why did the software come with a license that said I was. Isn't the license a binding contract?
Excuse: Contact Microsoft about the refund.
Answer: The license said contact the manufacturer. That's you. Why should I contact Microsoft when they said to contact you?
Excuse: The software comes bundled with the hardware and can't be separated.
Answer: Then why did you give me a license that said they could?
Excuse: We'll give you a refund, but not for the retail price.
Answer: I paid retail for the computer and the software.
Excuse: The software is only worth $10.
Answer: Okay. Send me the check.
Although this doesn't look like it, you've won a major victory with these words--that check is written evidence of the fact that the manufacturer owes you a refund. If you go to court, you don't have to establish that the company owes you something. All you have to do is establish the amount.
But before you do that, you should follow up with the company. There are several ways of doing this.
Follow up #1: I got your check for $10. You say Windows XP costs only $10, so I'd like to buy 100 copies please. To whom do I make out the check for $1000?
You won't sell me Windows XP for $10? I'll have to pay $199 for it? Then that means the check you sent me is too low. Please send me a check for the full amount.
Follow up #2: I got your check for $10. But your $10 price is far lower that the retail price of Windows XP ($199). Because of the vast difference in the amounts, I'm going to have to ask you for a copy of your purchase contract with Microsoft so I can verify the price.
You can't verify the price. Well, I can only find one documented price and that's $199. You'll have to pay that amount or document your price.
One company tried this excuse with me. When I asked for documentation, the customer service representative said, "I don't have access to price information".
"Then how did you come up with the $10 price figure?"
"I just know it's the right amount."
"So what you are really doing is guessing. Well, my guess is the software is worth $1,000,000. Tell you what, let's split the difference. Send me a check for $500,005."
Excuse: We'll give you a refund but that applies to only Microsoft Windows, not the other bundled software.
Answer: No problem. Please provide me with a copy of all the other software on another disk so I can install it under Linux using the Wine program.
In all of these cases, follow up the phone conversation with a written letter describing what was said and why you're unhappy with it. Remember you are creating a record for the judge.
At some point in this process you'll either get your refund (rare) or you'll realize the manufacturer is going to be totally unreasonable. So now is the time to pr
Oh come on - you don't do it directly to cost Microsoft money, but to encourage OEMs and Microsoft to let PCs be available for purchase without the Microsoft tax. It's a matter of principle surely - if you don't want Windows, why pay for it?
Anyone who does an analysis of monetary value (or cost) against time spent will not be reading Slashdot anyway...
-- Ed Avis ed@membled.com
That rocks that he got his $$$ back, those OEM 'Restore Disks' aren't worth the aluminum they're pressed on.
$199 refund!
Now he can buy a copy of OS X! ;) (Actually, I wonder if you could do this with Macintosh - get your $$$ back for OS X. Of course, removing OS X to install Linux is equivalent to removing your liver and cooking it for dinner...)
This is a great document. My only minor quibble is i'm afraid at moments he tries to be "clever" and that could potentially make you look like a smartass in court. Which of these questions are *necessary* and which are just trying to be clever? The "WinXP is worth $10." "Okay, then will you sell me 10 copies for $200, please? I would like to make an order." sounds on first read like the author is just being a smartass, but this really is an important little interchange because later on in court you need to be able to say "i asked the company if they would sell me a copy of WinXP for $10 but they declined." However some other bits seem to just be annoyedly hacking at a customer service guy with a script:
:)
"Then how did you come up with the $10 price figure?" "I just know it's the right amount." "So what you are really doing is guessing. Well, my guess is the software is worth $1,000,000. Tell you what, let's split the difference. Send me a check for $500,005."
I don't think the "tell you what, let's split the difference" is necessary. Oh well.
Perhaps someone should make a repository of stories from people who tried to do this. Find out what worked, what didn't, who caved, who didn't, and what seemed unprofessional and pissed off the judge. I would love to see this become a widespreaed thing. I would participate in it myself, except I do not own an x86 computer
4000 linux geeks going "i want a windows refund" is easy to blow off. 4000 linux geeks dragging company representatives into small claims court equates to actual policy changes...
-- Super Ugly Ultraman
...when he gets refunds on those unused AOL cds
The thing that you do not want to do is be a nut case. Don't bash Microsoft...
I guess that eliminates all of us.
