Slashdot Mirror
Microsoft Sends Takedown Notice To MSFreePC.com
DJFelix writes "Just to add some more drama in California this week, legal counsel for Microsoft issued a takedown notice to Lindows CEO Michael Robertson, demanding the immediate shutdown of the MSFreePC.com website. The MSFreePC.com website allows people who purchased certain Microsoft products in California, or used certain Microsoft products in California to submit a claim in the $1.1 billion class action suit Microsoft lost in California. The site is still up for now, but how long will it last?"
$, else M$FreePC.com could've been his, and he would've avoided this mess. I mean, Microsoft wouldn't claim that M$ actually represents them, would they?
Do they have any legal rights to demand such a shutdown?
Its just informing consumers, what could be wrong about that.
Hmm.. well, I'm not a Lawier, or Lawrence, so I have no idea. Anyone care to Enlighten?
// instant - "I for one welcome our new Decaff Coffee-Flavoured-Coffee Overlords"
If the reality is as the letter says it is -- and I'm not in California so I haven't cared enough to look -- then it seems to me that MS's concerns are completely reasonable.
.sig: be the majority of voters.
Remainder of my
Save Maine's economy: write stuff down. All comments are exclusively my own, not my employer.
What? Someone is being deceptive to Microsoft customers? How dare they LIE to Microsoft's customers! MS customers DEMAND honesty and integrity from the companies they buy from, and Mr. Gates will be damned if he'll just sit by and let his unfortunate customers get swindled!
Until it's slashdotted out of existance...
... I'd forgotten about this one. Thanks for the reminder.
Read the link, all it says is that it will not work. The agreement states that people have to mail in a signature. You can't do that on their website... Now about shutting down a site, that stinks...
reading the letter, it really sounds as if lindows is being sneaky, and trying desperately to capitalize on the class action suit by getting sales and customer information by any means possible.
in other words, it sounds like lindows is trying microsoft tricks, and microsoft doesn't like that.
should be interesting to see how this plays out.
Cause a court order may not be able to shut the site down, but I'm sure a slashdotting will do the job!
> The site is still up for now, but how long will it last?
Not very long after the post.
- Arwen, I'm your father, Agent Smith.
- Well, you're just Smith, but my father is Aerosmith!
According to the article, it looks like the major beef is that submitting via the website does not output the claim in the determined format. While this seems to be a small issue, imagine if you were the guy that admins the email server getting the 1000s of email generated by MSFreePC.com. I would think that MSFreePC.com could change the procedure to output a more compatible format to send to MS and all should be fine. Whether or not MS is just playing a bully is yet to be determinined (in this case).
In the article, Microsoft objects to the site because it misrepresents the settlement and encourages people to submit claims that are invalid.
It's just as likely that Lindows is being self-serving as it is that Microsoft is being malicious.
Toronto-area transit rider? Rate your ride.
"Takedown notice" usually refers to a procedure defined in the DMCA that allows someone alleging copyright infringement to demand that an ISP take a site down. This is not what is happening in this case. Microsoft has no means of forcing Lindows to take the site down without a lengthy legal process.
The instant claim just sounds like an "instant rebate" deal. Sure, there are forms to fill out etc, and if one bounces or is denied for whatever reason, the person will be billed for the products or services they acquired under the instant approval option. I'd assume the person gets billed for the things they buy but once completed, the claim gets used as credit.
Only frauds are hurt by this. I did read the article but am I missing anything important here? Microsoft is angry why?
Microsoft is saying that Lindows is urging fraudulent claims against Microsoft with incentives like "a free PC to the first 10,000 who purchase more than $100 of stuff," and discounts on Lindows software. I, myself, think that Lindows is being shady, but not illegal. There is a definite exchange of goods, one is the money gained from Microsoft, the other is the Lindows product.
The website put up by Lindows has to be acting on good faith that the claims against Microsoft are valid. If the consumers are submitting fraudulent claims, something which may be happening regardless of Lindows, then there is a problem. The present issue is "who's problem is it?" I think that Lindows should do some type of verification on all claims that it processes, making sure that they are all valid. It may cost a bit of money to do so, but I still think that Lindows will come out on top.
