Slashdot Mirror
Lenovo Ordered To Refund 'Microsoft Tax'
angry tapir writes with an excerpt from an article over at TechWorld: "A French laptop buyer has won a refund from Lenovo after a four-year legal battle over the cost of a Windows license he didn't want. The judgment could open the way for PC buyers elsewhere in Europe to obtain refunds for bundled software they don't want, according to French campaign group No More Racketware."
If a company wishes to not sell specific configurations of their products no one should force them. If that means they lose sales as a result of it, thats their problem. If it turns out another company (such as Microsoft) is forcing itself on the market in an anti-competitive way then it is that company that should be taken to court.
How would that judge feel about exclusive contracts for mobile phone hardware.
A feeling of having made the same mistake before: Deja Foobar
No, they would have surrendered long ago.
Does this say anything for buyers outside Europe? I bought a Lenovo laptop and tried to get them to refund the Windows license I was not planning to use and they said they can't do that.
Like it or not, the software bundled with your computer drives its cost down. Those companies (Norton, AOL, Roxio etc.) pay to have their software preloaded on your machine. If it becomes standard practice to offer a blank machine, hardware prices will just increase. Some manufacturers even offer a crapware free machine for a nominal fee.
Does anyone honestly think that retailers would charge you $50 less (or whatever the cost of the Windows License is, probably closer to $15) if Windows wasn't installed? Just look at Dell when they offered Linux boxes. The cost of the machine was often times more than the equivalent Windows machine.
Lesson learned here is offer an option for an unsubsidized blank hard drive that costs more than the Windows version. Problem solved, no "Microsoft Tax"
Lenovo does not have a free choice. They can either refuse Microsoft's thuggish demands (do not sell linux or we will cut off all supplies of Windows to you), or they can give in to Microsoft's thuggish demands. They have no power.
They can't take Microsoft to court.
Now, the consumer can't take Microsoft to court either. Why? They have no standing to bring a case - Microsoft did not bully or threaten the consumer, it bullied and threatened Lenovo.
IE, even though Microsoft is distorting the free market, they could never get sued.
You might say that the government should sue them... ha ha ha ah ha. The same governments that just bailed out Goldman Sachs, Morgan Stanley, Merrill Lynch, Bank of America, Deutschebank, Credit Suisse, UBS, RBS, etc, when they all blatantly broke the law? When the regulators that work for the government get payed huge salaries to to join industry as soon as they 'retire' from government service? When campaign contributions are now completely unlimited and these companies can give a billion dollars to someone to be president?
I've always been unsure if bundled Windows actually costs anything. The computer maker gets paid to install all sorts of adware and other crap on the computer; does that cover the cost of the Windows license? If so, then Windows is effectively "free" to the end user.
I don't know if this is how it actually works out in practice, though.
If you're a zombie and you know it, bite your friend!
than any inability to have avoided this situation. Can't the French just order from a vendor that offers laptops with either some variety of Linux they like installed, or no OS at all? Even if there aren't French sites out there for that purpose, it wouldn't have been that hard to order from the US or somewhere. Unless there's something I'm unaware of preventing them from doing this, it would seem to me that he could have just done that and avoided the lawsuit altogether. Seems to me as if he intentionally chose to do this and brought the lawsuit simply as a matter of principle rather than from any pressing need to do so. I'm sure there's a linux friendly vendor or someone willing to ship a machine with a blank drive where he could have purchased something comparable.
My office Dell computer came bundled with FreeDOS, which was never used. Yet more racketware. I want a refund, too.
I can try to get a refund on the laptop I bought?
French here. We've been sucking a big dick for, oh, almost a hundred years now.
The last 2 laptop computers I purchased did not come with any disks at all... and it was assumed that one would make restoration disks oneself after completing their system setup. This is very annoying, because then the restoration disks end up putting back all the bloatware that the manufacturer puts on it.
