Slashdot Mirror
Lenovo Requires NDA For Windows License Refund
tykev writes "A customer wanted to return the license for preinstalled Windows Vista Business that came with his Lenovo laptop. After some lengthy negotiations with representatives of Lenovo's technical support and management, he was offered financial compensation for returning the license in the amount of CZK 1950 (USD 130, EUR 78), pending his acceptance of a non-disclosure agreement that would cover the entire negotiations with the company and its results. He declined and published his experiences on a Czech Linux website. The website editors decided to reward the customer for publishing the article by paying him an author's royalty in the same amount as was the offered compensation for returning the license."
There go Lenovo's chances on my next laptop purchase.
"My opinions are my own, and I've got *lots* of them!"
...Everyone knows you make them sign the agreement *before* making an offer!
The CB App. What's your 20?
Where does the desire for the NDA come from and why?
Is it Lenovo? If so, is it some sort of routine ass-covering procedure that doesn't make all that much sense? Or is it something that applies to all "there is a not too well known way to get some money from us, we'll do it; but don't popularize it" situations?
Is it Microsoft? They have been historically tight lipped about their OEM agreements and prices, are they attempting to discourage indirect indicators like this one?
Why the hell is a NDA agreement required anyway? This is for a refund on a specific part of the total price. The price of Vista. Requiring a NDA for this is stupid unless you're trying to give as little away as possible - but wouldn't/shouldn't that be illegal? :P The cost of Windows on it is not subjective, it's concrete.
If it were me, and they attempted to hit me with a NDA prior to the process, I'd take them to court. Any NDA they have with microsoft is between them and microsoft. I should not be forced to accept it just to receive the LEGALLY ENTITLED REFUND I'm due. If microsoft is engaging in some sort of shady pricing schemes between it's various suppliers, that's THEIR problem, not mine.
Meanwhile, Microsoft still got paid for a product that was completely unwanted and unused. This is a great example of the Microsoft Tax in action. Even when their new operating system is a disaster and people refuse to use it, they still get paid, purely on the basis of their market position. This is the kind of reason why Microsoft should be subject to antitrust laws. Normal market forces just don't apply to them.
Bogtha Bogtha Bogtha
My point is that the $130 is almost certainly the maximum for the fixed price, not the minimum.
It isn't even all that likely that they will make a similarly sized offer under an NDA, as that ship has sailed.
Nerd rage is the funniest rage.
4. Configure the Vista product with the ultimate version. That is roughly feature equivalent to Ubuntu.
The point isn't to determine how much Windows Ultimate costs ($349 is probably about right), nor is it to perform a feature comparison of Windows vs. Ubuntu. The point is to determine how much the lowest 'Windows tax' is. From what we've seen, standard Windows should get you back about $130. That seems a bit high, as the OEM costs for Windows that I've heard are quite a bit lower. I wonder why they'd offer that high.
Really? I think most people would want their $130 USD back if they knew they qualified for it. It's not a lot of money, but it's not a trifle, either.
Developers: We can use your help.
going straight to MS
Which, incidentally, he should still be able to do, since he has not given up his license at this time. $260 is a lot better than $130. :D
Layne
Note that every story that has anything critical to say about Vista or is in any way unflattering to it is immediately attacked by rude offtopic comments. And not just one or two, but long threads of them, guaranteed to push any intelligent conversation a dozen screens down. I can't tell if this is done to discourage people from adding their own MS Vista horror stories or just to destroy any Vista discussion at all.
Either way, it has happened often enough that it looks suspiciously like an astroturf campaign. And it's not only happening at Slashdot. You'll see similar patterns at any of the tech-oriented news aggregators.
You are welcome on my lawn.
Someone said translation is like a woman:
If she is beautiful, she is not faithful.
If she is faithful, she is not beautiful.
No. They offered him what he asked for, with conditions. He did not ask for those conditions.
Sounds like they were rather distasteful to him. As they should be. The loss of ones freedom of speech should NEVER be a condition to anything.
NDAs are counterproductive. Learn how to discern people that you can trust and you shouldn't have to rely on them.
I for one, will NEVER sign one, regardless of context. I view them as unconstitutional. Simple as that.
Bank staff sign all kinds of secrecy legislation that applies to the industry and this can land them in jail for many years if they tried doing what you suggest.
Debian FTW