Windows Refund - It Is Possible

Discussion in 'NZ Computing' started by EMB, Oct 20, 2009.

  1. EMB

    EMB Guest

    1. Advertising

  2. EMB

    Dave Doe Guest

    In article <hbj4rf$65o$>, says...
    > http://www.theregister.co.uk/2009/10/19/windows_dell_linux_refund/


    So nothing new to add to what was previously discussed here in a thread
    of the same Subj.

    ie, you reject the EULA, you bargain with the shop over a refund price.

    And on that, I think *I* may have said, that, if your time is worth
    money - it's not worth it! Each to their own on that, I suppose.

    --
    Duncan.
    Dave Doe, Oct 20, 2009
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. EMB

    Max Burke Guest

    EMB wrote:
    > http://www.theregister.co.uk/2009/10/19/windows_dell_linux_refund/


    Maybe I should try for a refund sometime.

    Only problem is...

    All the PC's I have bought right up to the current ones I am using have
    cost the same with or without an OS.

    I'm sure the retailers would have willingly given me a refund of $0.00
    but probably would have charged an hourly rate to cover the staff's time
    in processing the refund.

    Of course I could try and claim the retailer has 'somehow' hidden the
    cost of the OS in the price and had a hissy fit in the shop to make them
    'fess up and refund that hidden M$ tax huh....

    Yeah RIGGHHHTTT!

    Hand me another Tui.

    --

    Replace the obvious with paradise.net to email me
    Found Images
    http://homepages.paradise.net.nz/~mlvburke
    Max Burke, Oct 20, 2009
    #3
  4. In message <4add70ba$>, Collector_NZ wrote:

    > The point here is buying a bundled product (one consisting of parts from
    > several sources, combined by the reseller or the resellers supplier
    > under license) While each part has a price the bundler is entitled to
    > give it an overall price and not separate it. {basically if you don't
    > like whats offered don't buy it}


    Except that then the vendor's product warranty should cover the package as a
    whole. Except that, if you check the fine print, you'll find that Microsoft
    Windows is never covered by the vendor's product warranty.

    Which kind of puts a dent in your "not separate" argument, doesn't it?
    Lawrence D'Oliveiro, Oct 20, 2009
    #4
  5. EMB

    Max Burke Guest

    Collector_NZ wrote:

    > Max Burke wrote:


    >>> EMB wrote:
    >>> http://www.theregister.co.uk/2009/10/19/windows_dell_linux_refund/


    >> Maybe I should try for a refund sometime.


    >> Only problem is...
    >> All the PC's I have bought right up to the current ones I am using
    >> have cost the same with or without an OS.


    > The point here is buying a bundled product (one consisting of parts from
    > several sources, combined by the reseller or the resellers supplier
    > under license) While each part has a price the bundler is entitled to
    > give it an overall price and not separate it. {basically if you don't
    > like whats offered don't buy it}


    Exactly! And that applies to anything you, I , or anyone else buys.
    Everything we buy, from the food we need, the clothes, to the luxury
    goods we all want but dont really need are created, marketed and sold
    as 'bundled products.'

    Tell me would you go into your local diary and buy a loaf of bread and
    2L of milk then whine to the shop keeper, your friends and family, that
    you're being ripped off because the price of those items has a hidden
    cost of the packaging, the shop keepers overheads, profit margin, and
    the rent they're paying? That you weren't told what those cost were and
    that you dont want to pay then simply because you want just bread and milk?

    Of course not. Computers with or without an OS are just the same. Not
    different, not a special case, simply because it's got OS X
    installed/not installed as opposed to OS Y.

    You dont like the price one retailer charges *FOR ANYTHING?* Shop
    around, you WILL find what you're looking for cheaper elsewhere.

    >> I'm sure the retailers would have willingly given me a refund of $0.00
    >> but probably would have charged an hourly rate to cover the staff's
    >> time in processing the refund.


    > Yes you are right, they don't have to unbundle their offering.


    Yeah they do according to the OSS/*nix 'community.'

    >> Of course I could try and claim the retailer has 'somehow' hidden the
    >> cost of the OS in the price and had a hissy fit in the shop to make
    >> them 'fess up and refund that hidden M$ tax huh....


    > Basically see above, it is included, because it is a bundle, but that
    > doesn't exclude private treaty to have a reduction in price (not to the
    > retail value of the unbundled item, since the process of unbundling cost
    > time therefore money) to take out that which you do not want


    Well there's nothing to stop anyone bargaining with a retailer is there?
    Provided the retailer is prepared to bargain of course.

    >> Yeah RIGGHHHTTT!
    >> Hand me another Tui.


    > No not at all just realize how the PC retail industry works


    I do. that's why I find it mildly amusing so many seem to think
    computers are a special case and they're somehow getting ripped off by
    the retailer/OEM/OS owner for buying a bundled product....

