Follow Slashdot stories on Twitter

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Microsoft Government The Courts News

Microsoft Drags Feet with Settlement Claims 133

Posted by michael from the slow-down-cowboy dept.
An anonymous reader writes "Microsoft is holding up compensation claims from a quarter of million Californians in order to punish Lindows.com, and to coerce the class action plaintiffs 'into siding with Microsoft against its Lindows competitor,' according to a court filing seen by The Register. The document, filed on 21st November by Townsend and Townsend and Crew, lead counsel for the Californian class action consumers, points out that none of the claims being held up was actually filed via Lindows.com, yet Microsoft has held them 'hostage' for over two months."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Microsoft Drags Feet with Settlement Claims More

Microsoft Drags Feet with Settlement Claims

Comments Filter:

  • Hmmm... (Score:4, Insightful)

    by Newer Guy ( 520108 ) on Saturday November 29, 2003 @02:28AM (#7586257)
    Does this mean that all of us who filed via the Lindows method are going to be stiffed? I did receive a claim form direct from the court...I wonder If I should file it. It says I have until March 15, 2004.

  • Argh (Score:5, Funny)

    by SpiffyMarc ( 590301 ) on Saturday November 29, 2003 @02:29AM (#7586260)
    They need to hurry up and process all the legitimate claims filed with proper proof-of-purchase, so they can get down to what really matters... processing all those phony ones from MSFreePC.com!

    *eagerly awaiting his ill-gotten gains*

  • A move for the books? (Score:5, Interesting)

    by NightWulf ( 672561 ) on Saturday November 29, 2003 @02:30AM (#7586263)
    I'm not a professional accountant, but could this be a move for the stock? According to the article, they won't have to pay out all 1.1 billion but there will still be a good chunk of money paid out. If they can keep delaying this until after the end of the year, they wouldn't have to report it on this quarters accounting forms. It would seen to me, even for MS, a big cash payment like that will look serious on paper. I could be wrong in my facts though.

    • Re:A move for the books? (Score:5, Insightful)

      by Prof. Pi ( 199260 ) on Saturday November 29, 2003 @02:46AM (#7586299)
      If they can keep delaying this until after the end of the year, they wouldn't have to report it on this quarters accounting forms.

      Only to have it as a charge on next quarter's earnings report? What would they gain from that? I know modern execs have an extreme short-term outlook, but that would really be extreme. Unless some guy is getting ready to retire and his retirement bonus is based on this year's stock performance.

    • Re:A move for the books? (Score:5, Interesting)

      by Registered Coward v2 ( 447531 ) on Saturday November 29, 2003 @07:01AM (#7586716)
      I'm not a CPA either, but IAR once you have a reasonable expectation of paying out the cash you take a charge for the full amouunt, which you can reduce if you discover you overestimated the actual payout.

      Side note - this allows companies to control earnings by overestimating, for allowances for unpaid debts. Say you overestimate by 1 billion dollars (in a period where earnings are great) - you can discover your error in a period where earnings are poor, magically adding back earnings removed earlier.

  • Gee, what a suprise! (Score:5, Funny)

    by crass751 ( 682736 ) on Saturday November 29, 2003 @02:31AM (#7586267) Homepage
    Microsoft is dragging its feet on settlement claims?

    In other news...
    Water is wet!
    The Sky is blue!
    Ice is cold!
    and so on ad nauseum.

    • Re:Gee, what a suprise! (Score:1, Funny)

      by Anonymous Coward
      A Slashdot reader is biased against Microsoft?

      In other news...
      Water is wet!
      The Sky is blue!
      Ice is cold!
      and so on ad nauseum.
  • Microsoft Drags Feet with Settlement Claims

    Now in news just to hand:

    Sun rises in the east.

    Sheesh

    Non-Microsoft-based VPS Hosting [rimuhosting.com]

  • Battle of resources, not facts (Score:5, Informative)

    by mabu ( 178417 ) * on Saturday November 29, 2003 @02:34AM (#7586277)
    Is anyone surprised?

