Slashdot Mirror
Italian Supreme Court Bans the 'Microsoft Tax'
An anonymous reader writes: In a post at the Free Software Foundation, lawyer Marco Ciurcina reports that the Italian Supreme Court has ruled the practice of forcing users to pay for a Windows license when they buy a new PC is illegal. Manufacturers in Italy are now legally obligated to refund that money if a buyer wants to put GNU/Linux or another free OS on the computer. Ciurcina says, "The focus of the Court's reasoning is that the sale of a PC with software preinstalled is not like the sale of a car with its components (the 4 wheels, the engine, etc.) that therefore are sold jointly. Buying a computer with preinstalled software, the user is required to conclude two different contracts: the first, when he buys the computer; the second, when he turns on the computer for the first time and he is required to accept or not the license terms of the preinstalled software. Therefore, if the user does not accept the software license, he has the right to keep the computer and install free software without having to pay the 'Microsoft tax.'"
Can I get a refund for my Mac OS too?
When the foot seeks the place of the head, the line is crossed. Know your place. Keep your place. Be a shoe.
Dell once explained why their Linux PCs weren't cheaper than similar Windows models. The average cost of a single customer service call to Dell was higher than their OEM Windows licence cost, and the Linux PCs had a significant higher number of customer service calls than the Windows-PCs.
I would MUCH rather see phones no longer bundling their crapware on the phones, i mean you cant even delete them (without rooting)
have you seen my sig? there are many others like it but none that are the same
How much less do Italians get to pay for a PC with no operating system loaded than for one with Microsoft Windows?
What. Are you. Talking about. This is not news. Maybe some reading on the history of the MS licensing "tax" before we no-scope post random info? This has been an issue in N. America since the 90s, the EU in the early 2K, etc. Mint is not an option for corporate because of non-free incorporated softwares. Debian is not "Catching up fast". Their focus is not on the desktop experience. Yeah, Windows will be a strong corporate OS for a long time. And yes, if you want to roll out linux to desktop corporate, it will be a battle. But it can be done.
.
If (and that's a big if) such a decision were rendered here in the US, Microsoft would have Congress quickly pass a law nullifying the decision.
20 years too late
Hardware with only windows drivers. By requiring windows 8.1 computers to have a certain level of hardware spec, they can ensure incompatible components on every computer and argue that the OS is required by the computer chosen.
Cwm, fjord-bank glyphs vext quiz
Exactly the same story already appeared on /. in September!
http://yro.slashdot.org/story/14/09/12/1450236/windows-tax-shot-down-in-italy
Doesn't anybody check these?
"if you want to roll out linux to desktop corporate, it will be a battle. But it can be done" good luck with that. Very few corps could handle the massive re-training of their staff to use something like OpenOffice. You would have to be an IT God to train 1,000+ babyboomers to effectively use OO before the entire company ground to a standstill. Then be prepared for the backlash when a large chunk of your clients and customers can no longer open up files sent to them like they used to. Theoretically it's possible but in practice unless the CEO and Board where pushing it the whole IT department would probably be fired first.
At my workplace we manage thousands of open-source systems, but their almost all Red Hat servers running under ESX.
So you only buy Macs and chromebooks now?
There is no reason to limit yourself to Unity, distro's like Kubuntu and Lubuntu are available in the official Ubuntu repositories.
"The likes of Facebook and WhatsApp are free to those whose privacy is of zero value."
This is it! 2014 will be the year of the Linux desktop!
Under Dutch law you are entitled a refund because you did not get to see the license before purchasing the computer but only after booting it for the fist time. Vendors have found all kinds of work-arounds. One of those work-arounds is that they add an administration-fee to your refund that is higher than the price of Windows. Another work-around is that they require the manufacture to verify that Windows has been entirely removed. Unfortunately they don't have a local office that can do that so you are supposed to ship your computer to Germany. They will check the computer, which takes a few weeks, and only then you get your refund, minus the international shipping and handling costs. Ofcourse they will not use the list-price for the refund but the volume-discount price that the big manufacturers get.
Only the most principled customers will jump through the hoops to get the refund.
Why should anyone be paying M$ so much as a thin dime let alone $10-$20 in royalties on each Android device sold?
Pain is merely failure leaving the body
Do it as a class action; that'll get their attention.
Pain is merely failure leaving the body
The bare bones PC doesn't sell worth spit.
It is not and never has been and never will be a mass market consumer product.
The OEM system install was the key to making the PC a mass market product. It meant that you had a working --- tested --- configuration out of the box, appropriate for its price range and intended use.
In 2014 it is still possible for the geek to be tied up in knots by Linux audio.
Something that leaves the OSX and Windows user with his head shaking in disbelief.
Walmart --- with its enormous purchasing power --- spent about ten years trying to make the OEM Linux PC a viable alternative to Windows in the North American retail market.
The chain sold tons of crap-tastic hardware to the geek for maybe $25 less than a Windows PC with a far more muscular CPU, twice the RAM and hard disk storage. For its rural customers on dial-up, Wamart had a Linux PC without a working modem.
The point being, that by the time product reaches retail shelves, the price of the OEM system install is essentially irrelevant.
There is something distinctly fraudulent about buying a Windows PC and demanding a refund when you could have bought a Linux PC from the start.
I may have missed in in the article, but is there any provision that states the OS has to be removed or disbled? If not, what's to keep someone from buying a PC and saying "Gimmie mah lira!" while still using the pre-installed OS?