    --

    Replace the obvious with paradise.net to email me
    Found Images
    http://homepages.paradise.net.nz/~mlvburke
    Max Burke, Oct 20, 2009
    #5
  6. EMB

    peterwn Guest

    On Oct 20, 2:47 pm, EMB <> wrote:
    > http://www.theregister.co.uk/2009/10/19/windows_dell_linux_refund/


    Actually there is something wrong here. Hardware makers are paying
    Microsoft money for Windows licences. Microsoft should be no different
    from the likes of Nero and should be supplying 'lite' Windows at no
    cost (or even paying something to the hardware makers). End users can
    then decide to tolerate 'lite' Windows, upgrade to full Windows or
    dump Windows altogether.
    peterwn, Oct 20, 2009
    #6
  7. On Tue, 20 Oct 2009 23:18:28 +1300, Collector_NZ
    <> wrote:

    >peterwn wrote:
    >> On Oct 20, 2:47 pm, EMB <> wrote:
    >>> http://www.theregister.co.uk/2009/10/19/windows_dell_linux_refund/

    >>
    >> Actually there is something wrong here. Hardware makers are paying
    >> Microsoft money for Windows licences. Microsoft should be no different
    >> from the likes of Nero and should be supplying 'lite' Windows at no
    >> cost (or even paying something to the hardware makers). End users can
    >> then decide to tolerate 'lite' Windows, upgrade to full Windows or
    >> dump Windows altogether.

    >In NZ we do not have the value of the cases in Euro over bundling.
    >
    >In my post i mentioned the situation where the seller offered a bundle
    >which includes the OS and no law in the western region of countries
    >requires then to reprice that if the client doesn't want a part of the
    >bundle and they do not want to do so.
    >
    >While the OS has a value which anyone can find from looking at the
    >retail price offers of that OS that in no way represents the cost of it
    >in a bundle situation.
    >
    >For example i buy an 10,000 enterprise license for Win XP each license
    >is worth cents, When dealt with over my install base., I buy a million
    >and it becomes fractions of a cent, which puts a retailer in the
    >position that they can not gain anything by removing the license, except
    >the cost to then to do that


    I seriously doubt that even at 10,000 off Microsoft will be charging
    only cents per copy for Windows. They would go out of business if
    they did that. Is there any real information as to the price bundlers
    pay for Windows? I would expect it to be several dollars per copy
    even at 1,000,000 off, and I would not be at all surprised if it is
    considerably more than that.
    Stephen Worthington, Oct 20, 2009
    #7
  8. EMB

    Simon Guest

    On Oct 20, 11:18 pm, Collector_NZ <> wrote:

    > For example i buy an 10,000 enterprise license for Win XP each license
    > is worth cents, When dealt with over my install base., I buy a million
    > and it becomes fractions of a cent, which puts a retailer in the
    > position that they can not gain anything by removing the license, except
    > the cost to then to do that


    But the Win XP/Vista/7 OS bundled with PC's is not purchased under an
    Enterprise Agreement. There have been various industry reports over
    time that manufacturers are charged a fixed amount of around $50 per
    OEM copy of Windows. Undoubtedly, some sort of discount structure is
    applied, but I cannot see the discount being so high as to reduce the
    costs to mere cents.
    Simon, Oct 20, 2009
    #8
  9. EMB

    AD. Guest

    On Oct 20, 11:18 pm, Collector_NZ <> wrote:
    > For example i buy an 10,000 enterprise license for Win XP each license
    > is worth cents,


    Don't forget that a Windows desktop volume license price factors in
    that you've already paid the OEM license price. So even if the cost is
    as low as you say (which I doubt), it isn't that relevant to the bulk
    OEM prices.

    Unlike an Office volume license which is full license, a Windows
    volume license is an upgrade (or downgrade) of the OEM one that came
    with the machine or an existing fully packaged install.

    See the last question here:
    http://www.microsoft.com/licensing/resources/faq.mspx

    --
    Cheers
    Anton
    AD., Oct 20, 2009
    #9
  10. EMB

    victor Guest

    Max Burke wrote:
    > Collector_NZ wrote:
    >
    >> Max Burke wrote:

    >
    >>>> EMB wrote:
    >>>> http://www.theregister.co.uk/2009/10/19/windows_dell_linux_refund/

    >
    >>> Maybe I should try for a refund sometime.

    >
    >>> Only problem is...
    >>> All the PC's I have bought right up to the current ones I am using
    >>> have cost the same with or without an OS.

    >
    >> The point here is buying a bundled product (one consisting of parts
    >> from several sources, combined by the reseller or the resellers
    >> supplier under license) While each part has a price the bundler is
    >> entitled to give it an overall price and not separate it. {basically
    >> if you don't like whats offered don't buy it}

    >
    > Exactly! And that applies to anything you, I , or anyone else buys.
    > Everything we buy, from the food we need, the clothes, to the luxury
    > goods we all want but dont really need are created, marketed and sold
    > as 'bundled products.'
    >
    > Tell me would you go into your local diary and buy a loaf of bread and
    > 2L of milk then whine to the shop keeper, your friends and family, that
    > you're being ripped off because the price of those items has a hidden
    > cost of the packaging, the shop keepers overheads, profit margin, and
    > the rent they're paying? That you weren't told what those cost were and
    > that you dont want to pay then simply because you want just bread and milk?
    >
    > Of course not. Computers with or without an OS are just the same. Not
    > different, not a special case, simply because it's got OS X
    > installed/not installed as opposed to OS Y.
    >
    > You dont like the price one retailer charges *FOR ANYTHING?* Shop
    > around, you WILL find what you're looking for cheaper elsewhere.
    >
    >>> I'm sure the retailers would have willingly given me a refund of
    >>> $0.00 but probably would have charged an hourly rate to cover the
    >>> staff's time in processing the refund.

    >
    >> Yes you are right, they don't have to unbundle their offering.

    >
    > Yeah they do according to the OSS/*nix 'community.'
    >
    >>> Of course I could try and claim the retailer has 'somehow' hidden the
    >>> cost of the OS in the price and had a hissy fit in the shop to make
    >>> them 'fess up and refund that hidden M$ tax huh....

