Slashdot Mirror
Amazon UK Refunds Windows License Fee, With Little Hassle
christian.einfeldt writes "Alan Lord, a FOSS computer consultant based in the UK, has announced that Amazon UK honored his request for a refund of the Microsoft license fee portion of the cost of a new Asus netbook PC that came with Microsoft Windows XP. Lord details the steps that he took to obtain a refund of 40.00 GBP for the cost of the EULA, complete with links to click to request a refund. Lord's refund comes 10 years after the initial flurry of activity surrounding EULA discounts, started by a blog post by Australian computer consultant Geoffrey Bennett which appeared on Slashdot on 18 January 1999. That Slashdot story led to mainstream press coverage, such as stories in CNN, the New York Times Online, and the San Francisco Chronicle, to name just a few. The issue quieted down for a few years, but has started to gain some momentum again in recent years, with judges in France, Italy, and Israel awarding refunds. But if Lord's experience is any indication, getting a refund through Amazon might be as easy as filling out a few forms, at least in the UK, without any need to go to court."
So this should work in the US, too? I'm looking to buy a new laptop sooner or later, but I sure as hell won't be using Windows. A refund would be prettty awesome.
To me, of all things that have been considered as a remedy against Microsoft monopoly abuse, the only one that is logical and practical would be to stop them from bundling hardware and software. I can't understand why this hasn't been done by either the EU or USA.
Software and hardware are clearly two different markets. You can install Windows in hardware from a number of vendors, and you can install a number of operating systems on a PC.
So you would buy a computer and you would get two receipts, one for the machine and another one for the OS. The OS can even be preinstalled on the machine and you would only get an activation key with your receipt. If you don't want the operating system, you just buy the hardware and don't pay for the activation key.
What really makes me mad is that the only reason this is not considered by the authorities is because Linux is not commercial, so they are not losing money from Microsoft's monopoly abuse. Only companies matter to government. The fact that the public would benefit from an operating system market where Linux would be allowed to compete on equals grounds is not relevant to the government because there is no single company making money from Linux.
When his defense asked, "Which computer has Jon Johansen trespassed upon?" the answer was: "His own."
US means United States according to the ISO 3166-1 International standard for 2-letter country code abbreviations. Is there some other standard I don't know about? These same codes that are used to define the TLDs of every country that has one... Why am I feeding the trolls?
From what I've read, the range of refunds given has been variable if not arbitrary. This thread on the ubuntu forums is an interesting place to start reading about some differenct experiences people have had.
I was also interested to learn recently that it is possible to buy machines with no OS from some vendors. The college I work for has this ability through our Dell rep. This post in the above-mentioned thread is particularly interesting, as it claims that anybody can request and receive a new computer without an OS from several vendors.
I am literally 3000 tokens away from the chaotic crossbow --Stephen
Maybe someone would like to buy a specific device without being bound to a license brought in by a separate party.
To you, that may be an unreasonable demand.
Is it your call?
-fb Everything not expressly forbidden is now mandatory.
There was a time when Microsoft got paid irrespective of what OS was loaded on the PC. Have a look for "per CPU licensing" on Google. Since the only way to avoid paying Microsoft was not to buy a PC at all that's quite a lot like the road fund licence or television licence in the UK which are both considered to be taxes even though they are not compulsory unless you have a car or a device capable of receiving television signals (I would have just said television but this place is where pedants go to die :P). I doubt that they are allowed to get away with that nowadays but the term Microsoft tax is still a valid albeit historical term.
That's why. Because people want to buy ANY machine, not some "special-needs" preconfigured POS. I'd buy a vaio FW any minute, if it came with something Debian-based. But it doesn't. Or can you find that missing link?
You don't have a choice, a us consent decree states that microsoft can not.
Microsoft gets paid, even if you don't you use their operating system, due to the per processor licensing scheme.
To gauge the Governments effectiveness (above rulings were in 1994) read this FINDINGS OF FACT (1998) which
to save you the read not much has changed.