FLAC - Free Lossless Audio Codec
1. All the documents he had
2. A citation to his case as added support for your complaint
Citing his case alone won't help you -- you have to prove that your case is the same as his and then the citation of his award will make it easier for the judge to rule in your favor (because he's not breaking any new ground). Although, I'm not sure this judge was really thinking that he was breaking new ground when he awarded Steve the judgement.
And of course....IANAL, but I work for Westlaw.com :-)
...and that's the way the cookie crumbles.
"The journey of 1000 miles begins with the first refund for unused Windows." - Lao Tzu
Yeah, who needs principles, anyways? Everything should be determined by its dollar value!
We who were living are now dying
With a little patience
They said $10, you said $1,000,000.
Then you said that "splitting the difference" would be $500,005, when in fact it would be $499,995.
That magic '5' at the beginning is the psychological hump that caused them to resist.
Evil is the money of root.
You conveniently forgot to include the next few sentences.
Two conclusions are possible: the judge in question already knew what Linux was. (Doubtful.) Or the judge was simply satisfied that the plantiff had installed something (i.e., not pirated the original software), and that he could name it easily (i.e., didn't pause to invent a name).
So, don't think Linux is what won here.
You cannot apply a technological solution to a sociological problem. (Edwards' Law)
This is a perfect case where the public will not pursue a refund out of inconvenience, even if they wipe the hard drive and install BSD, or Linux or whatever (admittedly a rare occurence). Such as my company, we have a handful of Windows machines- everything else is wiped clean and Linux is installed.
In the end, convenience wins out over principle. Most people would say their time is worth more than the $199 recovered here, but really what they are saying is the saved effort involved is worth more to them than the principle of recouping $199 for something they will never use.
We need principled (or persistent) people in a capitalist economy for it to function effectively. It's difficult to be a consumer these days and comparison shopping is almost impossible with coupons and rebates and prices that are but really aren't; most people just give up and take what's given to them.
Here.
(ducks, runs...)
Cheers,
Ian
Read the article: he bought a LAPTOP. It is awfully hard to buy an x86 laptop without a Microsoft OS on it.
That's enough Bill. You can go back to your .Net forum now...
The whole point is that a lot of systems cannot be bought without the operating system. That's the deal Microsoft has roped hardware vendors into. So this is an attempt to undo that.
You are checking your backups, aren't you?
The author spends a lot of time talking about his inability to document the license and the provisions he didn't want to agree to. Perhaps he could save a lot of trouble by just photographing or videotaping the license. I'd reccommend both because its easier to get a hard copy for court of the still photo, and you might want the video to provide evidence you selected NO and then reformatted the drive and then installed an alternate OS.
Another choice might be to boot into Demolinux or Knoppix, then open the license file and print it. This combined with videotaping the process from opening the box to installation of Linux on the then formatted drive would be pretty convincing.
Per his description of small claims court the judge isn't going to want to watch the video anyway, but having it might convince the company to refund or settle out of court.
Work for Change & GET PAID!
I'll give up my three precious moderation points... this is small guy vs. corporation.
I didn't get the feeling the writer had any intention to stick it to MS, he wanted to maek good on the agreement. I read it exactly as the judge did: It's the manufacturer's problem.
A little deeper than that, though, is the secret deals being made between manufactures' and Microsoft. This practice has been known for a long, long time, and it has been in and out of the courts for just as long. I remember first hearing the meme way back in '95. Back in the netscape vs. IE days.
But just like RIAA dragging thousands to small claims court ( no wonder Rosen wants out or the PR light ), civil cases do not a new company make.
I do wonder what Lessig thinks of this.
Before I part with'em: two pennies weigh ~4.996+/-0.014g, have a zinc core, and the face of Lincoln. You can keep 'em.
Manufactors are justing going to add this simple phrase to the computers they sell. "Free with every computer purchase: Windows XP". Loop hole closed, value of software is now $0.
Have you ever been to a turkish prison?
And the absence of the "Microsoft Tax" will equate to a whopping $10 in savings. It makes absolutely no difference at all to the cost of your system. You aren't going to see OS-less laptop prices drop $199.
They can throw XP on there, I don't care. I might or might not use it. A massive assault on OEM-included OSes ultimately has no price impact, and it becomes obvious what it really is: a geek jihad.