    >
    >> Basically see above, it is included, because it is a bundle, but that
    >> doesn't exclude private treaty to have a reduction in price (not to
    >> the retail value of the unbundled item, since the process of
    >> unbundling cost time therefore money) to take out that which you do
    >> not want

    >
    > Well there's nothing to stop anyone bargaining with a retailer is there?
    > Provided the retailer is prepared to bargain of course.
    >
    >>> Yeah RIGGHHHTTT!
    >>> Hand me another Tui.

    >
    >> No not at all just realize how the PC retail industry works

    >
    > I do. that's why I find it mildly amusing so many seem to think
    > computers are a special case and they're somehow getting ripped off by
    > the retailer/OEM/OS owner for buying a bundled product....
    >


    Software that is licensed IS a special case, you cannot resell the
    software you have acquired in the bundle, or incorporate it in another
    bundle for sale. It differs fundamentally from anything you buy at your
    local dairy.
    You should be able to re-sell an unused Windows license.
    victor, Oct 22, 2009
    #10
  11. EMB

    Max Burke Guest

    victor wrote:
    >> Max Burke wrote:
    >> I do. that's why I find it mildly amusing so many seem to think
    >> computers are a special case and they're somehow getting ripped off
    >> by the retailer/OEM/OS owner for buying a bundled product....


    > Software that is licensed IS a special case,


    In what way?
    You read and *understand* the licence, and if you want to use the
    software then you have to comply with the licence.
    Dont like the licence terms and conditions? tough. You dont get to use
    the software (legally anyway)

    > you cannot resell the
    > software you have acquired in the bundle,


    You need to explain why you think you should be able to resell when the
    licence you agreed to (when you paid your money to the licence owner)
    says you cant.

    > or incorporate it in another
    > bundle for sale.


    Again explain why YOU think you should be able to?

    I mean what is it about software (licences) YOU think you have a right
    to dispute licence terms and condition of ownership AFTER you have
    agreed to those terms and conditions by paying the licence fee.

    And dont claim you didn't agree to the licence terms and conditions. You
    did when you put your money down.

    If you hadn't read or understood the licence terms and conditions then
    that's your fault and in no way negates the licence terms and conditions
    you have to abide by.

    > It differs fundamentally from anything you buy at your
    > local dairy.


    Not if you try to dispute the original contract with the diary owner and
    claim they somehow mislead you when they sold you the items.

    > You should be able to re-sell an unused Windows license.


    But you cant when it says you cant in the EULA. You didn't read that in
    the EULA? that's YOUR fault, and in no way negates Microsofts legal
    right to say you cant resell an unused Windows licence.

    And that make what you think should be irrelevant.
    EOS

    --

    Replace the obvious with paradise.net to email me
    Found Images
    http://homepages.paradise.net.nz/~mlvburke
    Max Burke, Oct 22, 2009
    #11
  12. EMB

    victor Guest

    Max Burke wrote:
    > victor wrote:
    >>> Max Burke wrote:
    >>> I do. that's why I find it mildly amusing so many seem to think
    >>> computers are a special case and they're somehow getting ripped off
    >>> by the retailer/OEM/OS owner for buying a bundled product....

    >
    >> Software that is licensed IS a special case,

    >
    > In what way?
    > You read and *understand* the licence, and if you want to use the
    > software then you have to comply with the licence.
    > Dont like the licence terms and conditions? tough. You dont get to use
    > the software (legally anyway)
    >
    >> you cannot resell the software you have acquired in the bundle,

    >
    > You need to explain why you think you should be able to resell when the
    > licence you agreed to (when you paid your money to the licence owner)
    > says you cant.
    >
    >> or incorporate it in another bundle for sale.

    >
    > Again explain why YOU think you should be able to?
    >
    > I mean what is it about software (licences) YOU think you have a right
    > to dispute licence terms and condition of ownership AFTER you have
    > agreed to those terms and conditions by paying the licence fee.
    >
    > And dont claim you didn't agree to the licence terms and conditions. You
    > did when you put your money down.
    >
    > If you hadn't read or understood the licence terms and conditions then
    > that's your fault and in no way negates the licence terms and conditions
    > you have to abide by.
    >
    >> It differs fundamentally from anything you buy at your local dairy.

    >
    > Not if you try to dispute the original contract with the diary owner and
    > claim they somehow mislead you when they sold you the items.
    >
    >> You should be able to re-sell an unused Windows license.

    >
    > But you cant when it says you cant in the EULA. You didn't read that in
    > the EULA? that's YOUR fault, and in no way negates Microsofts legal
    > right to say you cant resell an unused Windows licence.


    If it is the same as anything you buy at a dairy, you would be able to
    re-sell it.
    You can re-sell the RAM or the mouse or the wifi module etc after you
    buy a PC, why not the un-used software ?
    victor, Oct 22, 2009
    #12
  13. EMB

    impossible Guest

    "victor" <> wrote in message
    news:hbpb91$hjo$-september.org...
    > Max Burke wrote:
    >> victor wrote:
    >>>> Max Burke wrote:
    >>>> I do. that's why I find it mildly amusing so many seem to think
    >>>> computers are a special case and they're somehow getting ripped off by
    >>>> the retailer/OEM/OS owner for buying a bundled product....

