Linux kills notebook - Page 2

I would add a 3.25 to this: Write an agent of counsel letter. In essence, find out who is the chief attorney for the company, and write to him / her a firm, assertive, yet kind letter stating what has happened and how you feel about the situation. CC: the letter to the Vice President in charge of consumer relations, and whatever you do, avoid describing "LEGAL ACTION", using the worlds "Legal, Sue, Attorney, Legal Action, etc.," In the cases of most companies, just knowing you sent to their head attorney and VP this letter means you're serious about the problem and not one of those trying to spin their wheels and be an inarticulate fool. In fact, do not threaten ANYTHING when writing this letter, you want to appear professional, not stupid. On a further note, I'm not sure step 3.5 would work so well. Although publicly humiliating a company via the media can be effective to an extent. A corporation is viewed almost as a person from a business perspective. What this entails is that in the event you choose to go this route, you had better have your facts straight and be able to back up your statements in writing and other forms of documents; lest you produce libel about the company (in which case you're going to be harassed a LOT more than you can imagine), in the event they choose to take legal action for the slander. DISCLAMER: I do not advocate these actions as first steps; rather as a penultimate and ultimate step before taking that jump into legal action respectively. PLEASE do not just go and blindly stuff the higher-ups of computer companies with complaints that have not at least had the opportunity to be rectified by CSR's and their supervisors. While the VP's and General Counsels are there to help us, they DO NOT enjoy having their power abused. Please keep whatever good bridges are left between consumers and them solid and crossable so that future incidents may also get the due services necessary in their respective times of need. Ganzonomy

Im sorry did we forget we are talking about a hinge?? a HINGE? software is not gonna affect the hinge.....can we be serious. If you think Linux caused this hinge to fail you dont wanna ever try fixing your laptop...heat mabey possibly by a small portion will help cause a hinge to go bad but not cause of the OS. very very stupid this person should get their warranty work done. going as low as that to say your Os caused your hinge to break i would consider asking this company to just go out of business. its like saying if i put halo on my pc my warranty is void. computers are supposed to be universal, which means to do what the EU wants...a hinge fault....caused by the OS, silliest dumbest thing i have ever heard to this day...just STUPID.

And therein you have the key. As long as that part does no damage to the machine the warranty on remaining parts stands. All that has to be done is demonstrate how something that in no way possible interacts with the plastic casing of a case, is not responsible for the case malfunctioning. This has been done I believe in previous cases and even in the US would not be difficult to prove to any judge that had even half a mind of technology (Read uses a computer on any semi-regular basis). And one large part of this is the fact OS is just software. By denying the ability to change software on a machine, you are denying any plausible use of the machine really. Not only that, if someone actually followed this, they would be manuvering themselves to an unuseable and potentinally damaged machine anyways as it would prevent them from updating virus definition files, and in cases like the Melissa virus some time ago that did manage to cause physical damage to some computers. If the argument is that the OS is "special" software that controls low level functionality of the computer, the counter-argument that so are drivers can easily be made. And drivers are often released and reccomended upgrades from the manufacturers of certain equipment, and one of the reasons for those upgrades can be to prevent damage if there is a problem i the firmware for that device that is worked around, or in the driver that was shipped. I am of the opinion, that no matter how you turn this, there is not a way for a warranty claim of the Linux OS voiding the warranty to stand up in court. Seablade PS NOTE: I am not a lawyer... I just play one backstage... Ok so I have had more than my share of dealing with legal issues, but that is besides the point Staying up to date with the legal issues surrounding my work and hobbies is worthwhile to me.

He is being quite serious actually, and the point that he brings up is a valid one, in that in actuality some warranties(Most?) are void if you replace the OS. My point though is that he is absolutely correct, a warranty statement may lead you to believe that, however basic consumer protection laws in most countries would invalidate that wording in the warranty. Just so that it is clear, I don't think the person I am debating with in any way claims it is not stupid in concept, he is just explaining it put into practice(Practial purposes) in that in many warranties there is language to the effect of what he is saying. He can of course speak for himself as well. The reason for this is many manufacturers do not want to take responsibility for the corners they cut in the manufacturing process to bring you 'budget' laptops. As such often times they won't even take responsibility easily for ANY case related manufacturing defect, particularly on those laptops. The wording in the warranty is to make people think just this, and they hope it will go away after the first round. Thing is consumer protection in the US and Europe both would force the manufacturer to take responsibility for this if it is followed up on, but many people do not want to do that for a $600 laptop as it might cost them significantly more, manufacturers depend on this thinking which is why the language is still there. Seablade

And is very good advice.


Agreed having your facts right is important, that is exactly why I put it after learn about your rights. Do NOT slander or libel the company in doing this, state the facts. The internet will take it in any direction, but chances are it will be taken in the direction in defense of the consumer in ridiculous cases such as this.

At this point you are beginning a PR campaign really. It is not so much about winning by itself, but gives the company another reason why they would NOT want this to go to court, as that would make their image look worse(NOTE: Only applies in cases where the company is obviously at fault, for debateable cases stay away from PR is probably your best bet). It is very easy these days to ahve a story take off on the internet, and from there it can spread farther into media(And does quite often). Worst case scenario, you want to have only stated fact.


Agreed.

