Slashdot Log In
Windows Refund Day II
Posted by
michael
on Wed Dec 11, 2002 09:17 AM
from the worthy-sequel dept.
from the worthy-sequel dept.
pbody writes "Sorry if this is rehashing an old topic, but I was looking for advice on how
to try to get a refund for the copy of XP that is coming with the laptop I
just bought when I came across this on LinuxJournal
about windowsrefund.net. They are
organizing "Windows Refund Day II" on January 23, 2003 -- which coincides
with the LinuxWorld Expo in NYC. Knowing how the first refund day turned
out, how many out there are going to the Expo and are thinking about
participating? For that matter, has anybody had any luck at all getting a refund from a vendor lately?"
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
And me! (Score:4, Interesting)
Re:And me! (Score:5, Funny)
Parent
Re:And me! And Gateway (Score:5, Interesting)
Parent
Yup.. (Score:4, Informative)
no luck (Score:4, Informative)
any laywers feel like taking on MSFT? this
Re:no luck (Score:4, Insightful)
Parent
Refund for XP (Score:5, Interesting)
Sell it on E-bay to someone who wants it.
Re:Refund for XP (Score:5, Informative)
It seems they mostly search for the words OEM. If people are worried, they'll usually pick up on it and send you and email asking "is this OEM..." etc etc.
My only recommendations would be to make sure it isnt hardware bound, that it will install on a system other than what yours is (example: installs that check your bios to make sure thats being installed on the machine it was sent for), and to offer full money back guarantee (minus shipping of course) in case something DOES go wrong, and the person isnt 100% pleased.
Parent
Re:Refund for XP (Score:5, Informative)
1 - not legal. The EULA specifically says it's legally bound to the hardware it was bought with
Not legal for whom, precisely? It's explicitly legal where I live (Germany). There was a court decision not too long ago, saying that Microsoft have no right to restrict the way in which OEMs resell copies of Windows; what they write in the licence is not above the law of the land. I'd go so far as to say this (unrestricted reselling) is probably the case for the rest of the EU.
I just looked in ebay.de and found OEM versions of XP for sale, so it doesn't look like Ebay is killing those auctions.
On a related note: you will see more and more recovery CDs. Although you may be able to sell them as you want, people generally aren't interested in buying them.
-- Steve
Parent
avoid the problem altogether (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:avoid the problem altogether (Score:5, Insightful)
So when's the last time you built your own laptop?
Parent
Re:avoid the problem altogether (Score:4, Informative)
You can get'em barebones at Newegg [newegg.com] pretty cheap.
Parent
Anyone know contract law? (Score:4, Interesting)
Parent
Re:Anyone know contract law? (Score:4, Interesting)
But remember IANAL. This could be totally wrong. Any lawyers?
Parent
Re:avoid the problem altogether (Score:4, Insightful)
Parent
Changing the licenses and refunds.. (Score:5, Informative)
We all know that MS are trying to move towards a licensing model where you pay every 3years/1 year/1 month/every day to use the software. This is interesting when you think about software as a service.
So the software is FREE, but the service is paid for. Thus the service enables the "free" software to be used and you have paid for a period of n to use that software. This could make getting a refund harder as the service is provided by Microsoft and not the OEM, also as its paid up front from the OEM to Microsoft it blurs how refunds can be obtained. Its like car insurance, you have it, you pay for it up front, the fact that you don't have a car crash doesn't mean that you can say it wasn't used and ask for a refund.
IANAL (Thank god) but a licensing change could make refunds even harder to get hold of.
Its like car insurance (Score:4, Insightful)
Parent
Re:Changing the licenses and refunds.. (Score:5, Interesting)
But there's a flaw in your logic. In your situation, you still owned and were capable of using the car. Imagine you sold the car and bought a bike. You don't still have to pay car insurance, and insurers are generally required to give you a refund -- prorated for the time that the car was in your possession.
The same should also be required for Microsoft -- even if it meands removing the OS at purchase time to avoid the situation altogether.
Personally, I think it would be much easier to move to a service model -- but the cost can't come at purchase time. It has to come at activation time. If the first thing you do is reformat, there's no service charge at all.
