-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
____/ Mark Kent on Sunday 03 August 2008 10:21 : \____
> Peter Köhlmann <peter.koehlmann@xxxxxxxx> espoused:
>> Mark Kent wrote:
>>
>>> thufir <hawat.thufir@xxxxxxxxx> espoused:
>>>> On Wed, 30 Jul 2008 10:36:51 +0100, Mark Kent wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>> As someone else wrote, the refund will be on the whole system, not each
>>>>>> individual component. It's bundled and normal return policies apply.
>>>>>> Doesn't mean that's a good situation, just that the guy who got the
>>>>>> refund read what he wanted into the EULA.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>> It's not fully bundled, though, because you have to agree to a licence
>>>>> before you can use it (Windows), so quite clearly, Microsoft consider
>>>>> their Windows to be a separate entity from the computer.
>>>>>
>>>>> Microsoft are not in a position in a Windows Eula to state the returns
>>>>> policy with respect to a 3rd-party product (an HP computer) as sold by a
>>>>> 3rd party vendor (whoever this was).
>>>>>
>>>>> Certainly, in the UK, this would not hold any water. Adding conditions
>>>>> after a sale is not allowed here, as far as I know.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> It would be alot clearer if the requirement was to *sign* the EULA at the
>>>> time of purchase. IANAL, but I agree with you that it sounds suspect to
>>>> add conditions after the sale.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>> I remain astonished that nobody has yet tested this issue legally.
>>
>> It is tested, at least in germany. Any EULA you get to see *after* the sale
>> is worth far less legally than used toilet paper
>
> Ah, good! I believe that the same situation would apply here.
>
>>
>>> The practice appears to be quite reprehensible.
>>>
>>
>> It is. But some countries still have those backwater laws
>
> quite.
See this article from last year:
Do Microsoft's EULAs have any real legal basis?
,----[ Quote ]
| "Microsoft has no special exemption from the sale of goods act." Well,
| no, probably not - but it might still be selling you "services"
| instead of "goods". But the real point to remember is that it doesn't
| matter a jot what the "logical" position is, it is what the courts
| decide that matters.
|
| As far as I know, no one has tested Microsoft's EULAs in a UK court
| and, until someone does, Microsoft will just go on assuming that they
| work. And I don't fancy the risk of taking on Microsoft's expensive
| lawyers in court myself...
`----
http://www.regdeveloper.co.uk/2007/04/25/microsoft_eula/
Germany, by the way, also forbids what Microsoft did to Linux last year
(slander around patents without any proof... never even mind if software
patents are suitable as toilet paper replacement in the country).
- --
~~ Best of wishes
Roy S. Schestowitz | Have you hugged your penguin today?
http://Schestowitz.com | RHAT GNU/Linux | PGP-Key: 0x74572E8E
13:00:01 up 12 days, 23:06, 1 user, load average: 1.01, 0.89, 0.80
http://iuron.com - help build a non-profit search engine
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (GNU/Linux)
iEYEARECAAYFAkiVrPYACgkQU4xAY3RXLo4BhACfT4V6PefDA9rMV+ECh1htiUe7
8KwAn38mbfBstXj2VzoE+Yai17LwR5d7
=hJ6V
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
|
|
