Slashdot Mirror
Microsoft Drags Feet with Settlement Claims
An anonymous reader writes "Microsoft is holding up compensation claims from a quarter of million Californians in order to punish Lindows.com, and to coerce the class action plaintiffs 'into siding with Microsoft against its Lindows competitor,' according to a court filing seen by The Register. The document, filed on 21st November by Townsend and Townsend and Crew, lead counsel for the Californian class action consumers, points out that none of the claims being held up was actually filed via Lindows.com, yet Microsoft has held them 'hostage' for over two months."
They need to hurry up and process all the legitimate claims filed with proper proof-of-purchase, so they can get down to what really matters... processing all those phony ones from MSFreePC.com!
*eagerly awaiting his ill-gotten gains*
I'm not a professional accountant, but could this be a move for the stock? According to the article, they won't have to pay out all 1.1 billion but there will still be a good chunk of money paid out. If they can keep delaying this until after the end of the year, they wouldn't have to report it on this quarters accounting forms. It would seen to me, even for MS, a big cash payment like that will look serious on paper. I could be wrong in my facts though.
Microsoft is dragging its feet on settlement claims?
In other news...
Water is wet!
The Sky is blue!
Ice is cold!
and so on ad nauseum.
Is anyone surprised?
It doesn't matter whether we're talking about SCO, Microsoft, the DMCA, RIAA, or Michael Jackson. The new get-rich-quick or save-your-ass business model is now based on seeing who can legally travel the farthest on the gas they have in their tank.
I know someone from IRC who openly brags about making up information to get a free download of Staroffice 7, because he says his claim will end up being thrown out. The fact is, it does encourage people to make up phony claims, and unfortunately, people like the one I mention above will probably never be caught. This is exactly one of Microsoft's objections, and they couldn't be more right in what they've said. By requiring people to file claims through the court, as would normally happen, people are much less able to make phony claims. As much as I don't like Microsoft, and even though they're guilty, it doesn't make it right to steal from them, or from Lindows.
It's a nice idea to encourage people to claim their piece of the settlement, and as much as I like seeing it happen to Microsoft, it really can't be done in a fair and legal way.
From what I read, they don't require the proof that the settlement requires, so how are they going to get the money? And what's stopping you from filing claims with both MS and Lindows? I doubt MS is going to share it's data with Lindows.
"It is not how things are in the world that is mystical, but that it exists." -Ludwig Wittgenstein
How many other companies can afford to pay 1.1 billion and barely feel it....?????
ONE
"The document, filed on 21st November by Townsend and Townsend and Crew, lead counsel for the Californian class action consumers, points out that none of the claims being held up was actually filed via Lindows.com"
'nuff said
me karma am bad
But how many small businesses are going to be that efficient? Especially when the guy who runs the systems is probably someone doing it part time along with his other duties, who may have been handed the job by the last guy who left, without a significant training period (after all, Windows is so easy to run, right?). A lot of small research labs (e.g., under one professor at a university) are run like this, usually by student volunteers.
And the point is, Microsoft accuses you of theft without any proof whatsoever. They have no way of tracking where that version came from, to know, for instance, if it was copied from some other disk). They have no witnesses to testify that they saw you make the copy illegally (unless they can find the guy you laid off last week and he has a grudge). But "innocent until proven guilty" means nothing. It's more like, "we have more lawyers than you and can grind you into the dust whenever we choose, so wouldn't you rather have a site license and end all these worries?"
This is about Microsoft wanting its way and screwing over innocents to try and get it. They're just being whiney crybabies here about MyFreePC. Sure, they may have some legit complaints about MyFreePC, but that shouldn't stop them from processing legitimate claims that have nothing at all to do with MyFreePC! This is truly just pathetic behaivor on MS's part.
The bulk of this money will return to Microsoft in the form of new income. So logically, they have no reason to block the settlement. I deduce therefore that it's a subtle way of pumping profits into 2004.
Or maybe Microsoft just hate Michael Robertson so much they would rather find themselves in breach of the settlement than pay one red cent... Nah, can't be.
Ceci n'est pas une signature
What? A benevolent, law-abiding company like Microsoft, whose only goal is to make people's lives better and more productive, trying to chisel people out of money it owes them? This can't be true. It's those anti-Microsoft zealots at it again. Don't believe everything you read on Slashdot.
Give 'em a break, they're still running the mail merge for the form letter response...
It's time to stop letting these things get turned into PR circuses benefiting the the defendant who chooses to settle out of court (and apparently giving no benefit to the plaintiffs, so far).
Standard disclaimer: IANAL, use this advice at your own peril, yada-yada-yada.
Logic is a wonderful thing but doesn't always beat actual thought. -Terry Pratchett