Parent
Re:Changing the licenses and refunds.. (Score:5, Interesting)
Sounds great, but why would Microsoft buy into this? They currently has a stranglehold on the PC industry, so they can force the big PC makers to pay for the service up front, and they get their cut no matter what OS you choose to run on your laptop after you buy it.
About the only reason the big PC makers would consider this is that they could charge less by forcing the user to enter a CC# the minute they register their PC, thus making their PC's look cheaper to the end user. I can envision this being a nightmare to support. For example, I buy a Dell PC, bring it home, and instead of paying the $199 up front for 3 years of MS OS rental, I format the drive and put, for example, the Plan 9 operating system on it. Suddenly the modem goes. Does Dell customer service want to troubleshoot every existing OS I can install on their hardware? Do they want to "take my word" that the problem is hardware-related and not a Plan 9 driver problem?
More likely, a casual end user will skip the $199 registration and install their old version of 2000 or WinME/9x on the box - something Microsoft would very much not want to see happen.
Parent
Just don't buy the OS (Score:5, Informative)
For laptops, I would try PCTorque.com. (I have no association with the website, other than being a satisfied repeat customer.)
And, to remain on-topic, from everything I've ever experienced or read about MS and their aggressive licensing policies/ideology, I think that it will take an outcry from corporations before MS even begins to contemplate giving refunds on unused merchandise. You've already had the opportunity to see the registration key, and that's very important to them.
OEMs & XP Home (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:OEMs & XP Home (Score:4, Informative)
Parent
please people (Score:5, Insightful)
not everyone likes linux and mac. not everyone can build machines. most people dont like the attitude on this web site, cuz its so intolerant. its time to quit bitching and understand that the world does not need to "be freed from microsoft."
by the way, before you get a chance to reply with all sorts of snide remarks, i built my two machines and i run linux (gentoo) and windows xp. peace.
Re:please people (Score:4, Interesting)
No, they are not. Of course they are not because in 95% of the time the customer wouldn't be aware of the alternative and thus will want Windows. However: have you ever *seen* the default installs of a Compaq or a Dell? No? I did: they are completely plastered with useless and idiot software, 3000 different services and stuff no normal user would ever need. Just to give you an idea: back in the Pentium days, I saw a Dell fresh out of the shop with 32Meg RAM (a lot in the time) and after bootup and doing nothing the memory usage was at 64Meg. Urks! That hurts, and that was a default install. Recent installs are better peformancewise, mainly due to cheap memory and fast CPU's, but the clutter is still there.
That is my problems with OEM's.... Not my problem with Microsoft. That is why any OEM machine that gest into my house just get booted up with a bootdisk/cd and reformatted on the spot.
And why don't people like Macs? (Linux I can understand) I don't get that: I used to dislike Macs, but that was a prejudice! I now have one and hell I've never had such a good system, and it's only an iBook.
Parent
Depends on the reason (Score:5, Insightful)
You're right - the OEMs are just making money, not playing ideology.
However, as I recall, years ago, you could get an OS-less PC from Dell. This was before M$ started strongarming companies, saying "put windows on everything you sell, or NOTHING." Obviously, from then on, OEMs sold windows on everything (this much is documented in the antitrust case).
Point is, are the OEMs basically refusing to sell OS-less PC's because it's convenient, or through fear? I know Dell will for some business clients, because usually they have a win site-license (could be mistaken about the details). However, they won't do it for just anyone.
I know it's hard to custom-make computers when you sell a jillion of them, but Dell does *some* tailoring of computers - it seems like formatting the HDD's of those pre-installed computers would not be that difficult to integrate into their business model. That's why I think there's still some fear of M$ involved.
Parent
Ehh ... (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Ehh ... (Score:5, Insightful)
Using the car analogy, that seems a bit unfair. This is where the car analogy breaks down. In this instance, the component supplier demands that the user agree to either follow the terms of the agreement, or the supplier agrees to not provide that component AND THE CONSUMER IS ENTITLED TO A REFUND OF THE VALUE OF THE SUPPLIED PRODUCT!
As a result of the vendor's own terms, the consumer should get what they want.
Besides this, the manufacturer is de facto forced to pay the component supplier for licenses on the products, even if the customer doesn't want it. It's like paying protection money so that "god forbid...it would be awful if something were to happen to your business......"
It's a shakedown.
Hope this sheds some light on their perspective.