File under 'M' for 'Manic ranting'
Then don't read them, and bugger off... idiot
A lot of them were modded up before the attack
Also, you're abusing the system posting and modding in the same thread.. You're part of the problem
-CT
Commonly accepted by whom? Certainly not by Oracle salesmen, or EDA software salesmen, or many other application and operating system areas (eg. MS Server). OK, it may be true for desktop PCs, but the computer market is more than just desktops.
The real "Libtards" are the Libertarians!
We already had that in Europe, for example you can get a refund from ACER:
- http://www.acer.it/ac/it/IT/content/rimborso
It's around 40 euro for Win ~professional, you do have to send it back to ACER by your own but at least it's an automatic procedure: they just give you the money back with no questions.
Haha, he/she is being part of the problem? How? As long as their moderation was done to the parts of this discussion that are on-topic, and not your annoying childish drivel, I see no conflict of interest.
And the system isn't being abused, it was designed this way. If it was not intended to be so, it would have been more effectively blocked. You don't even have to log out to do it; just check the mark that says "Post Anonymously" when you reply.
A lot of them were modded up before the "attack," hey? Well then post your comment moderation log to prove it. Not that it proves anything by itself, because it could easily be legitimate moderators doing it, because as the other AC noted, most of your posts don't really have that much content or insight... I did take a look as well. Sometime you do have a good point, but you almost always have to wrap it up in an insult or something inflammatory.
My advice: grow up, and maybe people will treat you better.
I've noticed that people don't want to listen to others whine, must be a conspiracy.
I see some of you are speculating about what should be the value of the refund for a Windows licence:
- http://static.acer.com/up/Resource/Acer/Docs/IT/20110110/Windows_refund_process_flow_rev_Nov_11th_2009.pdf
That is according to ACER Refunds in Italy, dunno if that's the same in the rest of Europe.
As it is a PDF (1 page) I'll give you some pointers:
- Seven Home: 25e
- Seven Starter: 20e
- Seven Home Basic: 35e
- Seven Home Premium: 40e
- Seven Prof 70e
- Seven Ultimate 90e
How am I supposed to know that what you are going to post is childish bullshit before reading it?
I could see your username and remember that your posts are low content high noise paragraphs of idiocy just from your posting history. But if I don't know beforehand that you're a complete idiot, how am I supposed to go about it?
Once I have read your post, how am I supposed to unread it? This seems to be a flaw in your solution.I can't find remedy besides trying to get you banned off the site. There might be a rule in the ToS against morons, but I'm assuming there aren't, so I'd have to deal with you anyway after my failed attempt.
Ignore? But what if you post something good? I know the chance is minuscule, but it is there. Personally I find it childish to ignore people. It is mean to ignore people simply because of their lower intelligence, and it would be even more rude to ignore them when they post complaints about how the moderation system works, no matter how wrong or how stupid the complaint seems to the general populace.
Regards,
-The solution to your problem
I think part of the problem is that it's legal for companies to pay to get software onto your computer. It's like payola from radio.
So can I now demand a refund from from Ford for including a specific component into a car that I have no intention of ever using?
If the idea of giving money to Microsoft as a part of your notebook purchase is for some reason completely unbearable, just buy an Apple machine and shut the hell up.
Microsoft
Apple
DIY Linux
That is it.
The market is working wonders....
You can add viperidaenz to the Bonch/Sharklaser/OverlyCriticalGuy/Dtech/hairyfeet etc Waggener Edstrom sockpuppet collection.
cable and satellite tv needs to end big packs bundled channels and on cable with a cable card you should get some kind of refund for guide / cable box software build into the main price as yuo are not useing it.
But big packs bundled channels need to go or at least tuned into smaller theme packs and no forcing you to buy disney or ESPN to get discovery, HBO, syfy, and others.
Or why should you be forced to buy lifetime, Disney, Fox news, MTV, CNN, to get EPSN and NFL network?
What about if you like NHL and not other sports so why should have to buy EPSN, NBA TV, NFL network, MLB network, to get your RSN , NHL network and, MSNBC, CNBC, and NBC sports network.
