ie8 fix

Vista Capable suit no longer a class action

By | February 19, 2009, 5:53am PST

Summary: The judge overseeing the “Vista Capable” suit against Microsoft has removed the “class-action” designation from it, but also declined Microsoft’s motion for summary judgment.

The judge overseeing the “Vista Capable” suit against Microsoft has removed the “class-action” designation from it, but also declined Microsoft’s motion for summary judgment.

The latest court action on February 18, resulted in Judge Marsha Pechman reversing her original decision to allow the case class-action status. Pechman did note that individual plaintiffs will be allowed to continue legal proceedings if they can prove harm.

As TechFlash blogger Todd Bishop explains:

“According to today’s ruling, Pechman removed the class-action status after finding that the plaintiffs hadn’t adequately shown that the Vista Capable program caused widespread, artificial inflation in PC prices. However, she said, that doesn’t preclude specific plaintiffs from pursuing claims against Microsoft if they can provide ‘evidence of individual deception.’”

The Vista Capable suit, filed in March 2007, claimed Microsoft “engaged in bait and switch — assuring consumers they were purchasing ‘Vista Capable’ machines when, in fact, they could obtain only a stripped-down operating system lacking the functionality and features that Microsoft advertised as ‘Vista.’”

Microsoft internal e-mail messages that have been made public as part of the case have shown that some of Microsoft’s own executives (many of whom now no longer work for the company) were not in favor of Microsoft’s marketing classifications, fearing they would confuse customers and anger partners.

I’m sure Microsoft officials are breathing a collective sigh of relief (but won’t be rolling out a Windows 7 Capable/Premium program any time soon). What’s your take: Do you agree with the judge’s latest decisions?

Kick off your day with ZDNet's daily e-mail newsletter. It's the freshest tech news and opinion, served hot. Get it.

Topics

Mary Jo has covered the tech industry for more than 25 years for a variety of publications and Web sites, and is a frequent guest on radio, TV and podcasts, speaking about all things Microsoft-related. She is the author of Microsoft 2.0: How Microsoft plans to stay relevant in the post-Gates era (John Wiley & Sons, 2008).

Disclosure

Mary-Jo Foley

Freelance journalist/blogger Mary Jo Foley has nothing to disclose. WYSIWYG (what you see is what you get). I do not own Microsoft stock or stock in any of its partners or competitors. I have no business ventures that are sponsored by/funded by Microsoft or any of its partners or competitors.

Biography

Mary-Jo Foley

Mary Jo Foley has covered the tech industry for 25 years for a variety of publications, including ZDNet, eWeek and Baseline. She has kept close tabs on Microsoft strategy, products and technologies for the past 10 years. In the late 1990s, she penned the award-winning "At The Evil Empire" column for ZDNet, and more recently the Microsoft Watch blog for Ziff Davis.

Got a tip? Send her an email with your rants, rumors, tips and tattles. Confidentiality guaranteed.

45
Comments

Join the conversation!

Just In

RE: Vista Capable suit no longer a class action
makrejktt69-24353632235517223654955787814232 Updated - 11th Nov
Almost original wordpress charger jerseys bog. Along san diego chargers jerseys with chargers jerseys subsequently search on top in order to taking a look at because of great deal more discussions.
0 Votes
+ -
Inflation in computer prices?
neisq 19th Feb 2009
I seem to remember the computer prices never really changing when Vista came out. All that seemed to happen was you got more computer for the same price. Almost all the computers coming out had a built in video card with 64-128 mb built in when before the cheap built in video cards had 2-8 MB of RAM. That and the average system ram went from 256 to 1 gig. Now we never find a basic cheap computer with less than a gig of ram unless it is offlease or a Netbook.
0 Votes
+ -
Inflation in this case meant...
msalzberg 19th Feb 2009
that consumers had to buy a pricier machine to get one that was truly
'Vista Capable.'
0 Votes
+ -
which couldn't be proven
Joeman57 19th Feb 2009
thus they decertified the suit.
0 Votes
+ -
too bad!
Linux Geek 19th Feb 2009
M$ deceiving tactics deserved pay back.
Only a lame OS like vista needs this kind of lies.
You'll not see a 'Linux capable' campaign because Linux just works on everything.
0 Votes
+ -
Linux FUD to the recuse!
Heatlesssun Updated - 19th Feb 2009
Linux works on everything? Maybe so but it has a tough time with WITH everything. Bluetooth headsets, USB tuners, gaming keyboards, games for that matter.