Respectfully,
Anomaly
Parent
Re:Ehh ... EULA! (Score:5, Insightful)
The difference is that a graphics card doesn't come with an EULA that says you can return it for a refund if you don't agree to the ludacrisp (heh) terms.
What many people assume is that you want to install Linux on a laptop. What if I own a copy of Win2k, and don't want XP? I should be able to return XP and install my own copy of Win2k. It isn't all about Linux.
And part of what ticks people off is that they PAY for an OS that they are being forced to purchase. Microsoft has made sure that OEMs include a MS OS in the price by charging them whether they sell you one or not. Sure, you can say "then don't buy from them" but as long as the EULA exists and it says you can return it, people should do it. Not only that, you don't even get a full copy of the OS to do with as you please. If they gave you a full version, instead of those insane recovery disks, you could at least sell it or give it away.
Parent
Are you all listening? (Score:5, Insightful)
My experience with Fujitsu (Score:5, Interesting)
Their argument was i agreed to THEIR EULA which states i can't get a refund, when i purchased it. Either they were ignorant or refused to give a refund under any circumstance. I would have contacted a lawyer but it just isn't worth my time.
Re:My experience with Fujitsu (Score:4, Interesting)
Parent
Let's see... (Score:5, Insightful)
[MS] If you sell just our OS you can have them at $20.00 each.
[Dell] Ok.
[Techie] Dell, will you give me a refund for this unused OS at full market value?
[Dell] No.
[Techie] MS, will you give me a refund for this unused OS at full market value?
[MS] Uh, no.
[Techie] I can't figure out why these guys won't budge...
Toshiba's Policy (Score:5, Interesting)
And most vendors around here charge a 15% restocking fee for notebooks, so you can see how far you would get.
As has been suggested before, if you do not want a given item (Windows or whatever), then either look for a system that does not include it, build your own, or have someone build one to your specs. This will enable you to get exactly what you want and no more at a price you are willing to pay, and it will also provide an incentive for the manufacturers to provide systems that meet your desire so that they can get your business.
I consider the refund day concept to be little more than a minor publicity prank and of little practical value. What might make it beneficial would be for a group of users to purchase a product, refuse to accept the EULA, and then demand refunds per the instructions included in the EULA (supposedly this has happened with the people that would be participating in the refund day). Microsoft would probably point the users to the vendor, and the vendors would probably stand on their return policies. An ambitious and capable law firm might be able to make a case out of this, but the outcome would probably be along the lines of prohibiting vendors from charging restocking fees on items where the customer refuses to accept the EULA unless it was presented prior to purchase. The law firm wouyld also rack up fees to be paid by someone, probably the vendors. This would not amount to a significant change.
If you REALLY want to make a change in the marketplace, don't give your money to companies that you do not agree with or whose policies you dislike. If enough people do this it will force changes in the market. And if not enough people do this to make a difference, then you need to accept that you hold a minority viewpoint and are a niche customer.
IANAL, and you should pay for legal advice rather than believe anything you read here.
Re:Toshiba's Policy (Score:4, Interesting)
If Toshiba wraps their own policy that you must return the whole unit, not the individual (Windows) part for a refund, then they must accept the whole unit without a restocking fee because again, this restriction was not disclosed to you before you made the purchase decision. The way to protest this would be to have people each buy one Toshiba laptop, open up the box to discover the bag with this policy on it, then walk back into the store saying you desire the full refund the cellophane bag promises. After a couple Best Buy stores discover that every Toshiba laptop they have is going to have to be sold as an open box item, Best Buy will tell Toshiba they have to come up with a better solution to this problem.
If the store has a contradictory restocking fee policy that they refuse to waive, Toshiba's got a problem here. They promised you a "full refund", and the store won't give one to you. If they can't live up to the "quid pro quo" on the cellophane bag, then the contract is invalid, and you get to open up the bag and discover the Microsoft EULA which sends this whole problem back to square one.
Bottom line: Contractal terms inside of product packaging will eventually fail, and the solution is to put the EULA outside of the retail box. Of course, how's Microsoft gonna handle that PR hit?
Parent
wait a minute... (Score:5, Interesting)
err... how *did* the first refund day turn out?
Re:wait a minute... (Score:5, Informative)
Microsoft condescendingly had a banner that said "Microsoft Welcomes the Linux Community" and offered free lemonade.