Another thing that Lindows could do is to post a warning about the penalties of committing fraud.
You need to restart your computer. Hold down the Power button for several seconds or press the Restart button.
Before bashing MS, read the letter. Lindows (MSFreePC.com) is mis-leading the public into thinking that they can enter them into the class. MS is only saying that due to the nature of the settlement and to the agreed method of joining the class, the way that MSFreePC.com is going about it is invalid. Wake up and RTFA before you go screaming about how evil MS is.
TODO: Insert witty sig
From MS (in the letter)
Claim forms submitted through the www.msfreepc.com website will be invalid because they will not be signed. Instead, these claims will include only the claimant's typed name (called a "digital signature" by the website) which is invalid under the Settlement Agreement.
Please Click Below to show that you Accept the EULA before using Windows/Word/Excel
Slashdot Syndrome: the sudden, extreme urge to correct someone in order to validate one's self.
This is probaly both.
1. If MS is right, they won't get their money. They will probaly be upset at MS because someone said MS would pay for it.
2. If MS is wrong, they pay more.
Both are bad for MS.
Thank you.
Sincerely,
All Subscribed Users
"The site is still up for now, but how long will it last?"
And to *help* the site you submitted it to Slashdot? I don't buy it. You're one of them, aren't you!
"Such claims, if approved, will take settlement benefits away from legitimate class members and from California's public schools, which will receive vouchers worth two-thirds of any unclaimed settlement funds."
Wow... Microsoft is so benevolent... two-thirds of unclaimed funds in vouchers! Weeeeee...
You obviously just assumed they were suing over the domain. Instead, what the article said was that they were suing because the web site was deceptive and encouraged people to make false/fraudulent/inaccurate submissions that don't qualify for the settlement.
Complexity is Easy. Simplicity is Hard.
The article is longwinded and legalistic, so I'll recap for the lazy:
Microsoft lost a class action case in California and owes a lot of people there money. msfreepc.com is offering people Lindows in return for their stake in the settlement. Microsoft's lawyers are complaining since the msfreepc.com form does not include things like signatures and certifications that filling out the legal forms firsthand would require, so they say claims from these people will be turned down. Microsoft's lawyers also portray Lindows as taking money away from schoolchildren, because leftover funds go to CA schools, and expiditing the claims means more of the money will be disbursed.
Don't kill me, but it seems there are valid points to M$ fax:
1) M$ writes that under the settlement the claimants must sign under penalty of purjury. That is not possible using the website and thus may invalidate the claimants rights under the settlement.
2) On that background M$ fax doesn't seem unreasonable if the settlement stipulates that they must not impeede the claimants in getting their reward under the settlement. They are in that case just protecting themselves from (yet) another lawsuit from disgruntled claimants.
Use the manual form system where you fill out forms, mail back receipts, and wait for up to 6 months or more to receive your settlement.
Or...use MSfreePC.com to get your Instant Settlement* TODAY! [...]
*If you qualify, your "Instant Settlement" is the credit that Lindows.com will give to you to immediately purchase products using the MSfreePC program in exchange for the right to process your settlement claim on your behalf as described in more detail in Step 7 and Step 8 of the Instant Settlement Wizard.
Bash microsoft all you will, I find that very shrewd of Lindows. It's basically piggy backing on the settlement. Not cool.
The site is still up for now, but how long will it last?
... who read the above sentence and mentally added:
How -- long -- will -- it -- last?!?
Someone get the Shatner Earworm out of my mind please....
Mod Karma -1: I sed bad wurds. If I cep my mouf shut, I wud be at riyses.