There's also precedence for this in a case in Denmark, where a guy got refunded his money for a windows license..
link is in danish, but google translate works http://www.version2.dk/artikel/saa-lykkedes-det-dansker-fik-850-kr-retur-ubrugt-windows-licens-17621
Let's apply this to the entire concept of bundling! For starters, how about your cable TV bill? ( I know, I know! Most Slashdot readers have dropped cable TV!) By some estimates, about 30% to 40% of your cable bill goes to paying for ESPN. If you have cable TV, then you must have ESPN even if you don't want it. ( At least in my area you do not have a choice not to have it.) I have even done a channel block for ESPN on my TV set. I never see it and don't want it but still have to pay for it. I call it the ESPN tax. I'm sure that there are many more examples of this!
I have purchased several PCs with an included microsoft license. I read the agreement and in all cases the Vendor stated that they would refund the operating system cost if it was requested and not installed. Having called these companies, I can tell u that they will pretend to have no idea wat u r talking about and insist that u return the entire purchase for a refund. I choose not to refund and tried for months to communicate with them in order to receive the refund they promised in the agreement they sent to me. The first thing their support staff told me was to call Microsoft for a refund. But the windows license agreement clearly states in the beginning it is between u (consumer) and the vendor (HP, Lenovo, etc). I copied the entire agreement and quoted the pertinent parts to their support staff. But they continued to pretend not to understand what they had written. Finally, a support staff member from Hewlett Packard stated directly to me: "You will never get a refund from us".
The only recourse is to sue the vendor in order to get a refund. But realistically, who is going to do this. I commend this consumer for sticking to his guns and taking the vendor to task. It is about time some people stand up to fight for the agreement that the vendor puts in writing themselves. It is ridiculous that a vendor provides u with an agreement that they wont even honor and pretend to not understand. What do u think the vendor would do if u began to violate the license agreement urself? Like if I began selling free copies of the operating system. Do u think the vendor would continue to pretend that they dont understand the letter of this license?
It seems clear to me that Vendors supply the option for a refund in the agreement, because to not do so would subject them to anti-competitive practice lawsuits... which can be a huge fine. But the reality is that they have absolutely no intent of honoring this agreement and provide only two options: pay for something u dont want or refund everything and go away.
IMO, this situation is ripe for a class action lawsuit. I live in Canada. I would be more then happy to support such a case and offer all my assistance of past correspondence to assist in the case. I cannot believe I am the only one who finds the Microsoft bundled products less then useless and requested a refund as outlined in the agreement. Alone, it is difficult to do anything, but together I believe that real change could occur.
When I bought an Inspiron from Dell here in Norway back in 2006, I called them to tell I didn't agree with Microsoft's EULA, and they refunded the money for both Windows XP and Office into my account the next day. I didn't know companies were still refusing people to get their money back, and now regret picking up a Lenovo as my most recent laptop.
And the system isn't being abused, it was designed this way.
It was designed to be manipulated by " rapid response" reputation management teams paid for by Microsoft? Are you sure?
Are you sure it didn't just evolve that way?
Monitoring conversations, including those that take place with social media, is part of our daily routine; our products can be used as early warning systems, helping clients with rapid response and crisis management.
http://waggeneredstrom.com/about/approach
http://waggeneredstrom.com/clients
I find it amusing how my folks here complain about Microsoft being a Monopoly in arguments related to Microsoft, yet at the same time, they will rant and rave about how much market share Apple has now. Which is it?
It is possible to buy a computer and install the OS you want. It is harder of course on a notebook, but for a desktop machine you can even but the bits by themselves and install and OS you want! Hell, I even installed mac OS X over the weekend via iboot mulitbeast.
I don't care how much a Windows License costs...
I purchased several Acer AOD150 netbooks back in 2008. Due for a refresh now that they are four years old.
I choose the Linux (Acer Linpus) dress because it matched our needs. Figured that a Linpus dress would be available in future.