Of course, Katz disagreed [slashdot.org].
Pictures here [svlug.org].
W
Parent
Ahem (Score:5, Funny)
Judge: "So Mr. Linux user, you bought a laptop that you knew comes with WindowsXP even through you didn't want it?"
Linux guy: "Yes"
Judge: "Can you buy a laptop that doesn't come with Windows? In fact, can't you buy a laptop that has Linux preinstalled?"
Linux guy: "Yes"
Judge: "So despite having a choice, and not being forced to pick the Windows laptop, you bought it anyway and think you're entitled to a refund?"
Linux guy "YESS!!!"
Judge: "Bailiff, please escort these Birkenstock-wearing geeks out of my courtroom"
System restore disks (Score:4, Interesting)
The problem was that the default install had a bug in it that would crash the computer on shutdown or sleep. (Pretty annoying) Many other people have this computer where I live (a company 'bonus' of sorts), and as I occationally go out and 'fix' these things, I saw *alot* of them with no patch installed (clueless users with no internet access).
Since the patch was marginal at best, the eventual solution was to install windows 98 from a regular install disk. Since they have already paid for Windows (that doesn't work), can I give them a 'copy' under fair use rights? Would it be easier to get a refund for a windows 'install' that doesn't work?
Later, I'll tell you the story of the family that had *140 separate instances* of trojans running at the same time...
Before you send anything back... (Score:5, Insightful)
Basically what it boiled down to is that they refused to provide any service under my warranty unless I ran the operating system that came with the laptop. I asked the guy, "is my warranty effectively invalid if I run Linux?". He said that, unfortunately, that was, in essence, the case.
So, just a word to the wise that if you don't install XP on your system, you may in fact be making your warranty irrelevent even for hardware specific problems.
Re:Before you send anything back... (Score:5, Informative)
In any case, there are IMPLIED warranties that arise simply out of the sale which cannot be disclaimed if a written warranty is provided and assuming this was a consumer sale. The most common is the implied warranty of merchantability (Uniform Commercial Code Section 2-314). Every state has a version except LA, and maybe even them by now. Also, breach of warranty is in most states an unfair and deceptive business practice that can get you 3 times your actual damages or a sum set by statute, whichever is greater, plus attorneys fees. You should be able to file this in small claims court abd get a very good result.
Remember - you bought a piece of HARDWARE and it is the hardware that is defective. As a matter of fact, unless that clear and conspicuous language is there, I would put in a separate count claiming that merely telling you that running Linux invalidates a warranty is unfair and deceptive, entitling you to damages. If it is there, I would claim that warranty provision is invalid and itself unfair and deceptive.
Parent
Linux/No-OS laptop vendors (Score:5, Informative)
You should realize though that most of these companies purchase the hardware from companies like Sager [sagernotebook.com] (Linux forum [sagerforums.com]) and Compal [compal.com], and those companies also supply the big-name guys like Compaq, HP, Dell, and Toshiba. So when you find some no-name laptop, it is usually equivalent to some branded laptop that never touched the hands of HP/Compaq/Toshiba/Dell. (And figuring out exactly *which* brand-name laptop it is equivalent to can be extremely difficult) Some of the below claim to manufacture their own notebooks, but what this means is that they buy them from Saeger/Compal or someone else, and put in a hard drive/CPU/RAM, which is why you will find identical looking cases at several of these vendors.
If you find a HP/Compaq/Toshiba/Dell/IBM/Sony branded laptop that has linux preinstalled, it means that the vendor paid for windows and removed it. I do not list them below because I think this is a despicable and deceptive practice. These manufacturers do not (yet) sell no-os or linux laptops. (But please, call them and ask!! The squeaky wheel gets the grease!) Also if you order a no-OS laptop, please request linux to be installed anyway, and tell them you'll pay for it! Let them know there is demand!
-- Bob
What no one has mentioned - small claims court (Score:5, Informative)
Just take your receipt and your laptop with no windows on it to the court, along with the EULA. You've got a good chance of winning, and merely filing the lawsuit will probably prompt the company to settle out of court. Make sure they pay your filing fee, of course.
If you have to miss a day of work to go to court, in some places you can sue for that too (assuming it's an issue where you work).
