Slashdot Mirror
Italian Judge Tells HP To Refund Pre-Installed XP
Paolo DF writes "An Italian user asked for a refund after buying a Compaq computer that came with Windows XP and Works 8 pre-installed. HP tried to avoid the EULA agreement which states, approximately: '[I]f the end user is not willing to abide by this EULA... he shall immediately contact the producer to get info for giving back the product and obtaining refunds.' The court ruled in favor of the user (Google translation from the Italian), who received back €90 for XP and €50 for Works. Here is the ruling (PDF, Italian)."
This is progress, the more this happens the better the choice for the consumer. It shows the vendors that users prefer OS choices a la Dell.
True, this is but 1 user but every little helps as we say in the UK.
90 euros for XP, $130
50 Euros for Works, $70.
so why do we only get back around $10 for a XP turn in?
Assuming the EULA is the same in the US and elsewhere, I wonder why this has not been tried before, and if it has, does anyone know the outcome? This has far reaching implications beyond HP. Any computer manufacturer would be affected, but the EULA seems to point heavily to the refunding procedure, not of Microsoft, but of the reseller. It should be interesting to see how HP responds.
This guy bought a computer with XP installed and he's griping about it? Perhaps he would have preferred a computer with no OS?
We buy machines with no OS all the time (actually Dell ships FreeDOS but it's not installed). Perhaps the user in question was wanting to install a free OS on it?
Well, this is probably a translation, so most of us are helped more with the translation, even if a translation has no binding value and is therefore only approximately correct.
Well, kudos to Italy for making the front page of slashdot 3 times in one day, finally constructing a mechanical device that didn't break down immediately, and ending up with a score in the green.
Ciao!
-- If you try to fail and succeed, which have you done? - Uli's moose
As a quick google search's first few results show: this has been done in the US and Australia in the past with at least Dell and Toshiba and has been followed on slashdot before.
"If we knew what it was we were doing, it would not be called research, would it?" - Albert Einstein
I think the EULA was clearly refering to the entire computer not to this software. My guess is that the reason this never happened before is because the entire computer is normally returned not just the software. My guess is that that HP ran afoul of some EU or Italian law governing bundled products. If that is indeed true, I will probably characterize such a law as "lame".
Not only was the buyer reimbursed 140 euros for the unwanted software, he was awarded 2,300 euros in legal costs. Refusing to abide by the EULA could get expensive for vendors.
I wouldn't be surprised if this issue ending up being so that nobody would sell you a computer before you have signed an agreement stating that you agree w/having Windows etc. in there. Then, if someone took this to court, it would probably end up so that you could get some other OS pre-installed, but w/extra cost, and they could justify this by saying that it causes them extra costs to serve a small group of users having e.g. Linux in there. So, you'd still end up paying the M$ tax in one form or the other. Of course they could sell the computers w/o any OS, but I don't think this is the way it's gonna be, because M$ will use a lot of money and will put a lot of pressure on the hw companies to make it otherwise.
The lyf so short, the craft so long to lerne
It went off-line long ago! It was www.wondowsrefund.net
No winder it went off-line !
After a few seconds to get to the Google page, the EULA states exactly in the first paragraph.. http://www.microsoft.com/windowsxp/sp2/proeula.mspx
"IMPORTANT--READ CAREFULLY: This End-User License Agreement ("EULA") is a legal agreement between you (either an individual or a single entity) and Microsoft Corporation or one of its affiliates ("Microsoft") for the Microsoft software that accompanies this EULA, which includes computer software and may include associated media, printed materials, "online" or electronic documentation, and Internet-based services ("Software"). An amendment or addendum to this EULA may accompany the Software. YOU AGREE TO BE BOUND BY THE TERMS OF THIS EULA BY INSTALLING, COPYING, OR OTHERWISE USING THE SOFTWARE. IF YOU DO NOT AGREE, DO NOT INSTALL, COPY, OR USE THE SOFTWARE; YOU MAY RETURN IT TO YOUR PLACE OF PURCHASE FOR A FULL REFUND, IF APPLICABLE."
Rejecting the contract at this stage means you have no need to read the rest of the EULA,and states explicitly that you are entitled to a refund, who you are entitled to a refund from, and as the court cases have shown, the refund is in fact applicable. So basically, if they don't give a refund, you are entitled to take them to court and enter a case where you as the end user will win.
It is difficult to get a man to understand something when his job depends on not understanding it.
I can't believe no one commented on the fact he might already have a copy of XP and used the EULA policy to get a refund for the retail amount of the OS he paid for at a subsidized cost. Essentially, he got more back than he actually paid in for the OS and software. Brilliant.
The downside of being killed is the upside of being dead.
Three stories on Italy so far is nothing. We need to get posting submissions about the 16 billion pixel image of da Vinci's Last Supper. This one could be the big one
My next sig will be ready soon, but subscribers can beat the rush
It is looking more and more that the court systems of the world are looking to EULA click-through "agreements" as contracts of adhesion.
Why on earth would anyone want to do such a thing?!
c++;
Not without the OS, I suppose. Besides, I am not sure why I would want one -- they are vastly inferior to many of the Windows models available in Japan.
I think people should go to those stores that sell bare pc's, instead of just complaining about the companies that won't give you a pc without Windoze.
Thanks Captain Obvious, I don't know what we would have done without you. You truely have made the world a better place.
the Google translation is not very readable; when I proposed this submission, I did summarize as follows:
HP defended , claiming the terms of their contract with Microsoft; the judge ruled that the end user request may not be dismissed based on a contract between HP and Microsoft, since this latter is unknown to the end user. The end user, a member of ADUC (a consumer organization) was given 90euro for Windows and 50euro for Works; this is just a small symbolical amount, but it is a huge signal to HP and all other major vendor; in defending, HP claimed that the license and contract to Microsoft is unilaterally written by Microsoft; the judge ruled that nonetheless, HP is to be held accountable by the EULA; the ruling seem to suggest that it may be time for vendors to address this situation.
Brings back memories. http://marc.merlins.org/linux/refundday/
Why don't you check the EULA that came with your copy of OSX. Does it say that you can return it for a refund?