0 Votes
+ -
Fight FUD with FUD?
Kid Icarus-21097050858087920245213802267493 19th Feb 2009
Games?

That's not Linux's problem that's MSs Direct X's doing. That's like saying Macs don't do games well. It's just not true. MS has a stranglehold over game developers now with DX.

If Linux had more marketshare the developers would port their apps and drivers to Linux. It's not like Linux is incapable of doing any of the things you listed.
0 Votes
+ -
I simply said to say that works on anything is leaving out the fact that it may not work with everything well. Who's fault it is is irrelevant to a user.
0 Votes
+ -
Whoooooah ... hang on there Cowboy!
de-void-21165590650301806002836337787023 19th Feb 2009
Microsoft's DirectX is the reason there are few med-high-end games on *N*X?

No. Sorry, but I am calling you on this one.

If *N*X had come together to create one or two decent games platforms, then we'd be seeing more games ported to run on said platform. As with most *N*X apps, most *N*X developers continue down the path of "my coding-c0ck is bigger than yours" and proliferate a thousand half-baked, poorly supported, badly organized, horribly irregular technologies. Oh ... and you expect everything to be given away for free.

If you ran a games company and were about to decide whether to:
1) Write to one/two gaming engines on the most broadly available platforms (and therefore available to the most customers)
2) Write your own cross-platform gaming engine
3) Write to some incomplete, irregular, untested open source game engine

Which would you choose? With most high-end games these days costing well in excess of $30M to create, where would you spend your money?

The lack of decent games on *N*X is NOT Microsoft's fault ... it's the *N*X's community's fault.
I hate to break your bubble, but it does not. There are elements that do not have linux drivers, nor can you use it with less then the required memory or disk space. Hmmm, I think I heard that before someplace too. Just like windows eh
0 Votes
+ -
The damage has been done.
kozmcrae 19th Feb 2009
Microsoft is the catalyst for their own troubles. I too doubt there will be a Windows 7 (The Linux Killer) Capable/Premium program. But the creative minds at Microsoft are never idle. They will come up with something to incur the public's wrath by the time Windows 7 (The Linux Killer) is released.
0 Votes
+ -
there's always something
eggmanbubbagee@... 19th Feb 2009
haters like you will be able to misconstrue, so relax

0 Votes
+ -
How can you kill
rtk 19th Feb 2009
something that has no life?

/south park.
0 Votes
+ -
Legal ineptitude abounds
johnfenjackson@... Updated - 19th Feb 2009
There are various legal actions underway at present:

1. Class action re Vista CAPABLE: it is fairly clear to the ordinary consumer that M$ is guilty of deception. (I do not expect M$ VP Nash to sue M$ for deceipt over his new portable's inability to run Vista AERO.)

2. Movie industry v The Pirate Bay: it is abundantly clear to the world that TPB is massively guilty of aiding copyright infringement (the first claim discharged!).

3. Psystar v App?e: it is clear that App?e is guilty of misuse of copyright in artificially tying OSX to expensive MAC hardware.

My guess is that the all three cases will result in the legal profession being unable to deliver the correct ruling. (I've asked ZDNET's Koman what it feels like for your profession to feel impotent: no reply to date.)

Hopefully the EU will reach the correct decision in consumer v Internet Explorer integration with Windows.
0 Votes
+ -
Excuse me?
justanitguy 19th Feb 2009
"The correct ruling"? By that , you of course mean what you have determined to be the correct ruling; never mind what laws are actually in place. If you do not like what the laws are, work to change them. One of the problems in the US today is judges that "interpret" the law to fit their own concepts, rather than applying the law as written. These are known as 'activist' judges. They, apparently like you, have determined that they, and only they, know what is best, and they are not unwilling to re-write legislation by judicial fiat if that means that it will then conform to what they have determined should be the law.
0 Votes
+ -
MyRuling
johnfenjackson@... Updated - 19th Feb 2009
"You of course mean what you have determined to be the correct ruling"
No! What I tried to express was that 99% of people would consider that TPB is guilty of 'aiding copyright infringement' ...
... but the law seems powerless to enforce the commonsense ruling.