    >>
    >>> Software that is licensed IS a special case,

    >>
    >> In what way?
    >> You read and *understand* the licence, and if you want to use the
    >> software then you have to comply with the licence.
    >> Dont like the licence terms and conditions? tough. You dont get to use
    >> the software (legally anyway)
    >>
    >>> you cannot resell the software you have acquired in the bundle,

    >>
    >> You need to explain why you think you should be able to resell when the
    >> licence you agreed to (when you paid your money to the licence owner)
    >> says you cant.
    >>
    >>> or incorporate it in another bundle for sale.

    >>
    >> Again explain why YOU think you should be able to?
    >>
    >> I mean what is it about software (licences) YOU think you have a right to
    >> dispute licence terms and condition of ownership AFTER you have agreed to
    >> those terms and conditions by paying the licence fee.
    >>
    >> And dont claim you didn't agree to the licence terms and conditions. You
    >> did when you put your money down.
    >>
    >> If you hadn't read or understood the licence terms and conditions then
    >> that's your fault and in no way negates the licence terms and conditions
    >> you have to abide by.
    >>
    >>> It differs fundamentally from anything you buy at your local dairy.

    >>
    >> Not if you try to dispute the original contract with the diary owner and
    >> claim they somehow mislead you when they sold you the items.
    >>
    >>> You should be able to re-sell an unused Windows license.

    >>
    >> But you cant when it says you cant in the EULA. You didn't read that in
    >> the EULA? that's YOUR fault, and in no way negates Microsofts legal right
    >> to say you cant resell an unused Windows licence.

    >
    > If it is the same as anything you buy at a dairy, you would be able to
    > re-sell it.
    > You can re-sell the RAM or the mouse or the wifi module etc after you buy
    > a PC, why not the un-used software ?


    Because the oem software license you purchased prohibits resale unless the
    software remains bundled with the PC. If you want the right to resell a
    copy of Windows on its own, then you need to purchase a full license, not an
    OEM license.
    impossible, Oct 22, 2009
    #13
  14. On Thu, 22 Oct 2009 11:21:01 GMT, "impossible" <>
    wrote:

    >
    >"victor" <> wrote in message
    >news:hbpb91$hjo$-september.org...
    >> Max Burke wrote:
    >>> victor wrote:
    >>>>> Max Burke wrote:
    >>>>> I do. that's why I find it mildly amusing so many seem to think
    >>>>> computers are a special case and they're somehow getting ripped off by
    >>>>> the retailer/OEM/OS owner for buying a bundled product....
    >>>
    >>>> Software that is licensed IS a special case,
    >>>
    >>> In what way?
    >>> You read and *understand* the licence, and if you want to use the
    >>> software then you have to comply with the licence.
    >>> Dont like the licence terms and conditions? tough. You dont get to use
    >>> the software (legally anyway)
    >>>
    >>>> you cannot resell the software you have acquired in the bundle,
    >>>
    >>> You need to explain why you think you should be able to resell when the
    >>> licence you agreed to (when you paid your money to the licence owner)
    >>> says you cant.
    >>>
    >>>> or incorporate it in another bundle for sale.
    >>>
    >>> Again explain why YOU think you should be able to?
    >>>
    >>> I mean what is it about software (licences) YOU think you have a right to
    >>> dispute licence terms and condition of ownership AFTER you have agreed to
    >>> those terms and conditions by paying the licence fee.
    >>>
    >>> And dont claim you didn't agree to the licence terms and conditions. You
    >>> did when you put your money down.
    >>>
    >>> If you hadn't read or understood the licence terms and conditions then
    >>> that's your fault and in no way negates the licence terms and conditions
    >>> you have to abide by.
    >>>
    >>>> It differs fundamentally from anything you buy at your local dairy.
    >>>
    >>> Not if you try to dispute the original contract with the diary owner and
    >>> claim they somehow mislead you when they sold you the items.
    >>>
    >>>> You should be able to re-sell an unused Windows license.
    >>>
    >>> But you cant when it says you cant in the EULA. You didn't read that in
    >>> the EULA? that's YOUR fault, and in no way negates Microsofts legal right
    >>> to say you cant resell an unused Windows licence.

    >>
    >> If it is the same as anything you buy at a dairy, you would be able to
    >> re-sell it.
    >> You can re-sell the RAM or the mouse or the wifi module etc after you buy
    >> a PC, why not the un-used software ?

    >
    >Because the oem software license you purchased prohibits resale unless the
    >software remains bundled with the PC. If you want the right to resell a
    >copy of Windows on its own, then you need to purchase a full license, not an
    >OEM license.


    Unfortunately, the EULA is usually unreadable until after the sale is
    completed. Hence you never agreed to its terms as part of the sales
    contract, and it simply has no validity. It my understanding that it
    is not possible under NZ law for one side of a contract to impose
    conditions on a sale after the sale takes place. Only those
    conditions agreed to at the time of sale apply. So if the retailer
    failed to point out that Microsoft's EULA applied before the sale went
    through, the EULA is completely void, even though it will pop up when
    you try to install the software. IBM seems to understand this - last
    time I bought IBM software (many years ago), the licence conditions
    were available on the outside of the packet, and they even mentioned
    NZ and the CGA (to disclaim the CGA if you were buying for business
    use). Microsoft seems to just completely ignore NZ law, and I
    suspect, similar law in other countries. I understand that US law has
    provisions for shrink wrap agreements and hence the EULA is valid
    there.
    Stephen Worthington, Oct 22, 2009
    #14
  15. EMB