To reiterate: small claims is really no big deal, and the company probably won't let it get to that point anyway. Too bad you have to sue the vendor, and don't get to drag M$ into small claims court. That would be too cool.
Re:Reschedule please... (Score:4, Informative)
Here's a start [accessmicro.com]. Doesn't anyone know how to use Google?
Parent
Re:Reschedule please... (Score:4, Funny)
But at least they "boost into Windows to make sure each components are compatible".
Parent
Re:You accepted the purchase of XP (Score:5, Informative)
That's just it - he may have accepted the purchase, but he didn't accept the EULA for Windows. After he bought it, he would have got home, opened it up, and been presented with additional terms & conditions, that he never agreed to beforehand, or even saw. That same document states that if he doesn't agree to them, he can get his money back.
The obvious way of fixing this is to present the EULA before purchase.
Parent
Re:Refunds for everyone! (Score:5, Insightful)
Bet you could. You just didn't want to wait for one to be built and shipped from the factory. Or you could've purchased a model with an improved radio.
Likewise, my townhome came with really terrible, contractor grade windows
Did you buy the townhome from the builder? If so then you could've opted to pay for a window upgrade. If you bought it from a previous owner, well, duh.
Oh, you didn't want windows at all? Sorry, that's not up to code and would be illegal.
Finally all the Macs in my organization run one flavor of Mac OS or another. I could not buy these things without Mac OS. Maybe I can convince Steve Jobs to give me $100 for each copy of Mac OS I don't use?
You just said you're using them. Make up your mind.
Face it, bundling is prevalent every where you look
Yes, but when you get charged for the bundled item even when you don't receive it then it's illegal. Particularly when a judge says "that's not a legal contract".
Frankly, a better comparison is being charged for lettuce, tomato, and pickles on a hamburger when you ask for them not to be put on. It's a customary practice in the US. The only difference I can think of is that the tomato, et. al. don't compromise 10-20% of the overall cost.
Parent
Re:Refunds for everyone! (Score:5, Insightful)
The whole "Windows Refund Day" is not about bundling. Yes, Microsoft, or any other vendor/manufacturer is perfectly free to bundle their software on your spiffy new PC, just like VW is free to bundle crappy stereos with their cars.
Where the important difference comes in is a quasi-legal contract called the End User License Agreement which you must agree to be bound by if you wish to use the software. 99% of the population don't read them and simply accept them. I suggest you take an afternoon some time and comb through one. The highlights of a typical EULA are this:
Frankly, I doubt your VW Golf, or your townhome came with such an agreement. (Your Mac is a different story, since EULAs are a standard practice in the software industry...although I am not familiar with Apple's EULAs, I suspect they have a similar clause.
The whole idea behind the Windows refund day is to illustrate that not even the software manufacturers pay any heed to their own EULAs. It's not about Microsoft-bashing, they just happen to be a very convenient target for too many reasons to list here...
Parent
Re:What about a.. (Score:5, Funny)
It whould have been a wanaBeOs..
Parent
Re:I don't get this "refund" thing. (Score:5, Interesting)
In general tying laws restrict when a manufacturer may tie in two products without offering the individual products for sale separately as well.
However, as long as we look at "a computer" as the product, a manufacturer may get away with tying without providing a bare box as an option in many countries by pointing to the fact that a consumer has many alternate sources of bare hardware.
On the other hand, though, a manufacturers offering a hardware platform with unique capabilities would have bigger problems doing this, as a consumer could claim that the manufacturer was utilizing it's monopoly in the manufacture of that specific hardware to pressure him/her to buy a product they don't want or need.
Various countries have wildly different laws here, but assuming that manufactureres are automatically free to decide what their system is made up of is wrong almost everywhere.
(ObDisclaimer: IANAL)
Parent
Re:Transfer of license OK (Score:5, Interesting)
Now, since what you bought was actually a copyrighted item, not a licensed item (after all, were you presented with a licensing agreement at the time of sale? Didn't think so. And those EULAs don't count - they're an attempt to impose a license after after the sale) you can do whatever you want with it, except make copies in violation of the copyright.
Buy the machine with XP, install linux, and sell your copy of XP to whomever you want. They're free to register it, or not.
If you don't believe me, google the quebec consumer protection act,
Parent