Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×
The Courts Government Hardware News Your Rights Online

Gateway Customer Sues to Get His PC Fixed 147

prostoalex writes "The Sacramento Bee tells the story of an El Dorado resident who had to go to small claims court to get his Gateway PC fixed: 'Right out of the box, he says, the computer displayed scattered graphics and wouldn't work properly. He says he called a Gateway salesman five times and sent him an e-mail to get an authorization number to send the computer back, but his phone calls and message were never returned. Then, over the course of months, Sheehan said he called Gateway technical support dozens of times.' Gateway insists that by clicking 'Accept' on a customer service EULA when the computer was first booted, Mr. Sheehan has waived his rights to sue the computer manufacturer in United States courts. The Gateway EULA states that conflicts must be resolved via private arbitrage. Sheehan, though, argues that he never saw the EULA, because of the broken graphics. As such, he's not held to that agreement." Some connections between this and a discussion about a Second Life case we had yesterday.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Gateway Customer Sues to Get His PC Fixed

Comments Filter:
  • :S... (Score:4, Interesting)

    by joe 155 ( 937621 ) on Saturday June 09, 2007 @07:36AM (#19449647) Journal
    Despite the fact that this is such an obvious dupe...

    I wonder about EULA if there was no way that you could have read it, if it would still be taken as being binding (if it can be at all, but someone last time suggested they might be). For example if you were registered blind (which can include very poor vision, at least in the UK) and windows asks you to agree to a EULA, you can see just enough to see there is something on the screen but without a screen reader (which you would need to install after accepting the EULA), you would have no idea what was going on. Here it would seem like randomly pressing things until something happened is a good solution. So you could accept even if there was no way you could have known...

    In this situation would they not be in violation of disability legislation?
  • Dupe tag, anyone? (Score:5, Interesting)

    by evanbd ( 210358 ) on Saturday June 09, 2007 @07:43AM (#19449683)
    What happened to the "dupe" tag? Why doesn't it show up any more? Obviously I'm not the only one to notice, as it seems to have been replaced by "duped." So what happened to it, and all the humorous tags -- haha, itsatrap, etc. What gives?
  • by supersat ( 639745 ) on Saturday June 09, 2007 @07:55AM (#19449741)
    Not only that, but they have no way to know if you've accepted the EULA.

    AFAIK, Gateway doesn't offer Linux as an OS option. If you want to run Linux, you'll probably boot to a Linux install disc the first time you turn on your machine, bypassing any EULA and nuking it in the install process. I suppose they could build it into the BIOS, but if they combine all of the EULAs into one, then you'll be forced to accept them even if you never use the software the EULAs cover.

    Really, the proper thing to do is make these conditions part of the terms of sale, made known to the customer BEFORE the sale is made.
  • Re:Bullshit (Score:5, Interesting)

    by _KiTA_ ( 241027 ) on Saturday June 09, 2007 @08:05AM (#19449777) Homepage

    Regardless if a user accepts a EULA, its actually against the law to unlawfully restrict their rights in tapping into some legal protection for sale of faulty goods. Well it is in Australia, I'm sure the US has similar laws to protect consumers.


    Actually... given the brazen attitude of EULA writers, I don't think we do. I know that EULAs are changed to be more consumer friendly in the UK and Australia, simply because if they tried half the shit there that they try here they'd get sued by the government, but they keep trying it here, so it must be at least somewhat legal, right?
  • by Alain Williams ( 2972 ) <addw@phcomp.co.uk> on Saturday June 09, 2007 @08:29AM (#19449861) Homepage
    Cost of fixing the bust PC: $200

    Cost of lost sales due to bad publicity: $200,000

    How does that make sense ?
  • by tomstdenis ( 446163 ) <tomstdenis AT gmail DOT com> on Saturday June 09, 2007 @08:36AM (#19449885) Homepage
    It's worse than that, most EULAs are only visible AFTER you bought the software which pretty much renders them invalid.

    It'd be like signing the lease for a new car, then 5 mins when you get into the car you find a notice in the glove box saying "you also can't sue us when you realize this is a lemon."

    EULAs are not part of the purchase agreement and are therefore not binding.

    Tom

Today is a good day for information-gathering. Read someone else's mail file.

Working...