Notice I didn't use plural - it would only take one lawyer - any lawyer - to determine that they were asking for trouble with MSfreePC.com and the way they're going about it. I asked about this in the original story - how can they file claims for people when they aren't even giving people access to the documentation outlining the rules, qualifications and benefits of the class action? I'm sure they did it for the tons of free publicity, as well as the goodwill anyone would get for doing anything against MS, but I think this one may just cost them more than it's worth. I'm surprised it's MS that's contacting them and not the courts. If I were the Judge and I heard about a web site that's sole purpose was to circumnavigate my ruling and orders, I'd be gunnning for the people behind it. Seems to me they could be facing obstruction of justice charges, maybe even fraud.
Don't get me wrong, I hate MS as much as the next guy, but in this case, they are totally right. I think Lindows jumped the gun and didn't think this one out. It looks like they didn't even read the terms of the settlement.
Oh yeah, and what lawyer would ever let them say MS was "found guilty" when it's a civil proceeding?
666-607: 6th floor apartment of the beast
Cnet Article
Microsoft has demanded that Linux seller Lindows.com take down a Web site that offers to process customer claims from the settlement of a California class-action suit against the software giant.
In a letter sent to the Linux seller on Friday and reprinted in a Lindows announcement Monday, attorney Robert Rosenfeld said Lindows' MSfreePC site includes false and misleading information and encourages filing of fraudulent claims. It demands that Lindows take down the site by noon Monday or face legal action by Microsoft.
Lindows announced the MSfreePC service earlier this month, offering to file claims on behalf of current and former California residents who qualify for proceeds from the $1.1 billion settlement of a class-action suit claiming Microsoft overcharged for its Windows operating system. People who submit a valid claim through the Lindows site receive an immediate credit in the amount of their anticipated settlement, good for the purchase of Lindows software or hardware.
The first 10,000 people to submit claims will also get a free WebStation, the stripped-down network PC the company introduced earlier this year.
Lindows CEO Michael Robertson said he wanted to make it as easy as possible for people to claim settlement awards, which range from $5 to $29. If few eligible consumers go through the claims process, Microsoft could pay out considerably less than the maximum $1.1 billion it agreed to.
But the Lindows service won't result in any valid claims, according to Rosenfeld, because it fails to meet several requirements detailed in the settlement. For starters, claims must be submitted with an actual signature.
"Claim forms submitted through the www.msfreepc.com Web site will be invalid because they will not be signed," according to his letter. "Instead, these claims will include only the claimant's typed name (called a 'digital signature' by the Web site), which is invalid under the settlement agreement."
The settlement agreement also specifically prohibits third parties from filing claims on the behalf of others, according to the letter, which alleges that the Lindows service encourages the filing of fraudulent claims by not presenting claimants with the terms of the settlement or adequately quizzing them on qualifying purchases.
"The Web site's clear objective is to encourage claimants to maximize the amount of their claims rather than submit claims that accurately reflect purchases made or benefits to which they are entitled," the letter said.
A Lindows representative said early Monday that the company was still reviewing the letter. The MSfreePC site was still operating as of Monday morning. Microsoft representatives did not immediately respond to requests for comment.
Lindows is no stranger to Microsoft lawyers. The software giant sued the company shortly after Robertson formed it, claiming the name infringes on Microsoft's Windows trademark. That case is set to go to trial in December.
Send all the lawyers you want, he'll come up with something new to make you send more lawyers
Problem is, Robertson's track record isn't very good in this regard. Look at his history at MP3.com:
At least Lindows isn't a public company this time, so his investors should understand the risk he is taking better than the public did with MP3.com
Imagine how much harder physics would be if electrons had feelings! -Feynman, maybe
They modded him down because he is off-topic. This isn't a lawsuit by Microsoft against Lindows. It is basically a cease-and-decist letter against the MSFreePC site because they consider it deceiving and encourages users to make fraudulent claims. He is just a Microsoft bashing troll who didn't read the artcile. He deserves whatever negative moderation he gets.
If the reality is as the letter says it is -- and I'm not in California so I haven't cared enough to look -- then it seems to me that MS's concerns are completely reasonable.
This is "informative"? In what sense?