Nope. I replaced these with AOD257 models. In my country these were only available with Windows 7 Starter. Linpus or Meego aren't available.
Two problems - 1: I would like to indicate to Acer that I want them to continue contributing drivers to Linux. 2: declining the Windows EULA tells me to contact my OEM (Acer). I may well do that, because I do want to register my desires with my chosen hardware vendor.
Now, back when I bought the AOD150's, the Linput dress was around twenty bucks cheaper. Around 10% of the netbooks cost. I wouldn't mind getting sixty bucks back on the refresh, but that isn't the main point.
Future Linux support for my desired hardware is the point. I want a "no-problem" install. Web-cam, sound, networking, wireless, SD multi-reader, keyboard controls, sleep/hibernate, etc.
As it happens, everything worked on the AOD257 with Fedora 16 (I needed to add "kmod-staging" for the multi-reader, as it's a new chip, and the main OS didn't have built-in driver support. Minor issue, and easily resolved). But we need to be able to indicate our use cases to the vendors for continued support.
No, I don't know if retail Windows has all the drivers for this hardware; I am fairly sure that all needed drivers were in the OEM installed Windows (but since I've never run it, I wouldn't know). Linux support needs the OEMs or chip vendors to supply driver source code, because most Linux users do not like to install strange binary blobs from vendors that they don't trust to code stable drivers.
Just another "Cubible(sic) Joe" 2 17 3061
Does not show what OS the CAs were running on, only the public website frontend server of those companies. If it's even that, and not some sort of caching or loadbalancing device. It's not uncommon for CAs to run their actual certificate generation platform on MicroSoft windows.
I was promised a flying car. Where is my flying car?
Consumer have the right to buy what he wants to buy. I want "clean", standard-complaint hardware without any crap from Microsoft. It should be optional. If some customer wants it, he/she pays and gets it. If I do not want it because I'm not going to use it, I have right to buy product without the crap. Forcing me to pay for things I do not want to by and do not want to use is CRIME. So, Microsoft is pushing vendors and resellers to commit CRIME.
Show me a link to this aggreement on the web please.
Thanks
Exclusive contracts are not very common in Europe, at least not in my experience. But perhaps I shop more wisely than others...
Have a look at soylentnews.org for a different view
This is stupid. Why would you not go after Apple? Why is there no organizations demanding the separation of their hardware and software? It's just an anti-Windows front.
Can I send that back and get a refund for the cost of that? If I decide I don't need the mouse and keyboard from a desktop PC can I get a refund on them? How about if I get something on special offer - buy one get one free. Can I send the one I bought back back and keep the free one?
The licensing is probably a bulk deal negotiated with Microsoft for all its PCs. An individual copy doesn't have a cost of them. Only the right to install it on their PCs in the first place.
The cost of Windows isn't quantifiable. the pats aren't itemised. One way of looking at it is you buy a â400 copy of Windows and get a free PC. another way of looking at it is you buy a â400 PC and get a free copy of Windows.
The licence agreement gives the right to send the whole thing back. Not parts.
This isnt about microsoft. This is about the Vendors (Lenovo in this case). They are the ones providing the Microsoft EULA contract. And this contract is written legally. Meaning: the Vendor states that they will offer a refund. The illegal part is when they decline a refund to the consumer when requested. This happened to me with Hewlett Packard. At first they said to me: call microsoft for a refund... but the agreement is clear: the contract is with the vendor (HP) and they r responsible for providing the refund as they wrote in the contract. Declining to do this is the antitrust violation. It is the Vendor and not Mircrosoft that is the problem here.
That's an interesting viewpoint that never occured to me (because in Germany, where I live, the EULA is most likely invalid because you get to see it only after the purchase). In other countries,
a) is the EULA legally binding?
b) is the vendor obliged to pay the refund, just because Microsoft wrote it into the EULA?
If the answer to both questions is "yes", I'd say refusing the refund is a simple breach of contract. The French courts seem to see it this way, tough luck Lenovo.