    impossible Guest

    "Stephen Worthington" <34.nz56.remove_numbers> wrote in
    message news:...
    > On Thu, 22 Oct 2009 11:21:01 GMT, "impossible" <>
    > wrote:
    >
    >>
    >>"victor" <> wrote in message
    >>news:hbpb91$hjo$-september.org...
    >>> Max Burke wrote:
    >>>> victor wrote:
    >>>>>> Max Burke wrote:
    >>>>>> I do. that's why I find it mildly amusing so many seem to think
    >>>>>> computers are a special case and they're somehow getting ripped off
    >>>>>> by
    >>>>>> the retailer/OEM/OS owner for buying a bundled product....
    >>>>
    >>>>> Software that is licensed IS a special case,
    >>>>
    >>>> In what way?
    >>>> You read and *understand* the licence, and if you want to use the
    >>>> software then you have to comply with the licence.
    >>>> Dont like the licence terms and conditions? tough. You dont get to use
    >>>> the software (legally anyway)
    >>>>
    >>>>> you cannot resell the software you have acquired in the bundle,
    >>>>
    >>>> You need to explain why you think you should be able to resell when the
    >>>> licence you agreed to (when you paid your money to the licence owner)
    >>>> says you cant.
    >>>>
    >>>>> or incorporate it in another bundle for sale.
    >>>>
    >>>> Again explain why YOU think you should be able to?
    >>>>
    >>>> I mean what is it about software (licences) YOU think you have a right
    >>>> to
    >>>> dispute licence terms and condition of ownership AFTER you have agreed
    >>>> to
    >>>> those terms and conditions by paying the licence fee.
    >>>>
    >>>> And dont claim you didn't agree to the licence terms and conditions.
    >>>> You
    >>>> did when you put your money down.
    >>>>
    >>>> If you hadn't read or understood the licence terms and conditions then
    >>>> that's your fault and in no way negates the licence terms and
    >>>> conditions
    >>>> you have to abide by.
    >>>>
    >>>>> It differs fundamentally from anything you buy at your local dairy.
    >>>>
    >>>> Not if you try to dispute the original contract with the diary owner
    >>>> and
    >>>> claim they somehow mislead you when they sold you the items.
    >>>>
    >>>>> You should be able to re-sell an unused Windows license.
    >>>>
    >>>> But you cant when it says you cant in the EULA. You didn't read that in
    >>>> the EULA? that's YOUR fault, and in no way negates Microsofts legal
    >>>> right
    >>>> to say you cant resell an unused Windows licence.
    >>>
    >>> If it is the same as anything you buy at a dairy, you would be able to
    >>> re-sell it.
    >>> You can re-sell the RAM or the mouse or the wifi module etc after you
    >>> buy
    >>> a PC, why not the un-used software ?

    >>
    >>Because the oem software license you purchased prohibits resale unless the
    >>software remains bundled with the PC. If you want the right to resell a
    >>copy of Windows on its own, then you need to purchase a full license, not
    >>an
    >>OEM license.

    >
    > Unfortunately, the EULA is usually unreadable until after the sale is
    > completed. Hence you never agreed to its terms as part of the sales
    > contract, and it simply has no validity.


    Yeah, right.

    > It my understanding that it
    > is not possible under NZ law for one side of a contract to impose
    > conditions on a sale after the sale takes place. Only those
    > conditions agreed to at the time of sale apply.


    No problem. If you're unhappy with the bundle you paid for, then take the
    bundle back.

    > So if the retailer
    > failed to point out that Microsoft's EULA applied before the sale went
    > through, the EULA is completely void, even though it will pop up when
    > you try to install the software.


    The end user license is only valid for use on the machine that the software
    was originally bundled with. Which makes it worthless to you for any other
    purpose, since no one is going to pay good money for a license they can't
    use.

    > IBM seems to understand this - last
    > time I bought IBM software (many years ago), the licence conditions
    > were available on the outside of the packet, and they even mentioned
    > NZ and the CGA (to disclaim the CGA if you were buying for business
    > use). Microsoft seems to just completely ignore NZ law, and I
    > suspect, similar law in other countries. I understand that US law has
    > provisions for shrink wrap agreements and hence the EULA is valid
    > there.


    In the case of end-user licenses distributed by an oem sytem builder, it's
    the system builder that is the licensor -- not Microsoft. That's where your
    complaints need to be directed.

    http://oem.microsoft.com/script/contentPage.aspx?pageid=557159
    http://oem.microsoft.com/script/contentpage.aspx?pageid=552861
    http://oem.microsoft.com/downloads/Public/sblicense/2008_SB_Licenses/FY08_SB_License_English.pdf
    impossible, Oct 23, 2009
    #15
  16. EMB

