Quote:
Originally Posted by Lo Zeno
If you could be more specific and give me a concrete example, it would help greatly. I don't know UK laws, so I can't know how they are more complex and restrictive than normal commercial laws, and despite your efforts I still don't know what part of those laws they are not complying with. Can you please tell what are they doing illegally?
|
Please understand, they're selling these things as what UK judges is a sale. (If it looks like a sale, smells like a sale and is paid for like a sale? It's a sale!) They
can't enforce restrictions only avaliable via a liscence because it's not liscenced, and any attempts to do so are illegal.
i.e. "No resale", which due to exhaustion of rights is something which cannot be enforced on a
sold product.
(Also note this
only applies to sales to end-users, company-company sales are, pretty much "buyer beware")
If something is a service then, for instance, there is an explicit right to recieve a "satisfactory" service, which has to be made good at the expense of the company providing said service. This was actually primarily aimed at cowboy builders, but would apply equally to software!
Quote:
|
if I pay for a three years service and get kicked out after 2 years, I get a 1 year refund; but if I pay only each time I benefit of the service, I can't have a refund.
|
Yea, thats how it works, billing period minimums. But with XBL, if you pay for a year then get banned the next day, they don't give you 11 months back.
Microsoft have settled a number of these cases before they reached the small claims court. It's not in their interest to get a judgement against them there, and nobody has yet - although someone could - take it to a full court. And only the refund term could be changed in an action focusing on that...it's not precisely a high return item for a law firm.