I am all about new and varied technology. I enjoy using different types of software and hardware. Linux is an excellent platform for everything from hardware tinkering to large-scale database work. But I don't approve of trying to stomp out the other guys. Microsoft is big, and has been stomping out other guys forever, I know. But Linux was supposed to built on higher ideals and such. The truth comes out: once we got a little more powerful, we're out there stomping for all we're worth.
Sad.
...
I'm sure there are more out there... Just pop over to ResellerRatings.com and search for notebook or laptop.
bytesmythe
Hypocrisy is the resin that holds the plywood of society together.
-- Scott Meyer
(this is from painful, and recent, experience)
I've had the same types of experience with W2k and (very recently) XP. Had a D-Link WLAN setup, and the machine would just randomly stop recognizing the WLAN card.
OTH, the Suse on that same box had no problem. The WLAN was installed after both systems were installed; both XP and Suse recognized and set up the card instantly. But XP operation was quite dodgy.
So, I think it's more of a "YMMV" situation for both operating systems.
IMHO, both Linux and MS-Windows suck to about the same degree. The difference is this: in Linux, I see progress; in MS-Windows, I see a fast retreat in flexibility, configurability, and user control. With the stuff coming up in Longhorn (including (especially?) DRM), I don't see the future getting any better for MS products.
Plus, I have fun with my OS, and Linux is *fun.* MS-Windows hasn't been fun for years.
Microsoft is to software what Budweiser is to beer.
What this case boiled down to was that it would cost more than $199 for the vendor to fight this in court and therefore the vendor cut its losses and didn't fight it.
Do this too often to the point where the vendor thinks their total expenses will be more than it will cost to fight it and they will. And they won't need to fight every case, just the first one and use that as precedent.
Mmmm.. Donuts
From the article:
It looks to me that the plaintiff agreed to settle his claim for $10. I suspect that if the judge knew the pertinent facts, the plaintiff would get only $10. He entered into an oral contract to accept $10 as his refund, and then (presumably) memorialized that agreement in writing (i.e., by letter). I don't think the judge would be impressed by the plaintiff engaging in the "bait and switch" tactics of agreeing to accept $10.00 to settle his claim in order to establish liability (which it wouldn't), and then renegging on the deal and demanding more.
So why did the plaintiff get a judgment for $100? Because the other side didn't show up:
As recounted in the story, the Small Claims Court judge properly made the plaintiff "prove up" his case. However, when the plaintiff did so he didn't bother to mention that he agreed to accept $10.00 to settle his claim:
Only Women Bleed (Sex, Sharia remix)
Okay, so here's an interesting idea. Most of the people here are giving scenarios that say "Oh, I don't use Windows, so give me my $200 back."
What about those of us who DO use Windows... but may not use the version bundled with the hardware? Dell is a real pain to deal with, from my experience, because they insist you use the OS they send you... or else it "could be pirated." And how do you upgrade? You MUST buy it from them. Even buying it from Microsoft, Best Buy with receipt... none of those are acceptable.
So I think I should be able to say "Sorry, I didn't use WinME. I want my $200 back, since I use a separate version I purchased independently."
Feasible?
"PC Load Letter? What the $@#% does that mean?!"
This should have been the title of this story:
HOWTO: Screw manufacturers and have them fight your battles in court
MS could help the manufacturers out by putting a clause in their agreemtn to state the refund cannot exceed the "OEM purchase price" or not to exceed $75.00. The entire license is written so that manufacturers get screwed on this deal. Will they learn from this, probably not. The CEO probably never knew this case ever happened and it may only get told at Christmas parties while everyone sits around and laughs at how this nut crazed Linux guy sued them.
What you would do if you were the manufacturer in this case? Could the manufacturer in this case proved the price they paid on MS Windows XP? I think they could have so I wouldn't go out trying to get $199.00 on each copy you own. I say this because I don't ever remember seeing anything when I ran a PC company that said I couldn't show my invoice from Tech Data, Ingram Micro or other distributors to a customer. Maybe they just didn't want to, who knows.
I do know this though, because of the MS license, manufacturers get screwed.
It will only get worse before it gets better.
"With enough memory and hard drive space, anything in life is possible!"
Yes, a similar thing happened to me. I was serving tables in a restaurant and I started chatting with a customer about how waiting tables was a summer job while I got my Computer Science degree. And so he says, "Oh, you're a programmer, huh? Maybe you could help me with computer. Do you know anything about Windows?"