    impossible Guest

    "Allistar" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > Stephen Worthington wrote:
    >
    >> On Thu, 22 Oct 2009 11:21:01 GMT, "impossible" <>
    >> wrote:
    >>
    >>>
    >>>"victor" <> wrote in message
    >>>news:hbpb91$hjo$-september.org...
    >>>> Max Burke wrote:
    >>>>> victor wrote:
    >>>>>>> Max Burke wrote:
    >>>>>>> I do. that's why I find it mildly amusing so many seem to think
    >>>>>>> computers are a special case and they're somehow getting ripped off
    >>>>>>> by the retailer/OEM/OS owner for buying a bundled product....
    >>>>>
    >>>>>> Software that is licensed IS a special case,
    >>>>>
    >>>>> In what way?
    >>>>> You read and *understand* the licence, and if you want to use the
    >>>>> software then you have to comply with the licence.
    >>>>> Dont like the licence terms and conditions? tough. You dont get to use
    >>>>> the software (legally anyway)
    >>>>>
    >>>>>> you cannot resell the software you have acquired in the bundle,
    >>>>>
    >>>>> You need to explain why you think you should be able to resell when
    >>>>> the
    >>>>> licence you agreed to (when you paid your money to the licence owner)
    >>>>> says you cant.
    >>>>>
    >>>>>> or incorporate it in another bundle for sale.
    >>>>>
    >>>>> Again explain why YOU think you should be able to?
    >>>>>
    >>>>> I mean what is it about software (licences) YOU think you have a right
    >>>>> to dispute licence terms and condition of ownership AFTER you have
    >>>>> agreed to those terms and conditions by paying the licence fee.
    >>>>>
    >>>>> And dont claim you didn't agree to the licence terms and conditions.
    >>>>> You did when you put your money down.
    >>>>>
    >>>>> If you hadn't read or understood the licence terms and conditions then
    >>>>> that's your fault and in no way negates the licence terms and
    >>>>> conditions you have to abide by.
    >>>>>
    >>>>>> It differs fundamentally from anything you buy at your local dairy.
    >>>>>
    >>>>> Not if you try to dispute the original contract with the diary owner
    >>>>> and claim they somehow mislead you when they sold you the items.
    >>>>>
    >>>>>> You should be able to re-sell an unused Windows license.
    >>>>>
    >>>>> But you cant when it says you cant in the EULA. You didn't read that
    >>>>> in
    >>>>> the EULA? that's YOUR fault, and in no way negates Microsofts legal
    >>>>> right to say you cant resell an unused Windows licence.
    >>>>
    >>>> If it is the same as anything you buy at a dairy, you would be able to
    >>>> re-sell it.
    >>>> You can re-sell the RAM or the mouse or the wifi module etc after you
    >>>> buy a PC, why not the un-used software ?
    >>>
    >>>Because the oem software license you purchased prohibits resale unless
    >>>the
    >>>software remains bundled with the PC. If you want the right to resell a
    >>>copy of Windows on its own, then you need to purchase a full license, not
    >>>an OEM license.

    >>
    >> Unfortunately, the EULA is usually unreadable until after the sale is
    >> completed. Hence you never agreed to its terms as part of the sales
    >> contract, and it simply has no validity. It my understanding that it
    >> is not possible under NZ law for one side of a contract to impose
    >> conditions on a sale after the sale takes place. Only those
    >> conditions agreed to at the time of sale apply. So if the retailer
    >> failed to point out that Microsoft's EULA applied before the sale went
    >> through, the EULA is completely void, even though it will pop up when
    >> you try to install the software. IBM seems to understand this - last
    >> time I bought IBM software (many years ago), the licence conditions
    >> were available on the outside of the packet, and they even mentioned
    >> NZ and the CGA (to disclaim the CGA if you were buying for business
    >> use). Microsoft seems to just completely ignore NZ law, and I
    >> suspect, similar law in other countries. I understand that US law has
    >> provisions for shrink wrap agreements and hence the EULA is valid
    >> there.

    >
    > Does that mean that the EULA can be ignored? I would expect that in the
    > case
    > of a "read after you buy" type license that if you then didn't agree with
    > the license details, you could go back to the retailer and get a full
    > refund.
    > --


    You can take the bundle back -- the machine and its software together -- but
    a separate refund on the software would be a violation of the oem system
    builder license, which prohibits transfers to any machine other than the one
    it was originally installed on.
    impossible, Oct 23, 2009
    #16
  17. On Fri, 23 Oct 2009 00:59:45 GMT, "impossible" <>
    wrote:

    >
    >"Allistar" <> wrote in message
    >news:...
    >> Stephen Worthington wrote:
    >>
    >>> On Thu, 22 Oct 2009 11:21:01 GMT, "impossible" <>
    >>> wrote:
    >>>
    >>>>
    >>>>"victor" <> wrote in message
    >>>>news:hbpb91$hjo$-september.org...
    >>>>> Max Burke wrote:
    >>>>>> victor wrote:
    >>>>>>>> Max Burke wrote:
    >>>>>>>> I do. that's why I find it mildly amusing so many seem to think
    >>>>>>>> computers are a special case and they're somehow getting ripped off
    >>>>>>>> by the retailer/OEM/OS owner for buying a bundled product....
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>> Software that is licensed IS a special case,
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>> In what way?
    >>>>>> You read and *understand* the licence, and if you want to use the
    >>>>>> software then you have to comply with the licence.
    >>>>>> Dont like the licence terms and conditions? tough. You dont get to use
    >>>>>> the software (legally anyway)
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>> you cannot resell the software you have acquired in the bundle,
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>> You need to explain why you think you should be able to resell when
    >>>>>> the
    >>>>>> licence you agreed to (when you paid your money to the licence owner)
    >>>>>> says you cant.
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>> or incorporate it in another bundle for sale.
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>> Again explain why YOU think you should be able to?
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>> I mean what is it about software (licences) YOU think you have a right
    >>>>>> to dispute licence terms and condition of ownership AFTER you have
    >>>>>> agreed to those terms and conditions by paying the licence fee.
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>> And dont claim you didn't agree to the licence terms and conditions.
    >>>>>> You did when you put your money down.
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>> If you hadn't read or understood the licence terms and conditions then
    >>>>>> that's your fault and in no way negates the licence terms and
    >>>>>> conditions you have to abide by.
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>> It differs fundamentally from anything you buy at your local dairy.
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>> Not if you try to dispute the original contract with the diary owner
    >>>>>> and claim they somehow mislead you when they sold you the items.
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>> You should be able to re-sell an unused Windows license.
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>> But you cant when it says you cant in the EULA. You didn't read that
    >>>>>> in
    >>>>>> the EULA? that's YOUR fault, and in no way negates Microsofts legal
    >>>>>> right to say you cant resell an unused Windows licence.
    >>>>>
    >>>>> If it is the same as anything you buy at a dairy, you would be able to
    >>>>> re-sell it.
    >>>>> You can re-sell the RAM or the mouse or the wifi module etc after you
    >>>>> buy a PC, why not the un-used software ?
    >>>>
    >>>>Because the oem software license you purchased prohibits resale unless
    >>>>the
    >>>>software remains bundled with the PC. If you want the right to resell a
    >>>>copy of Windows on its own, then you need to purchase a full license, not
    >>>>an OEM license.
    >>>
    >>> Unfortunately, the EULA is usually unreadable until after the sale is
    >>> completed. Hence you never agreed to its terms as part of the sales
    >>> contract, and it simply has no validity. It my understanding that it
    >>> is not possible under NZ law for one side of a contract to impose
    >>> conditions on a sale after the sale takes place. Only those
    >>> conditions agreed to at the time of sale apply. So if the retailer
    >>> failed to point out that Microsoft's EULA applied before the sale went
    >>> through, the EULA is completely void, even though it will pop up when
    >>> you try to install the software. IBM seems to understand this - last
    >>> time I bought IBM software (many years ago), the licence conditions
    >>> were available on the outside of the packet, and they even mentioned
    >>> NZ and the CGA (to disclaim the CGA if you were buying for business
    >>> use). Microsoft seems to just completely ignore NZ law, and I
    >>> suspect, similar law in other countries. I understand that US law has
    >>> provisions for shrink wrap agreements and hence the EULA is valid
    >>> there.