    It doesn't matter whether we're talking about SCO, Microsoft, the DMCA, RIAA, or Michael Jackson. The new get-rich-quick or save-your-ass business model is now based on seeing who can legally travel the farthest on the gas they have in their tank.

    • Re:Battle of resources, not facts (Score:5, Funny)

      by mattjb0010 ( 724744 ) on Saturday November 29, 2003 @02:38AM (#7586286) Homepage
      It doesn't matter whether we're talking about SCO, Microsoft, the DMCA, RIAA, or Michael Jackson.

      Well the RIAA and Michael Jackson have been going after little kids, but Microsoft?

      • Re:Battle of resources, not facts (Score:1, Informative)

        by Anonymous Coward
        Michael Jackson have been going after little kids

        BZZZZT!

        It has been alleged that Michael Jackson has been going after little kids. I don't know whether he has or not.
        This could just be another attempt by his accusers to grab a chunk of money by making up some juicy dirt. It happens all the time.

        • Re:Battle of resources, not facts (Score:1, Informative)

          by Anonymous Coward
          Yeah, because last time this happened Micheal so wanted to prove his total and complete innocence he settelled out of court for millions of dollars.

          Now I don't know about you, but even if I were Micheal Jackson and had that sort of cash just lying around, I wouldn't prove my innocence by buying off the complaint and not going to court.

          So, how well do you think little old Micheal will fair in the nonce wing?
          • Well even if he is innocent, who would the courts believe? a child on his death bed? or an accused molester?

            It's pretty much a losing situation for Michael either way, after all it is just circumstantial evidence and the verdict will be decided based on testimony and not "evidence".

            I think Michael is just a weird guy but I don't think he "molested" any child. He's just strange and probably hugged and treated the kids like he wanted to be treated as a child. Of course that's a bit weird if you aren't relat
      • Well the RIAA and Michael Jackson have been going after little kids, but Microsoft?

        Who's the main target demographic for the XBox?

    • Re:Battle of resources, not facts (Score:5, Interesting)

      by Maestro4k ( 707634 ) on Saturday November 29, 2003 @03:55AM (#7586407) Journal
      • Is anyone surprised?

        It doesn't matter whether we're talking about SCO, Microsoft, the DMCA, RIAA, or Michael Jackson. The new get-rich-quick or save-your-ass business model is now based on seeing who can legally travel the farthest on the gas they have in their tank.

      Well, yes and no. I'm not surprised because I know Microsoft tends to behave this way, but at the same time, I'm a tad surprised at how flagrantly they're thumbing their nose at all the governments (states and federal) that these settlements effect. As for federal, things aren't looking perfectly hunky-dory for MS on that front, as thre seems to be a fair chance the holdout state may manage to get tougher sanctions placed on MS.

      Yes, I know we all think Microsoft is the Evil Empire (tm), but even evil empires/villians generally know when it's time to shut the hell up and at least pretend to play by the rules for a while. Hasn't MS learned by now that further antagonization very well may cause them to end up in bigger trouble? If they start ticking off enough business and individuals, they may find not only public sentiment totally against them, but some seriously powerful lobbying interests pulling out the big guns to launch attacks on them. That could hurt a lot more than any of the current judicial cases/settlements would, and definitely would be far worse than the miniscule amount of money they'll be out by playing by the rules of the game in this case.

      • Re:Battle of resources, not facts (Score:5, Interesting)

        by Trurl's Machine ( 651488 ) on Saturday November 29, 2003 @06:54AM (#7586706) Journal
        Yes, I know we all think Microsoft is the Evil Empire (tm), but even evil empires/villians generally know when it's time to shut the hell up and at least pretend to play by the rules for a while.

        Sorry for straying offtopic, but this is generally not true. Actually most empires in history fall just because they went for yet another "easy prey" and bitterly discovered that it wasn't that easy after all. Would the Soviets keep away from Afghanistan, they could pretty well still be in Kremlin. Would Napoleon keep away from Kremlin, he could pretty well keep Paris, Vienna, Berlin, Rome and Madrid till the end of his days. And still this lesson didn't keep Hitler from repeating exatcly the same mistake. The same goes with the villains - Al Capone could live his days in luxury if he wouldn't be too greedy.

