Here we go again...

[Guest Vision]

Microsoft wants to freeze the Vista incapable lawsuit

Hang on, wait till everyone forgets

 

By Egan Orion: Monday, 10 March 2008, 4:23 PM

 

 

EVER SLIPPERY, Microsoft asked that the "Vista Capable" lawsuit against it

be stayed while it appeals the judge's approval of class action standing for

the case.

The lawsuit, filed almost a year ago, claims that Microsoft misled punters

in late 2006 by letting PC makers stick "Vista Capable" labels on lower

power machines sold with Windows XP that were later found capable of running

only the Home Basic version of Windows Vista rather than the full version

that includes most of Vista's new features including the Aero eye-candy

graphical interface.

 

It claims that PC buyers paid more for those machines than they would have

parted with had they known that they wouldn't be able to support Windows

Vista when that was released a few months later in early 2007.

 

Never mind that those PC consumers who bought "Vista Capable" machines are

likely better off sticking with Windows XP instead of "upgrading" to Vista,

seeing as how Vista has turned out to be even more of a pig on qualudes than

all prior versions of Windows. The Vole probably won't be arguing that, but

even if it did, that wouldn't let it off the hook for having misled

customers who expected that "Vista Capable" actually meant "Vista Ready"

when they coughed up the readies.

 

US District Judge Marsha Pechman granted the lawsuit class action status two

weeks ago. Microsoft filed a petition to appeal that ruling with the Ninth

Circuit Court of Appeals on Friday, a day after it filed a motion before

Judge Pechman to stay the lawsuit pending its appeal.

 

If the case is stayed, that would put off any further discovery by the

plaintiffs until the appeal is decided, which could take up to three months

or more. The delay would postpone additional revelations of potentially

embarrassing emails and other documents by Microsoft and PC manufacturers,

hardware suppliers such as Intel, and wholesalers and retailers.

 

Release of internal company emails last month disclosed that high level

Microsoft executives anticipated the problems caused by the "Vista Capable"

labels on PCs sold with Windows XP. Microsoft's OEM partners warned the

company that the labels would confuse consumers, and even Microsoft's own

executives got burned by buying PCs incapable of running the full version of

Windows Vista.

 

In its motion to stay, Microsoft wrote: "Continued proceedings here would

cost Microsoft a substantial sum of money for discovery and divert key

personnel from full-time tasks...; would intrude on sensitive pricing

decisions and strategies by OEMs, wholesalers, and retailers; and would

jeopardize Microsoft's goodwill with class members -- all with respect to

claims that might not proceed on a class basis at all."

 

Microsoft argued that, if its appeal is successful, any time and money it

spends on additional discovery will have been wasted and any further

negative publicity will have been raised unnecessarily. It also claimed that

continuing discovery while its appeal is pending might needlessly impair

certain business partner relationships.

 

"Plaintiffs' discovery almost surely will involve intrusion into the most

sensitive pricing decisions of the OEMs, wholesalers, and retailers who sell

the PCs at issue and set their prices," Microsoft wrote. "Continued

discovery thus will disrupt Microsoft's relationships with its business

partners, a disruption that will be unnecessary if the Ninth Circuit

reverses."

 

The motion also raised the issue that continuing the lawsuit pending the

appeal will require the plaintiffs to advertise nationally for class members

to join the litigation, and that the class action search could damage

Microsoft's reputation with its customers unfairly. "The result will be

nationwide publicity that impugns the ['Vista Capable'] program," it said.

 

With typical Microsoft chutzpah, the appeal to the Ninth Circuit challenges

Judge Pechman's basing her approval of class action standing on Washington

state law because Microsoft is headquartered there. It also questions her

approval of the plaintiff's theory that PC buyers might have paid more for

the so-called " Vista Capable" PCs than they would have without those

allegedly misleading labels.

 

Like many defendants, the Vole is seeking delay in the hope that the passage

of time might work in its favour, as "Vista Capable" PC buyers get over

having been taken in, witnesses change jobs, memories fade, documents get

lost, and so on.

 

We'll see in due time whether Judge Pechman is fully confident in her

rulings and believes the plaintiffs' case deserves to move forward timely,

or decides that the potential harm to Microsoft should her rulings be

reversed on appeal outweighs the plaintiffs' rights. µ

[Guest Tom Ferguson]

Re: Here we go again...

 

I believe this appeared on 'the Inquirer' web site yesterday. In any case,

it is OT here.

 

Tom

MSMVP 1998-2007

 

"Vision" <visi@pandora.net> wrote in message

news:47d665ec$0$16674$4c368faf@roadrunner.com...

> Microsoft wants to freeze the Vista incapable lawsuit

> Hang on, wait till everyone forgets

>

> By Egan Orion: Monday, 10 March 2008, 4:23 PM

>

>

> EVER SLIPPERY, Microsoft asked that the "Vista Capable" lawsuit against it

> be stayed while it appeals the judge's approval of class action standing

> for the case.

{blah-blah snipped]

[Guest cvb]

Re: Here we go again...

 

Tom Ferguson wrote:

-------------blah blah blah snipped ---------------

> Tom

> MSMVP 1998-2007

>

------------------ end of blah blah blah ------------

[Guest Tom Ferguson]

Re: Here we go again...

 

:-)

[Guest Homer J. Simpson]

Re: Here we go again...

 

> The lawsuit, filed almost a year ago, claims that Microsoft misled punters

> in late 2006 by letting PC makers stick "Vista Capable" labels on lower

> power machines sold with Windows XP that were later found capable of

> running only the Home Basic version of Windows Vista rather than the full

> version that includes most of Vista's new features including the Aero

> eye-candy graphical interface.

 

In other words, there's a class-action lawsuit against Microsoft because

people's window captions and borders aren't translucid.

 

That's how I'm reading this.

 

How about a few years back when OEMs were selling XP machines with only

128MB RAM? IMO that's much more of a case of misleading people into buying

an expensive paperweight than this. I mean, if I'm a Windows Classic user

on Vista, I wouldn't even be aware there's a "problem" to begin with...