    >>
    >> Does that mean that the EULA can be ignored? I would expect that in the
    >> case
    >> of a "read after you buy" type license that if you then didn't agree with
    >> the license details, you could go back to the retailer and get a full
    >> refund.
    >> --

    >
    >You can take the bundle back -- the machine and its software together -- but
    >a separate refund on the software would be a violation of the oem system
    >builder license, which prohibits transfers to any machine other than the one
    >it was originally installed on.


    But the OEM agreement is between the PC builder and their supplier -
    it has no bearing whatsoever on the sales contract between you and the
    PC retailer. It is entirely their problem to deal with. So unless
    the retailer pointed out to you that the EULA applied before the sale
    took place, you can ignore it. Even if it pops up and tried to impose
    its conditions, my understanding is that it has no legal effect in NZ
    as it is happening after you were sold the software. So in theory you
    should be able to completely ignore it. Of course, I am sure that
    Microsoft will ignore you if you tell them that, and getting them to
    acknowledge the truth would probably take a High Court case, and who
    can afford that?
    Stephen Worthington, Oct 23, 2009
    #17
  18. EMB

    impossible Guest

    "Stephen Worthington" <34.nz56.remove_numbers> wrote in
    message news:...
    > On Fri, 23 Oct 2009 00:59:45 GMT, "impossible" <>
    > wrote:
    >
    >>
    >>"Allistar" <> wrote in message
    >>news:...
    >>> Stephen Worthington wrote:
    >>>
    >>>> On Thu, 22 Oct 2009 11:21:01 GMT, "impossible" <>
    >>>> wrote:
    >>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>>"victor" <> wrote in message
    >>>>>news:hbpb91$hjo$-september.org...
    >>>>>> Max Burke wrote:
    >>>>>>> victor wrote:
    >>>>>>>>> Max Burke wrote:
    >>>>>>>>> I do. that's why I find it mildly amusing so many seem to think
    >>>>>>>>> computers are a special case and they're somehow getting ripped
    >>>>>>>>> off
    >>>>>>>>> by the retailer/OEM/OS owner for buying a bundled product....
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>> Software that is licensed IS a special case,
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>> In what way?
    >>>>>>> You read and *understand* the licence, and if you want to use the
    >>>>>>> software then you have to comply with the licence.
    >>>>>>> Dont like the licence terms and conditions? tough. You dont get to
    >>>>>>> use
    >>>>>>> the software (legally anyway)
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>> you cannot resell the software you have acquired in the bundle,
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>> You need to explain why you think you should be able to resell when
    >>>>>>> the
    >>>>>>> licence you agreed to (when you paid your money to the licence
    >>>>>>> owner)
    >>>>>>> says you cant.
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>> or incorporate it in another bundle for sale.
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>> Again explain why YOU think you should be able to?
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>> I mean what is it about software (licences) YOU think you have a
    >>>>>>> right
    >>>>>>> to dispute licence terms and condition of ownership AFTER you have
    >>>>>>> agreed to those terms and conditions by paying the licence fee.
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>> And dont claim you didn't agree to the licence terms and conditions.
    >>>>>>> You did when you put your money down.
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>> If you hadn't read or understood the licence terms and conditions
    >>>>>>> then
    >>>>>>> that's your fault and in no way negates the licence terms and
    >>>>>>> conditions you have to abide by.
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>> It differs fundamentally from anything you buy at your local dairy.
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>> Not if you try to dispute the original contract with the diary owner
    >>>>>>> and claim they somehow mislead you when they sold you the items.
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>> You should be able to re-sell an unused Windows license.
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>> But you cant when it says you cant in the EULA. You didn't read that
    >>>>>>> in
    >>>>>>> the EULA? that's YOUR fault, and in no way negates Microsofts legal
    >>>>>>> right to say you cant resell an unused Windows licence.
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>> If it is the same as anything you buy at a dairy, you would be able
    >>>>>> to
    >>>>>> re-sell it.
    >>>>>> You can re-sell the RAM or the mouse or the wifi module etc after you
    >>>>>> buy a PC, why not the un-used software ?
    >>>>>
    >>>>>Because the oem software license you purchased prohibits resale unless
    >>>>>the
    >>>>>software remains bundled with the PC. If you want the right to resell
    >>>>>a
    >>>>>copy of Windows on its own, then you need to purchase a full license,
    >>>>>not
    >>>>>an OEM license.
    >>>>
    >>>> Unfortunately, the EULA is usually unreadable until after the sale is
    >>>> completed. Hence you never agreed to its terms as part of the sales
    >>>> contract, and it simply has no validity. It my understanding that it
    >>>> is not possible under NZ law for one side of a contract to impose
    >>>> conditions on a sale after the sale takes place. Only those
    >>>> conditions agreed to at the time of sale apply. So if the retailer
    >>>> failed to point out that Microsoft's EULA applied before the sale went
    >>>> through, the EULA is completely void, even though it will pop up when
    >>>> you try to install the software. IBM seems to understand this - last
    >>>> time I bought IBM software (many years ago), the licence conditions
    >>>> were available on the outside of the packet, and they even mentioned
    >>>> NZ and the CGA (to disclaim the CGA if you were buying for business
    >>>> use). Microsoft seems to just completely ignore NZ law, and I
    >>>> suspect, similar law in other countries. I understand that US law has
    >>>> provisions for shrink wrap agreements and hence the EULA is valid
    >>>> there.
    >>>
    >>> Does that mean that the EULA can be ignored? I would expect that in the
    >>> case
    >>> of a "read after you buy" type license that if you then didn't agree
    >>> with
    >>> the license details, you could go back to the retailer and get a full
    >>> refund.
    >>> --