The letter from MS is BS; as others here have noted, it mostly objects to procedural aspects of the claims process (e.g. digital signatures), mostly on hypocritical grounds (think MS's click-though EULA's) and throws in a few "think of the children!" sops (e.g., stating that even if the digitally signed claims were excepted, the real consequence would be that the schools wouldn't get to purchace MS products at 150% of retail with the unclaimed funds).
Even if you credit these objections, it would only be fraudulent if the Lindows people (after failing to get the settlement funds) tried to charge the people who had used the site. There's nothing wrong with me (for example) offering to pay out lottery winners or cash checks, etc. and then just burning the check or ticket. As long as Lindows.com acctually accepts the filling out of their form in leu of payment, there's no fraud involved.
-- MarkusQ
I didn't say that he hasn't done things that merit legal action, I just said he doesn't fold like an accordian.
The more Microsoft goes after this guy, the more he is going to want to make them go after him.
Then he can say "ohh OHH look at the big monopolistic tyrant holding me down with lawsuits and anti-competitive practicies!"
While MS is anti-competitive, and they are a monopolistic entity, most uninformed people won't know of Robertson's past side with him, especially as he is "fighting the good fight" for Linux.
It's all political posturing, and Microsoft is playing right into it.
Slashdot still doesnâ(TM)t support Unicode after it was added to the HTML standard in 1997.
Well atleast they have the common sence to host it on a server running Linux and Apache :)
"I bow to no man" - Riddick
Except Clinton signed a bill making digital signatures just as legally acceptable as physical ones.
(That bill was probably pushed through by MS themselves, to give credit to their EULAs.)
tasks(723) drafts(105) languages(484) examples(29106)
Claims cannot be transferred at all and a transferee of vouchers may not redeem more than $10,000 in transferred vouchers.
It's enough to make your disk head spin.
Free Software: Like love, it grows best when given away.
The request is reasonable. If it was a case of lindows merely offering information about how people can make their claims it would be legitimate. But their site makes the claim that you can file your claim agaisnt MS through the lindows site, and according to the terms of the settlement that is clearly not true (for one thing, the form has to be physically signed to be legitimate.) So the Lindows site is making false claims about their capacity to file on your behaf. Asking them to change that is perfectly reasonable.
(And you will note if you actually read the statement instead of trusting the slashdot summary that it is NOT are request to take the site down. It is a request to take it down OR fix the faulty claims it makes about what it can do for you.)
Lindows could just change the site so it doesn't do the filing on your behaf, but still does everything else, and it would be legitimate. If it resulted in a form you can download, print out, and sign and stuff in an envelope, then it would be removing the point of contention with the lawyer firm that sent this notice.
This isn't an example of MS trying to censor valuable information from the public. It's an example of them trying to get a site to stop making fradulent legal claims. The site can continue to exist as an informational site telling people what steps they need to take to get a refund, but right now it's giving incorrect information about what those steps are, and making the claim that it can file your claim on your behaf, which it can't.
Don't label something "offtopic" unless you know the topic well enough to tell what's on topic.
I haven't read the terms, but it's possible they're taking a risk, too: They have to sift through the claims to determine if they're valid. For the ones found invalid, they may have already paid the claimer.
Read the terms. They are not "paying" anyone, except as follows:
*If you qualify, your "Instant Settlement" is the credit that Lindows.com will give to you to immediately purchase products using the MSfreePC program in exchange for the right to process your settlement claim on your behalf as described in more detail in Step 7 and Step 8 of the Instant Settlement Wizard.
In other words, if you sign on through them, you get your settlement in the form of Lindows Fun Bucks (a term I just made up), and it is very misleading to those who don't read the fine print (I'd venture to guess, most).
It's very tricky in my opinion, and for once I actually agree with Microsoft's position on this for the above reasons.
NGWave - Fast Sound Editor for Windows
What are they giving away? They are giving away the same thing MS is giving away - a "license" to use their software for a period of time. In my case I get 30 weeks of "free click-n-run" plus an OS install which I can use on all my home PCs (if I desire). Whether or not MS ever pays Lindows a penny really doesn't matter - what lindows has done is signed up another potential user.