        DISCLAIMER - no, I am not saying that Bill Gates is like Hitler or Capone; I'm just saying that history proves, that saying "Okay, I have gained enough, now is the time for peaceful consumption of what I've got" is actually the MORE difficult part than saying "Let's build an empire from scratch".
        • Absolutely--there is little in history that makes me think that any "villain" does know when to stop, and it all goes back to the idea that you express--greed.

          I think M$ is NO different in that respect--they are already one of the biggest corporations in history, and they have a LOT of cash, but they want MORE! This is what really annoys me about that company--every thing they do seems to be about getting more money.

          I know that that is the idea of any publicly traded company --to generate cash for the st
        • i think al capone died of syphallus, so to live longer he would have had to do more than stay away from greed...
        • Well, all we have to do is wait for the political climate to turn against large corporations and we'll see a new wave of trustbusting. Besides, with corporations taking more and more these days, it's just a matter of time before people get pissed off enough to do something. This situation is nothing new, it happened in the first part of last century and will probably happen again in the first part of this one.

          Response to disclaimer: I'll probably get lynched for saying this, but Gates is actually not a bad

          • Re:Battle of resources, not facts (Score:5, Insightful)

            by Daniel Dvorkin ( 106857 ) * on Saturday November 29, 2003 @02:35PM (#7588540) Homepage Journal
            Response to disclaimer: I'll probably get lynched for saying this, but Gates is actually not a bad guy. Really. He's already given away somewhere in the neighborhood of $20 billion, roughly half his fortune, and is actively working on giving the rest of it away.

            If you rob a bank, and give half your ill-gotten gains to charity, and on your deathbed give away what's left ...

            ... you're still a bank robber.
      • Yes, MS learned they are above the rules and do not have to listen to anybody.

        Look at the recent doj case as an example. This just confirms ms can do whatever they want.

        My guess is MS will refuse to pay and wait for the next higher court to take its case and then will settle as soon as they find a favorable judge just like the doj case.

      • Re:Battle of resources, not facts (Score:5, Insightful)

        by sultanoslack ( 320583 ) on Saturday November 29, 2003 @07:56AM (#7586801)
        Yes, I know we all think Microsoft is the Evil Empire (tm), but even evil empires/villians generally know when it's time to shut the hell up and at least pretend to play by the rules for a while.
        Hasn't MS learned by now that further antagonization very well may cause them to end up in bigger trouble?

        No, because it hasn't landed them in bigger trouble. They continue to ignore the legal system and it continues to be very profitable for them. And they'll keep thwarting the legal system as for them it's been a working strategy.

        Microsoft has learned that they can win most of their court cases and get slap-on-the-hand settlements for the rest and then see to it that the slap doesn't even actually happen.

        • get slap-on-the-hand settlements for the rest and then see to it that the slap doesn't even actually happen.

          Or, even worse, get settlements that actually make their position stronger. Forcing a convicted monopolist to give away a certain amount of their own software makes no sense. The problem is that they've already got far too much market dominance. Giving them a way to get still more market dominance is not a punishment.

          Of course, given that they won the antitrust case by paying off the Federal gov

          • Comment removed based on user account deletion

            • Actually, you should get your facts straight. Bush campaigned repeatedly on the promise of ending the MS anti-trust trial as soon as possible via settlement.

              So the fact that Microsoft helped buy the election of the administration that handed them the keys to the kingdom instead of buying them off after makes things better how, exactly?

        • I think the primary point, however, is that if they continue behaving this way, the heavy hammer is eventually going to fall on them. All it would really take is an administration a bit less beholden to Corporate interests than the current one, and they're in a world of excrement.

          Remember, Clinton was all for smacking them down. Then when Bush got into office, he told Ashcroft to let them off the hook. (well, presumably. The order technically just came from Ashcroft, but I can't imagine him doing that

      • they may find not only public sentiment totally against them, but some seriously powerful lobbying interests pulling out the big guns to launch attacks on them.

        I know it may not seem like this from a slashdot reader's perspective, but public sentiment is very much for Microsoft, not against it.

