Racketiciel writes "An French user asked for a refund after buying a ASUS computer
that came with Windows XP and other softwares pre-installed. ASUS tried to
apply a procedure which cost more money to the consumer that they
will give back... The court ruled in favor of the user
who received back 130 Euro (~200 $) for the softwares.
Here is
the ruling (PDF, French).
In France, this is the fourth victory for refund during last two years,
and
many persons are now starting procedures (in French).
Two French associations (AFUL
and April) published
a press
release on this victory the same day a important hearing happened." Link to Original Source
This discussion was created for logged-in users only, but now has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
... don't you have to agree to the EULA to purchase the machine?
Not in Europe, and I doubt it is the case in the USA. No one signs it before buying, or else what would be later the point of clicking. But that is not the real issue here. Buying and then suing is just the only available procedure to bring to justice the fact that anti-competitive bundling practices are used. The purpose is not so much to get the money back, but to force the authorities to act on a situation that is actually forbidden by law, but without enforcement.
The customer has bought windows bundled with the machine; but as long as you don't agree with the software license, you should be able to get a refund. If this goes in an American court, it may establish a very dangerous precedent to Microsoft.
And, of course, to Apple. (but who outside the EFF would be crazy enough to pay for a mac and take it to court?)
Accepting the EULA (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
... don't you have to agree to the EULA to purchase the machine?
Not in Europe, and I doubt it is the case in the USA. No one signs it before buying, or else what would be later the point of clicking.
But that is not the real issue here. Buying and then suing is just the only available procedure to bring to justice the fact that anti-competitive bundling practices are used.
The purpose is not so much to get the money back, but to force the authorities to act on a situation that is actually forbidden by law, but without enforcement.
When will an american court get to this? (Score:1)