From what I've read/heard, you are paying for the hardware and the hardware only. As Apple is a "hardware company." OS X is a freebie according to this logic many Slashdot users like to profess.
And the Lord spake, saying, "First shalt thou take out the Holy License, then shalt thou count to 40 GBP, no more, no less. 40.00 GBP shall be the number thou shalt count, and the number of the counting shall be 40. 50 shalt thou not count, neither count thou 30, excepting that thou then proceedest on to 40. 60 is right out. Once the 40.00 GBP, being the 40th number, be reached, then lobbest thou thy Holy License of Windows towards thy Amazon, who being naughty in my sight, shall snuff it." Amen.
Any sufficiently advanced intelligence is indistinguishable from stupidity.
The case in Israel was an out of court settlement. It never got to a judge. It was unique in that the plaintiff refused to settle unless it was also made public, but still, no judge.
Shachar
Copy Print Exit 4:58:39 PM CustomerChristian Initial Question/Comment: Rebates 4:58:44 PM SystemSystem Jeremy has joined this session! 4:58:44 PM SystemSystem Connected with Jeremy 4:58:44 PM SystemSystem Hello my name is Jeremy. How may I help you today? 4:59:20 PM CustomerChristian Hi there, I was reading an article about how amazon refunded the microsoft OS price for a netbook that was purchased. http://www.theopensourcerer.com/2009/07/21/getting-your-microsoft-tax-refunded-1010-for-amazon-uk/ 4:59:35 PM CustomerChristian I was wondering whether Newegg would do that on a laptop I ordered, because I don't accept the EULA. 5:00:34 PM AgentJeremy We do not offer this return. 5:01:02 PM CustomerChristian Didn't think so. :) Perhaps one day when EULA's are challenged in court we can get this fixed. Until then, viva la microsoft tax eh? ;)
5:01:49 PM AgentJeremy
Do you have any other questions, or is there anything else I can assist you with today?
5:01:53 PM CustomerChristian
Nope, thanks.
Send
Session ID: 658231
Question40
Pick one of the following options:
OK Cancel
Timeout40
Do you wish to continue this chat session?
Continue Session End Session
All your base are belong to Google.
I wonder if anyone has ever tried this with Apple.. Wipe out OSX and request a refund for it because you plan to use Linux.. I bet it would be even more difficult than getting a Windows refund.
forced
Forced, forced. I keep seeing that word in this thread.
Forced? Was it a gun or a knife? Was the state forcing you to buy Windows?
No, no, and no. You had a choice. There are vendors offering pre-installed Linux. There are vendors selling bare PCs. You may buy parts and build your own PC.
Instead, you chose to buy a PC with Windows on it. And now you are complaining that you were "forced" to buy Windows. Just because the particular hardware you wanted had Windows on it does not mean you were "forced" to buy it. Just because the marketplace does not offer the exact choices you want does not mean you were "forced" to buy something. You may buy something else, or you may choose to buy nothing at all. Or, you may pay a few extra dollars for something that includes software that you do not intend on using. That does not mean you were "forced" to buy it.
Penny - plain text accounting
Amazon is not the company that bought that Windows licensed. That would be Asus. That implies that what really happened here is that Amazon decided to eat the cost to keep a customer happy.
My guess is that the customer (the company that actually bought the computer--not the guy they gave it to) does a lot of business with them, so they were willing to eat a little on one sale to keep the end user happy, to keep their customer happy.
I doubt Amazon is willing to in effect buy a Windows license for everyone who wants to buy a netbook from them and use Linux on it, so I don't expect this to go far.
Why should it be any different for operating systems?
B...b...because it's MICROSOFT!
It's like trying to vote for an independent third party. You may be very smart and know what policies should be implemented, but other voters aren't as concerned as you are, and they outnumber you. Something like 90 to 8 to 1.
This is why you need to take them to court to get your refund. Talk to friends to get your refund. Support people who offer computers without Windows installed, and let OEMs know that's why your doing it.
Interesting.
Isn't this sort of like buying a car and demanding a refund on the crappy OEM stereo because you immediately replaced that crap stereo with some audiophile fanciness?