C - the footgun of programming languages
Offtopic, but Slashdot is one of the few high-profile sites on the net where Microsoft loathing and pure hate/rage is not only present, but accepting (when taking into account which posts are most highly moderated up). On the other hand if a MS basher appears on something more balanced like ArsTechnica, unless they have something creditable to add instead of 15 years of pent-up rage at a company the rest of the posters (and moderators) will keep them in line. It seems Slashdot is one of the few places where in 2012 there is still way too much hatred for Microsoft. It's not like they kicked your dog, and there are worse companies out there than MS these days.
Microsoft are not particularly nice, but I think the time has come to perhaps calm down and focus one's rage (with logical reasons) on the more dangerous technological companies which have a greater mindshare in the world (e.g. Apple). It's just getting silly that Slashdot are alone in the circlejerk and other sites have posters who can look at things reasonably and without so much emotion.
To all newcomers - people here are very close-minded and can't handle complaints about Linux. Keep this in mind.
Would you act the same way with a trader that is known to be unreliable and abusive?
Would you be so forthcoming with a dentist that every time causes you pain?
I don't see why one should give a free pass to Microsoft, they have barely changed their business practices and they keep using their muscle to bring into submission other companies (and it is not like if these things happened long time ago, the patent bullying of companies distributing Linux is happening right now, that is right, Microsoft is earning a crust from Linux just because others know they don't have the financial resources to fight them in court).
And saying one should forget about Microsoft and instead concentrate on Apple is puerile, one can inspect and put into question what both companies (and Google, and Facebook, and many others) are doing.
IANAL but write like a drunk one.
It is time that some of you folks take a reading comprehension course.
The EULA that comes with the software *guarantees* a refund if you don't want it.
All what people want is that this unilateral pseudo contract is honoured by the party imposing it.
This has nothing to do with how other items forming a computer system are sold, this has nothing to do with how a computer manufacturer and Microsoft reach a deal.
IANAL but write like a drunk one.
If you buy a computer preinstalled with Windows *the EULA* offers you a refund.
It is part of the deal, why should you go and buy elsewhere if they are offering you upfront something that you want or need? (a Windowless machine).
One should go elsewhere if they made perfectly clear they won't give refunds for unused copies o WIndows, which would be interesting from a point of view of consumer rights, since it is illegal in most localities to sell one item (the computer) only and only if you buy another (Windows).
Microsoft could solve this problem by doing what Apple has done: produce their own computers and stop licensing to manufacturers. Of course this would bring the competition that MS does not want: Dell, HP, and others putting their collective weight behind another OS (most likely a variant of Linux or even Solaris or BSD).
The EULA and the refund offered are not gracious favours, is MS's way to avoid the route down proper competition in the desktop market (which may be dying anyway, so job done, they would have dominated that industry during almost its whole existence, by almost whatever means necessary).
IANAL but write like a drunk one.
Therefore let's stop making crime illegal. Mugging grannies is just a way of making money.
I build the freaking machine myself.
Order parts put machine together.
No windows involved.
But boy do they lower the price with hardware purchases to tempt you. Evil bastards.
Or you could, seems like a good protest.
format c: echo y
Then return it.
Which quite heavily cuts into MS's complaints about losses due to piracy, doesn't it.
And you act rude and insult the dick at every opportunity, and try not to show too many films from the dick's country at your theatres... right?
Love that term!!!
Apple, IBM, and Oracle, all bundle hw/sw.
Yeah if it's a part of one single product you've bought.
The trouble in this case is that it's 2 separate products (a laptop and an operating system) done by 2 separate companies (lenovo and microsoft) and which are bundled together, with a complex EULA and other legal paper binding the whole together.
"Sufficiently advanced satire is indistinguishable from reality." - [Tips: 1DrYakQDKCQ6y52z6QbnkxHXAocMZJE61o ]
In U.K., I get my no OS computers from Dell refurbish stores who usually have some offered without any OS or software. Hardware only computer at adiscount. Usually a 6 months old machine but useful.
Regards Eion MacDonald