Seablade

I'm not excusing the company for being stupid. In fact from a personal standpoint, I would say "go for getting the hinge fixed", because it's blatantly obvious that linux didn't cause it. However most companies are simply looking for a way out of a situation rather than trying to fix it. If PCWorld's an unethical company, then they'll make the link from A to B and justify it that way, even when we ALL know Linux isn't the culprit. However, I'm willing to bet that PCWorld's profit margin is very very slim, and that if they actually repaired a great deal of computers, they'd be in the red a great deal. The hinge thing has been gone over, but i will reiterate one more time that A HINGE CANNOT BE AFFECTED by LINUX.

I hope that in Europe, there is a legal avenue through the EU (Unless he's in England, in which case he's going to have to use their legal system for warranty-work, both systems I do not possess a great knowledge of), and use those resources to find appropriate resolution. Unfortunately, as long as laws allow for corporations to make cheap copouts and put customers through hell to get their due service, then we either have to a) play by the company's rules, or b) use the legal avenues available to citizens in order to find just rectification of the problem at hand.

Remember, no company wants to help a person more than they have to. Every part replaced is money coming out of the business's bank to make "Good PR". (In fact, I think all warranty work is "Good PR", and that we should all be sure we know what's going on so we don't get sucked into that vacuum of "OOH, look how kind this company is". A gesture of whatever is just a covert way of them to get more money out of our pockets in future ventures.

From what I have been told PCWorld is part of a larger corporation that owns several chains. That corporation and everything to do with it... describing it as unethical... might be complimenting them. Many people have other choice words for them, and apparently they don't give a crap about their public image, at least to an extent that hasn't been easily discovered yet. In Europe, and Engliand I believe, there are VERY strong laws in favor of consumer protection. Remember the lawsuits against a PS2 game because they used pre-rendered footage in a commercial? Yea that is a good example. I am willing to bet they actually have an even stronger case over there than they do here, and even here they would have a strong case. Seablade

Seablade is correct in regards to VERY strong laws for consumer protection. It's also why you notice a LOT fewer high scores for cars in auto safety tests. The tests are much harder to do well on, and ultimately cars have to be MUCH better made to pass snuff. The case in Europe is much stronger due to these laws, and the fact is, in Europe there is much less complacency / acceptance for shoddy goods than there is in the USA. As for the USA case, it really would depend on where the suit originated from. As for speaking my piece on it. The only reason I'm so passionate about this topic is because I have had to sue DELL in regards to them trying to dump a laptop on me, my being nice and returning it, and then being billed because of a computer error. If you have to take legal action, realise that computer companies / conglomerates do not retain lawyers on an hourly basis like we cretins must do, they either have an in-house lawfirm, or in the rare state where they do not have a lawyer licensed to practice in a state, they'll pay whatever is necessary to win a case, and as defendants, the burden of proof would be on YOU to prove any wrongdoing (US court system promotes innocence unless proven otherwise, in theory, and let's run with "theory" to keep things somewhat simple) This is exactly why I don't advocate the public poo-poo-ing of companies; the more firepower you give them, the harder it will be to win an already uphill legal battle. (Something I learned when suing DELL. We ultimately settled, I got an XPS GEN I, that died, got the XPS m1710 that i've built up into the monster in my sig). On a side note, I believe in most European countries, the burden of proof is on the Defendants to prove they committed no wrongdoings, so if the Defendants don't show up, or don't bother to provide a case, the Plaintiffs would win by default (Plaintiffs being the Linux'd PCWorlders). Best Advice: Lay Low, make a paper trail, maintain relations with higher-ups in companies, keep all documents and replies and feedback filed and safe, and let your attorney and your proof do the speaking instead of your emotions.

All consumer product warranties are regulated through the Magnusson Moss Warranty Act. It applies to ALL consumer goods though it is most often quoted in reference to cars and trucks. Even though the MMWA hasn't been updated to also include more specifics to computers. Software is something that can't void your warranty. HOWEVER the manufacturer isn't required to support software that didn't come with your system. They cannot deny a warranty claim because you installed Linux or other version of Windows. This is policy at every manufacturer I've dealt with. However you get the occasional phone tech moron who doesn't know any better who says your warranty is void.

In the case of the OP, if he were in the US the Magnuss Moss warranty act would protect the customer because the manufacturer would have to PROVE that Installing Linux cracked the hinge.

The thing to remember is, if you're using an OS other than what shipped with your computer. You're going to HAVE to be able to troubleshoot the system without that OS. Or you'll have to reinstall it before calling tech support.

This is true. Thanks mrevil for clarifying on this. However, if the hinge broke and Linux is in the PC, then can't the OEM say that the software is treated the same as hardware (ie: memory, HD, etc.,) and absolve themselves of the whole fiasco. As far as I know, there is no law or provision in Mag-Moss that makes a differentiation between software and hardware. Furthermore, the US court system does put the burden of proof on the plaintiff to show that the OS did not cause the crack in the PC, whereas the OEM can counter that since they do not support the modification, and assuming they track and record calls have a recording of the verbal admittance of the Linux mod, they are free of liability. In essence, if you put the OS in, and have to go to court, you have to be able to prove that not only didin't the OS produce the crack, but also keep the backup to flash back on in the event of a computer crash and not tell the OEM you changed OS's. Otherwise all they have to do is playback to the judge the tape of you admitting to playing with the OS's and changing them, and they're walking out free. The law doesn't have a provision in it, as far as I know, that differentiates between software and hardware modifications, unfortunately.

Heh actually PCWorld is saying it "Has been unable to contact the customer" and the customer has another fun report or two about the entire incident

Yea they are on a winning streak.

Seablade