Hacp
Lifer
- Jun 8, 2005
- 13,923
- 2
- 81
Originally posted by: DarkThinker
Originally posted by: unfalliblekrutch
Look, OP, you're the one calling others ignorant for "not understanding the legal background."
Well he called me a moron, I did the least thing and told him why he is calling me a moron while I am not. Don't make it look like I started insulting others.
JeeeezuzBelieve it or not, there is NO legal background to understand. No request for a windows refund has gone to court, so there is no legal background for the issue.
Why do you guys keep saying stuff like you have records of every single case that has passed through a US court to date?
Here is a detailed and documented case in California for a guy who refused the EULA, proceeded to installing Linux on his system instead and demanded $199 + Court fees for Windows XP refund
http://www.linuxjournal.com/article/7040
Judge: The defendant didn't show up, but Mr. Oualline you still have to prove your case. You say that they owe you some money. Why?
Me: I bought a computer from them, and when I booted it up it displayed a license agreement with a long list of restrictions that limited what I could do with my computer. It also said that if I didn't agree with the license agreement, I could get a refund.
Judge: I take it you didn't get your refund.
Me: They sent me an e-mail yesterday offering me one, but it was only for the software. I want my court costs too.
The judge then fumbled through my papers looking for the printout of the refund letter. He found it.
Judge: You removed the software from your system.
Me: Yes.
Judge: You installed something else.
Me: I installed Linux.
Judge: Judgment for the plaintiff.Sure, Microsoft has gone to court for anti-trust issues, but that is in no way related to you deserving a refund for something you did not pay for.
Yes I havepaid for Vista don't kid yourself. Vista Business doesn't come for free.
And sure, some people have gotten refunds, but it wasn't out of legal obligation.
Again you are assuming you know all the cases that have passed.
again I refer you to the same link:
http://www.linuxjournal.com/article/7040
Again, you keep saying you bought a laptop from lenovo because they make the best laptops. Agreed.
Yes they make good laptops out and what's left to make them perfect laptops is having the option of not having to pay for Vista to get one from Lenovo. That would be sweet don't you think?
Let those who want Vista get Vista and those who don't not. Very simple logic that I follow.
This isn't a free economy.And part of the laptops they make is microsoft windows. Why is microsoft windows included on every thinkpad? it doesn't matter. It could be because of financial incentives. It could be because they just are too lazy to add a "No OS" option. It could be because the CEO of lenovo specifically knew you would want a "No OS" option and he wanted to personally inconvenience you. The fact of the matter is, no matter what the reason for lenovo's business decision was, it is their decision to make. You, then, have the right to buy their product, or choose not to.
Microsoft has restrictions on who's arms it can twist and how much it can do so.
You even have a right to buy their product, then modify it to suit your own desires.
Really?
Microsoft says on the CD itself I don't have the legal right to make more than one copy of said CD. But I paid for the CD....but then you would jump in and say "You are restricted by the EULA that is why DK" and then that's when I would tell you "Well the EULA also says I have the right to a refund too, but somehow that doesn't count when I ask for one..."
You do not have a right to buy it, remove part of the product they sold you, and expect them to give you a partial refund for ripping out a part of the product you knew you were paying for going in.
Oh yes I do. Court cases prove it.
If a people view Microsoft's arm twisting of consumers and OEMs as anything other than self serving, then the last thing I would think about is how such people see my actions as pure and simple.You might think it's immoral or perhaps outright illegal for microsoft to give financial incentives for lenovo only offering windows laptops. You may be right. And you're welcome to litigate microsoft for those business practicies or bring such practices to the attention of the governments that have the ability to charge microsoft with anti-trust concerns. And if the outcome of those court proceedings results in a requirement that microsoft's hardware partners cannot receive financial incentives for not offering competing products, then you win. And at that point, you can buy the laptop you want with the OS (or lack thereof) you want. However, short of doing that, what you're trying to do as far as gaining a personal refund for a bundled product has the backing of neither principle nor legal grounding. IANAL, but it may actually constitute something more like mail fraud. If you get anything out of your endeavors, understand that in the eyes of most rational people, your actions will be viewed as immoral and self-serving.
It's really funny, the same people that are having their precious little dollars discretely taken away from them are the ones defending the not greedy at all MS.
You tell me, if MS made an announcement to everyone telling them that they can get the full cost of each windows copy they don't agree to it's EULA back, how many would reconsider using Windows to begin with.
People would start looking at alternatives, either it's their own copies of the software or free software, or non-microsoft-non-free-software and that's why MS stays quiet about this and asks people to sign NDAs to not say a word about it.
Why on earth do companies like Lenovo and MS ask people to sign NDA's if what they are doing is right?
That is bull all the way.
In my opinion, you are worse than the microsoft you claim to hate.
There he goes again.
The practices of MS put me in a position of either buying a laptop with windows Vista or not buying a laptop at all from my favorite vendor.
MS uses it's position in the market through many tricky practices to have OEMs offer nothing but their solutions. Is it a surprise I got a laptop with Vista preloaded?
If I desire not to take their solution I am SOL and I will have to go elsewhere. I shouldn't have to, not when it's MS we are talking about.
I have paid for Windows and I WANT that money back.
Why do I want it back? Is it because some ~ $100+ is worth all of this??
Hell no!
But because it's my right and companies don't have the right to force me into paying up like that.
And I want people to know that they can do that. I want people to wake up and realize these practices and stop them in their lives.
Do you seriously think you paid 100 dollars for windows? You're an idiot.