        For every geek they piss off, there's 10 investors that love them.
    • During the first case against Michael Jackson, Jackson benefited some 8-million dollars through secondary means due to publicity, even after the settlement.

  • MS has a point on this (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward on Saturday November 29, 2003 @02:35AM (#7586278)
    I know someone from IRC who openly brags about making up information to get a free download of Staroffice 7, because he says his claim will end up being thrown out. The fact is, it does encourage people to make up phony claims, and unfortunately, people like the one I mention above will probably never be caught. This is exactly one of Microsoft's objections, and they couldn't be more right in what they've said. By requiring people to file claims through the court, as would normally happen, people are much less able to make phony claims. As much as I don't like Microsoft, and even though they're guilty, it doesn't make it right to steal from them, or from Lindows.

    It's a nice idea to encourage people to claim their piece of the settlement, and as much as I like seeing it happen to Microsoft, it really can't be done in a fair and legal way.
    • why should they benefit from it? I don't see anything wrong with Microsoft being "exploited" any more than I did when I heard that Dahmer got offed in prison...

      In both cases, my reaction is: "couldn't happen to a nicer fuck". And I dont' see any reason to feel bad about that.
    • >By requiring people to file claims through the court, as would normally happen, people are much less able to make phony claims.

      If it workes for Bill Gates [cmcnyls.edu], why can't it work for anyone?

      You don't get it both ways, Microsoft. Either you let everyone lie to the courts, or you don't. Which one they prefer -- they've already made your own bed of nails on that one -- doesn't matter.
      • I know someone from IRC who openly brags about making up information to get a free download of Staroffice 7, because he says his claim will end up being thrown out. The fact is, it does encourage people to make up phony claims, and unfortunately, people like the one I mention above will probably never be caught. This is exactly one of Microsoft's objections, and they couldn't be more right in what they've said. By requiring people to file claims through the court, as would normally happen, people are much

    • gimme a break (Score:3, Insightful)

      by penguin7of9 ( 697383 )
      It's a nice idea to encourage people to claim their piece of the settlement, and as much as I like seeing it happen to Microsoft, it really can't be done in a fair and legal way.

      The settlement is whatever the parties agree on. They could have agreed to give the money to chain smokers, or to donate to endangered ducks, or to burn a billion dollars to heat orphanages. It doesn't matter matter whether you consider the distribution fair, what matters is what they agreed to.

      And what they agreed to is that th

    • MS has no point (Score:2, Insightful)

      by Anonymous Coward
      The agreement says they pay out a maximal of 1.1 billion. That means they've done at least 1.1 billion damage. So, any phony claim is only depriving real claims of their share of the settlement. MS has no reason to complain because they owe 1.1 billion. People who aren't getting their share of the claim should be out trying to get their fair share.
    • False claims?

      How about, "Just reboot the machine, that will fix the problem"? Or, "It's the user's fault", or maybe "That's the fault of 3rd party vendors"? Etc. etc.
    • I know someone from IRC who openly brags about making up information to get a free download of Staroffice 7, because he says his claim will end up being thrown out. The fact is, it does encourage people to make up phony claims, and unfortunately, people like the one I mention above will probably never be caught. This is exactly one of Microsoft's objections, and they couldn't be more right in what they've said. By requiring people to file claims through the court, as would normally happen, people are much
    • I live and work in California and filed a claim through Lindows.com. I have purchased a great deal of MS products over the last 7-8 years for myself, my children and my employer.

      The items I claimed on the Lindows form represented only a fraction of the $$ MS has gotten from me over the years.

      Because MS is paying with vouchers, and those vouchers will not cover the cost of any new software, they are betting most of it will come back to MS along with some cash.

      I filed that claim through Lindows because

  • How was this going to work in the first place? (Score:5, Insightful)

    by benna ( 614220 ) * <mimenarrator@g m a i l .com> on Saturday November 29, 2003 @02:36AM (#7586283) Journal
    From what I read, they don't require the proof that the settlement requires, so how are they going to get the money? And what's stopping you from filing claims with both MS and Lindows? I doubt MS is going to share it's data with Lindows.