~Knowledge is knowing that a tomato is a fruit, but Wisdom is knowing not to put it in a fruit salad.
Walk into a store and buy a fully assembled name brand (Dell, HP, etc) PC, complete with warranty and guarantees, without ANY software preinstalled. You can't. Your analogy fails.
Heathkit. Radio Shack. Long dead in any recognizable form.
The PC is a mass market consumer appliance or an office machine. It sells as a kit of parts only to a handful of enthusiasts and IT pros --- who don't do their shopping at the Galleria Mall.
explain how to get into boot menu without using windows tools on UEFI devices. Either I have been too stupid, or microsoft very smart, but I haven't found any optiont o boot an EFI-capable stick without windows, at least for the hardware I were on. I could have tried to remove the HDD, but that could have voided warranty. What to do in this case?
Just don't have software loaded on the PC at all, and include a disc that images your computer if you do agree that you want it at retail/on order.
Twinstiq, game news
Ok I'll bite. Show me where I can buy a Linux laptop, with a i7-4710, 1TB HDD, 8GB of RAM, and a GTX 850M.
No trouble:
Configure your Bonobo Extreme [Desktop Replacement]
Base price $1629
CPU Upgrades start at $50.
Free upgrade to NVIDIA 870M
Upgrade to 12 GB for $69.
1 TB HDDs starting at $39.
Full range of SSD primary and HDD/SSD secondary drives, optical and tertiary SSD drives.
As a ten year Kubuntu 'veteran', no I can't believe that.
"The likes of Facebook and WhatsApp are free to those whose privacy is of zero value."
To extend the analogy to OS X's free upgrade argument, imagine hotel A gives free lunch too, not just breakfast. So the arguments here seem to be saying, "since lunch is also free, it means breakfast is free, unlike at hotel O where you have to order food from M directly(which implies that breakfast there was not really free), hence CA does not deserve a refund while CO does".
This space for rent.
For Microsoft to be truly competitive, a PC with a preloaded MS system where the MS OS is denied, should entitle the purchaser to a full refund of retail price from microsoft.
That way, people who hate 8.1 can migrate to win 7 at the expense of Microsoft.
That would also allow small site PC builders to compete with the crap factories of Dell and other large scale manufacturers by reducing it to a hardware and labor price point.
_ _ _ Go for the eyes Boo! GO FOR THE EYES!
Microsoft is not in the business of giving away Windows. Are you thick?
They are not charging the end user, they're charging the OEM. What the end user pays is never going to be less than the OEM price, and Microsoft is going to charge less than $1 for Windows when Hell freezes over. They invented the idea of charging for an OS. It is their raison d'etre, and if they ever stopped doing that, they would be out of business in a heartbeat.
As Apple has demonstrated, when you're selling both the hardware and the software, you can price each as you wish. That is not what this discussion is about.
No one is saying they will license the OS for less. The OEM can still charge full price for the PC and add in a small additional price for the OS; that way if someone wants a rebate they get only a fraction of the total costs to the OEM so they recoup their license fee and make a refund not much of a value.
I'm a consultant - I convert gibberish into cash-flow.
It's up to the OEM and MicroSoft to risk bundling the OS with the machine. It's up to the OEM to add crapware that they actually get paid for to install on the machine. If a consumer wants the machine without the software, they should get the retail price of the software discounted off the price of the bundle.
Who pays for the price difference between the money the consumer gets back their money is between the OEM and MicroSoft. Maybe this will teach both to price stuff reasonably since the consumer now will be able to make a more informed and concious desision on actually paying for the OS, or getting a cheap(er) or free alternative.
Sure, you'll see more people pirating Windows. But right now, many companies have to pay twice for a windows license. Once when they buy the machine and once when they install the enterprise version they have a volume license for. That's just as much theft in my book. Upgraded your main board? Pay again for the windows license. You can't have your cake and eat it too. If you sell software, it's not fair to force people to buy it even if they don't use it, just because otherwise someone might pirate your alternative if the computer is sold without an OS. You want to sell, you take the risk.
I was promised a flying car. Where is my flying car?
Windows has become "Brazil". Between UEFI, and Win 8, a level of distopia has been created that rivals the movie.
I don't remember seeing a build-your-own laptop kit in stores recently.
Under Dutch law you are entitled a refund because you did not get to see the license before purchasing the computer
Perhaps PC sellers should start acting like font publishers, which don't let the user check out until he has scrolled through and agreed to the EULA.
My thoughts exactly. Either it will be agreed to in the purchase of the computer, or the retailer will charge them $30-$100? to uninstall the software before it leaves the store.
Not seeing how this is a win for consumers.
Let's hope that this ruling catches on in other countries. It is true that consumers are forced to pay for a Microsoft license on most new computers because Microsoft has tight relationships with most of the major players. The interesting part is that PC vendors used to issue a partial refund for Windows software that is pre-installed on systems, when requested, however they no longer honor this request. This tells me that the PC vendors KNEW it was wrong to charge consumers, but they soon found out that they can simply force the consumers to pay for the Windows software regardless. Thankfully a government entity has finally stood up to represent the people. Today, I only buy used or refurbished systems to avoid the Microsoft Tax. However again with refurbished systems, we are still forced to pay the Microsoft Tax from most PC vendors. In those cases, I sell the Windows software and remove the license from the PC before I install GNU/Linux on it.
*buntu is garbage.
Anything descending from Debian and Debian itself is garbage
Why not take them to small claims court?
Odds are they will not show up and you will get a default judgment.
A class action will get their attention and multiple lawyers involved.