    >>
    >>You can take the bundle back -- the machine and its software together --
    >>but
    >>a separate refund on the software would be a violation of the oem system
    >>builder license, which prohibits transfers to any machine other than the
    >>one
    >>it was originally installed on.

    >
    > But the OEM agreement is between the PC builder and their supplier -
    > it has no bearing whatsoever on the sales contract between you and the
    > PC retailer. It is entirely their problem to deal with. So unless
    > the retailer pointed out to you that the EULA applied before the sale
    > took place, you can ignore it. Even if it pops up and tried to impose
    > its conditions, my understanding is that it has no legal effect in NZ
    > as it is happening after you were sold the software.


    No. Under terms of the OEM agreement, the EULA is assigned to a specific
    machine. It's invalid on any other machine. So if you don't want the
    software, then you have no choice but to take the machine back and get a
    refund on the entire hardware/software bundle.

    > So in theory you
    > should be able to completely ignore it.


    In theory you can do anything. In reality, no, ignorance of the law is not a
    license to steal.

    > Of course, I am sure that
    > Microsoft will ignore you if you tell them that, and getting them to
    > acknowledge the truth would probably take a High Court case, and who
    > can afford that?


    Exactly. So be a good buy and obey the law.
    impossible, Oct 23, 2009
    #18
  19. EMB

    Max Burke Guest

    victor wrote:
    > Max Burke wrote:


    >> But you cant when it says you cant in the EULA. You didn't read that
    >> in the EULA? that's YOUR fault, and in no way negates Microsofts legal
    >> right to say you cant resell an unused Windows licence.


    > If it is the same as anything you buy at a dairy, you would be able to
    > re-sell it.
    > You can re-sell the RAM or the mouse or the wifi module etc after you
    > buy a PC, why not the un-used software ?


    Because the licence owner (that limited to Microsoft BTW) wrote a
    legally binding contract that states you cant.
    A contract you agreed to when you paid your money.

    EOS

    --

    Replace the obvious with paradise.net to email me
    Found Images
    http://homepages.paradise.net.nz/~mlvburke
    Max Burke, Oct 23, 2009
    #19
  20. EMB

    Max Burke Guest

    Stephen Worthington wrote:
    > On Thu, 22 Oct 2009 11:21:01 GMT, "impossible" <>
    > wrote:


    > Unfortunately, the EULA is usually unreadable until after the sale is
    > completed.


    BS! Google it.

    Snip rest.


    --

    Replace the obvious with paradise.net to email me
    Found Images
    http://homepages.paradise.net.nz/~mlvburke
    Max Burke, Oct 23, 2009
    #20
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. gangle

    German demands refund

    gangle, Aug 27, 2003, in forum: Computer Support
    Replies:
    8
    Views:
    509
    trout
    Aug 28, 2003
  2. JR
    Replies:
    1
    Views:
    494
    callsignviper
    Oct 22, 2003
  3. News Reader
    Replies:
    6
    Views:
    753
  4. Sailor Sam

    Windows refund

    Sailor Sam, Aug 24, 2009, in forum: NZ Computing
    Replies:
    315
    Views:
    4,267
    Dave Doe
    Oct 7, 2009
  5. Lawrence D'Oliveiro

    Re: Windows refund

    Lawrence D'Oliveiro, Sep 10, 2009, in forum: NZ Computing
    Replies:
    4
    Views:
    321
    peterwn
    Sep 11, 2009
Loading...

Share This Page