    • Re:How was this going to work in the first place? (Score:5, Interesting)

      by evilviper ( 135110 ) on Saturday November 29, 2003 @03:32AM (#7586370) Journal
      Yikes... Where to start tearing apart your post?

      From what I read, they don't require the proof that the settlement requires

      I don't know what the hell you read, but the Microsoft standard claim form requires practically NOTHING. Name of product, where you got it, your own address, and signature... That's it. I have the form right in front of me as a matter of fact.

      And what's stopping you from filing claims with both MS and Lindows?

      The same thing that stops you from filing two claims with Microsoft... When Microsoft recieves the information, they see that they've already paid one, and refuse the other.

      I doubt MS is going to share it's data with Lindows.

      That's how Lindows gets their money. If Microsoft doesn't pay Lindows for your claim, then Lindows doesn't pay you. Simple.

  • Interesting Thought..... (Score:4, Interesting)

    by Anonymous Coward on Saturday November 29, 2003 @02:42AM (#7586294)
    How many other companies can afford to pay 1.1 billion and barely feel it....?????
    ONE
    • Well, I would say that most fortune 500 companies could afford to pay around that amount, but then I remembered Enron and WorldCom. I guess every big company needs a scandal in one form or another in order to keep the warm and fuzzy feeling inside.
      • Not many companies has that kind of money in cash or cash equivalents, because most established companies don't hoard - they distribute dividends to their shareholders. So I'd guess relatively few companies could afford it without seriously eating into their cash reserves.

  • Seriously (Score:4, Insightful)

    by SpiffyMarc ( 590301 ) on Saturday November 29, 2003 @02:50AM (#7586303)
    I'm not sure what intentions Lindows had beyond marketing their software using a court decision, and I'm equally unsure of how they can say that any of the claims filed by Lindows on behalf of the claimant have any merit whatsoever.

    When I first read about this program on /., I rushed to MSFreePC and completed all but the last couple steps to file a claim. Of course, I've never even been to any states that BORDER California, let alone purchased a PC there. What's to stop anybody from doing that, and how could they ever verify the legitmacy of the claims?

    As bad as it may be, I think Microsoft is well within its' right to not accept MSFreePC claims, or at least to challenge their validity in a court of law. That shouldn't stop them from processing claims submitted under THEIR terms, however.
    • When I first read about this program on /., I rushed to MSFreePC and completed all but the last couple steps to file a claim. Of course, I've never even been to any states that BORDER California, let alone purchased a PC there. What's to stop anybody from doing that, and how could they ever verify the legitmacy of the claims?

      Well, that's Lindows problem isn't it. They buy the right to your claim (with free stuff to you). If your claim is bullshit, well, they don't get the money for that claim from MS.

      I

  • This isn't about MyFreePc folks!!! (Score:5, Interesting)

    by Maestro4k ( 707634 ) on Saturday November 29, 2003 @04:03AM (#7586421) Journal
    Ack, so many posts already, all saying that they agree that the MyFreePC site is probably plagued by cheats. Come on guys, that's not the main point in this article!!! It plainly says the following: "The document, filed on 21st November by Townsend and Townsend and Crew, lead counsel for the Californian class action consumers, points out that none of the claims being held up was actually filed via Lindows.com, yet Microsoft has held them 'hostage' for over two months."

    This is about Microsoft wanting its way and screwing over innocents to try and get it. They're just being whiney crybabies here about MyFreePC. Sure, they may have some legit complaints about MyFreePC, but that shouldn't stop them from processing legitimate claims that have nothing at all to do with MyFreePC! This is truly just pathetic behaivor on MS's part.

    • Ah, such fresh faced innocence. I bet you read the headline. The post AND the articles linked in the post. So naive. Real /. Trolls scan the headline, notice a few words as they scroll down for the reply button and then post their "thoughts" without previewing. You yet got much to learn.

      Yes of course you are absolutly right. The post and articles point out clearly that the claims being held back have nothing to do with the lindows. These claims have been made by ordinary citizens of California and should h

        • As for why MS is doing this. Bill Gates is a little kid. For the last 20 years he has been head of an empire growing ever bigger. Everyone around him told him he was a hero. Now slowly he is finding out that outside his little empire people really don't share his vision of the world. Law makers are after him, geeks are building software for FREE, major companies he thought he had beaten multiple times are still there ready to see him fail.