MS is right about several things. I'm tempted to send many of my friends here and tell'em just to make up some shit so they get the "free click and run."
Once you fill out the form you can download lindows, install it, and use the "click and run" archive for a period of time. They lose nothing but some bandwidth, and in exchange they get the opportunity to show another person how linux can work for them. The user gets a lindows plus account, which is great because it gives them an excuse to give away "premium" software the user usually has to pay extra for.
It may be a bit shady, and MS may be right on many counts, but it doesn't matter - even if Lindows loses the ability to collect on all those "signatures" they still may drive a few more users from the arms of MS. If those new linux users stay with lindows, then they get a fresh revenue stream. And if they don't stay with lindows, maybe some of them will move onto redhat or debian or whatever. Maybe some of them will buy macs. What matters is just that people are encouraged to try something new because they have the promise of free shit. Lindows isn't normally free even to end users, so there's a greater perception of value here on the part of mom sixpack and, therefore, greater incentive to try it. and if they can't collect, so what? As much as I'd like to cost MS money, I honestly wasn't going to jump through the hoops required just to maybe get back a check for $80. At least this way there's a chance I'll cost MS some money and, hey, in the meantime I got something with some modest perceived value.
Comment removed based on user account deletion
Gimme a second to gird my loin - I'm about to be flamebaited by the Linux zealots who have surrendered all perspective on the meaning of "free" and "open" and "fair".
*gird* *gird*
Okay, here's the deal. I've already
pointed out that Lindows sueing Microsoft is no better than SCO suing Linux users - in either case it is ultimately a tactic used to increase corporate profits at the expense of a competitor, using the legal system as a prybar.
Micro$oft makes several valid and salient points here about Lindow$'s predatory tactics. What Lindow$ is essentially doing is leveraging their anticipated income on the sale of current products. Moreover, if you look at the MSFreePC, it is quite deceptive. You are not getting a "free pc". You are purchasing a PC from Lindows with settlement rightfully due you for being forced to purchase MS Software in the past.
This whole thing stinks. Now, watch my score drop like a prom-dates panties.
California's
2001 SB97 reads:
This seems pretty clear to me, but then, as they say, IANAL.
The cure for cancer is coming: Reovirus
According to this website, it's a violation of Federal Law for Microsoft to say that electronic signatures are invalid.
Get rid of everything Micro and Soft: Buy Viagra and/or Linux
No, I'm New Here
7. SELL THE SHIT TO VIVENDI FOR $385 MILLION.
I bet its $384,999,996 more than u have.
So please... he's an asshole, but he's not stupid.
The "donated" software will be valued at retail value, possibly ten or more times more than the price a school would actually pay for it. Microsoft may also "donate" software that the schools would never buy on their own. And as many have pointed out, Microsoft software donations are actually in Microsoft's benefit, since it encourages lock-in to their product.
The issue of an ink signature is not really valid, since as many people have already pointed out, electronic sigs hold equal legal weight now in most states, CA included.
Anyone ever get an instant tax refund from H & R Block? Its really the same thing as what Lindows is doing. You sign over your right to them, you get instant payout, they get to make the claim for you. H & R gets a cut, where as Lindows pushes their product in exchange for fronting you the settlement.
Also, Lindows isn't encouraging false claims. If you get away with a false claim, then your only screwing Lindows and not MS. They now own the rights to an invalid claim, and they won't get reimbursed, even though they already gave you software. MS shouldn't really care about this.
There was no problem with digital signature in the CD suit, and there shouldn't be here either. I don't see anything illegal about what Lindows is doing, but it is a sleezy piggy back manuever.
Moderation Totals: Flamebait=2, Troll=1, Redundant=1, Insightful=6, Overrated=1, Underrated=1, Total=12. (not mine)
HellerEhrman
Robert A. Rosenfeld
rrosenfeld@hewm.com
Direct (415) 772-6609
Main (415) 772-6000
Fax (415) 772-6268
Tell him what you think.