And I said, "Sort of, but I know a lot more about UNIX."
"Weird," he says, and then he leans in and says, "cause I always wonder, how do they take a leak when their weiners are chopped off?"
I was in a daze. Not everybody knows about UNIX/Linux as we do.
___________________________________
I crochet because I'm lonely; I'm lonely because I crochet.
I bought a MSDN universal subscription through my student bookstore (which was actually a transaction between me and Torcomp/Studica).
So I received a box with an activation card.
I went to activate my MSDN subscription. The activation key was invalid ("in use by another user").
I expected the situation to be fixed on the first call to Microsoft -- BUT NO!
On the first call to Microsoft, they told me to pound sand: Deal with the reseller. Calling the reseller was the same: It's Microsoft's problem.
At that point, I was *already* going to file a claim with my credit card... Fortunately, I got a call back asking me to send all the documentation: The invoice, the activation card, the box. I quickly put these items in the mail, and then realized afterwards: "I have just mailed all my evidence to Microsoft!" So much for my claim with the bank...
There were some emails exchanged. The reseller asked Microsoft to fulfill the order, and copied me on the mail.
A month had passed, to the day from the day I placed the order. I called to find out the status of the order: They had received my mail, but there was some issue with the invoice. I had printed the invoice on my laserjet. Somehow, that wasn't good enough for them. WTF?
I told the rep that I had sent them everything I had, that they were obligated to fulfill my subscription, and that I wasn't going to send them anything else because I didn't HAVE anything else, and besides, the retailer had already sent them what they were asking for on my behalf.
Next day, I got a rude message on my voice mail. I wonder how many companies can afford to have rude customer service reps? Microsoft, and maybe a collection agency. I felt like I needed a lawyer by now. Anyway I insisted on another service rep, and after explaining the whole situation to the new rep, the problem got solved.
So I got what I paid for, but I had to beg, threaten, and wait long enough that I was never sure it would be delivered or that I was going to solve the problem without filing a lawsuit.
-fb Everything not expressly forbidden is now mandatory.
Buy one of those $500.00 computers that comes with Windows XP preinstalled. Drag them to small claims court over the $199.00 price of Windows. The computer has just cost you $301.00. Hmmm... Good deal!
I've represented myself in Small Claims and his advice is generally good.
The only problem I can see is that the XP EULA has clearly contemplated this. Remember, he isn't getting the refund from Microsoft but from the hardware manufacturer that bundles XP.
The EULA reads:
If you do not agree to the terms of this EULA, you may not use or
copy the SOFTWARE, and you should promptly contact Manufacturer
for instructions on return of the unused product(s) in accordance
with Manufacturer's return policies.
It says nothing about a refund. Even if it did, the manufacturer could say their policy is not to give a refund, or only to give $10 or whatever.
- Buy/setup computer; read license.
- Decline license; have auto-installation program wipe your drive. Install Linux.
- Take all Windows software media, documentation, and other materials and box them up. Take pictures of the package, and include a packing list of what you're returning. Include a letter explaining that you do not agree to the license, and that you're returning the product for a refund, per the license instructions.
- Send the package via certified mail to the vendor (Dell, etc.); make sure someone has to sign for it.
- Once you know it's been received (and you have a signature), call up your credit card company (you DID pay by credit--not a check card--right?), and request a $199 hold on the payment to the vendor, explaining that you're following the license regarding returning the product.
- The credit card rep will ask you a bunch of questions; I can't remember exactly what they are, but they are very specific yes/no questions; be careful how you answer them (they reps are reading a standard scripted list of questions that is used to determine whether or not you qualify for a refund under credit card consumer protection laws).
- The credit card company will put the $199 on hold while they investigate. They may require you to send a letter explaining your request; you may have to use some of the 'responses' listed in this article as justifications for why your claim makes sense, particularly regarding the actual value of the software.
- Sit back and watch the mega-corps fight it out. You have your "refund," and all you had to do was follow the license terms. No fuss, no muss, no court, no court costs.
Granted, IANAL, and I haven't tried this (but I for damn sure will next time I buy a computer)... but I had some experience with a credit processing agency and we dealt with these kinds of chargebacks all the time; I see no reason why this wouldn't work.