        I'm glad I'm not the only one who sees it that way. I had point

    • I agree. Its time to bring out Robo-judge. Spank that M$ ass!......... Bad Bill, Bad!
    • Townsend and Townsend says:

      "Although plaintiffs expressed some initial concerns with the Lindows web site, we are now satisfied with Lindows' explanation of its procedures and believe that it fully comports with the express terms of the Settlement Agreement."
  • The bulk of this money will return to Microsoft in the form of new income. So logically, they have no reason to block the settlement. I deduce therefore that it's a subtle way of pumping profits into 2004.

    Or maybe Microsoft just hate Michael Robertson so much they would rather find themselves in breach of the settlement than pay one red cent... Nah, can't be.

  • This can't be true! (Score:5, Funny)

    by Anonymous Coward on Saturday November 29, 2003 @06:58AM (#7586711)
    What? A benevolent, law-abiding company like Microsoft, whose only goal is to make people's lives better and more productive, trying to chisel people out of money it owes them? This can't be true. It's those anti-Microsoft zealots at it again. Don't believe everything you read on Slashdot.
  • Microsoft is known for slowly backing out of punishments, or does pay people....such a politicians to look the other way.

    and seriously, has microsoft ever done things the legal way? no, but they have done some legal things.. but based off illegal actions.
    they dont like following federal law, but they sure like using federal law against its own consumers.
    when I first heard M$ was supposed to send out money.. I laughed, because I knew they wouldnt do it. Also, if they did pay the settlement, they'd lose a ma
    • Um, they were fairly law-abiding until they decided to overthrow IBM and DOS \ OS/2. Of course, at that point, they were only a small software shop best-known for putting out a really great Flight Simulator. (and a pretty good word processor)

      That's what drives me batty about our current system. Ultimately, the Best Product pretty much cannot win. Whichever company has the slickest marketing and the most underhanded back-room tactics wins. And that's almost never the guy with the best product since h

      • While it certainly wasn't a perfect operating system, just imagine what the last decade of computing would've been like had OS/2 become the standard instead of Windows...

        Don't pile on the torture, man. In 1994, I had OS/2 and early GNU/Linux running under OS/2 Boot Manager and, frankly, I was in non-MS-Windows heaven.(It was the install floppy reads that gave the game away. After about disk 5 on OS/2, it started multitasking and chomping data like Mr Creosote. Early Slack and terrific memory management di

  • Mail Merge (Score:5, Funny)

    by drdestructo ( 44777 ) on Saturday November 29, 2003 @12:18PM (#7587860) Homepage
    Give 'em a break, they're still running the mail merge for the form letter response...

  • How future MS settlements should be handled (Score:5, Interesting)

    by shadow255 ( 710534 ) on Saturday November 29, 2003 @01:17PM (#7588194)
    Let this be a warning to any other states which have not yet completed class actions against Microsoft for anticompetitive pricing. Any settlement reached should require that Microsoft place the settlement amount, in cash, into an escrow account managed by an impartial third party with disbursements to be managed by said third party with strict guidelines and regular court oversight.

    It's time to stop letting these things get turned into PR circuses benefiting the the defendant who chooses to settle out of court (and apparently giving no benefit to the plaintiffs, so far).

    Standard disclaimer: IANAL, use this advice at your own peril, yada-yada-yada.

  • A few pertinent facts here (Score:1, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward
    - MS is refusing to pay ANY claims in an attempt to extort the attorneys for the class members to object to MSfreePC

    - MSfreePC requires the IDENTICAL information that the manual process does. In fact, it's the same form. They are just doing it electronically. To the extent that someone could defraud MSfreePC, the IDENTICAL opportunity exists with the paper process.

    - Microsoft objecting to ONLINE settlement claims is dripping with irony given their "innovation" advertising campaigns.

    - While 1.1B is the an
  • the "So what did you expect?" department.

Slashdot Top Deals

This restaurant was advertising breakfast any time. So I ordered french toast in the renaissance. - Steven Wright, comedian

Close