By CORRECT I mean what a civilised, commonsense, fair, unbiased person would conclude without any reference to statutes. Therein lies the problem: the words are obstructing the CORRECT outcome.

If you want to argue that TPB does not 'aid copyright infringement' by all means proceed. Perhaps MJF would arrange a poll? A pseudo-jury? Political dynamite I suspect.

HAND
0 Votes
+ -
Republic vs Democracy
mikefarinha 19th Feb 2009
"What I tried to express was that 99% of people would consider that TPB is guilty"

Our founding fathers knew the inherent flaw in allowing the masses to determine laws. This is why we are not a democracy but rather a republic.
0 Votes
+ -
Was that 90% of the flock would follow the leader down the path to destruction. Had they known, the first amendment would have been crafted to prevent it. Not that slick lawyers wouldn't have sidestepped the amendment, anyway.

So 10% of us languish in despair, while the 90% trot happily after their leaders to they know not where. Victims of gluttony and greed they will always be.
0 Votes
+ -
Ah, but they DID know!
mikefarinha 19th Feb 2009
"The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants." -- Thomas Jefferson

They knew it was inevitable that the USA would collapse. Which is why they put the right to keep and bear arms as the 2nd amendment. Why else would they put such a 'violent' right as the second amendment right after the peaceful right of "Freedom of religion, of speech, of the press, to petition, and to assemble?"
Oh, so let us hurry to spill some blood, so we may take up arms to protect ourselves, eh?

Didn't hear that the state of Ohio is passing a bill (or trying to pass it) that every gun owner (who is already required to register his gun and carry a photo ID) will now be required to carry a million dollar insurance policy against accidental or intentional misuse of the firearm, did'ja? Not one insurance company in the United States will issue such insurance. Failure to acquire said insurance will result in revocation of your license and ID card, and a felony charge against the owner.

What'cha gonna do then? Whip out your bill of rights and see what the founding fathers predicted?

Rotsa ruk!
0 Votes
+ -
Despairing Ole Troll
M.R. Kennedy 19th Feb 2009
"What "Our founding fathers" DIDN'T know...
Was that 90% of the flock would follow the leader down the path to destruction. Had they known, the first amendment would have been crafted to prevent it."

Huh? What does the First Amendment have to do with the sales of Windows-equipped PCs?


"So 10% of us languish in despair, while the 90% trot happily after their leaders to they know not where."

Abandon your failed dreams and follow the rest of us into the light!
0 Votes
+ -
Be ye about your business
Ole Man 20th Feb 2009
And get thee behind me, Satan.
0 Votes
+ -
So you are of that Ten percent
GuidingLight 19th Feb 2009
of the Anything But Microsoft crowd that knowinglly follow your leaders towards destruction.

An interesting revelation, Ole Troll, an interesting one indeed...
0 Votes
+ -
Have you been consorting with Zuny?
Ole Man 20th Feb 2009
Or are you just mimicking him?

You seem to have everything backwards, just like he does.
0 Votes
+ -
Also Found
johnfenjackson@... Updated - 19th Feb 2009
Being a Brit my knowledge of the American Constitution is somewhat lacking. However I remembered ...

"That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, ? That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it,"

So if the legal system cannot find the manifestly guilty so ... is it time for an alteration?

Anybody commenting care to argue that TPB is NOT guilty of 'aiding copyright infringement'?

There is a famous story in English football which cropped up during a rule dispute. The law stated that a player committed a particular offense if he was 'adjudged to be interfering with play'. When a TV interviewer quoted it, the great manager Bill Shankley replied instantly "if he is not interfering with play, then what is he doing on the pitch?" wink
0 Votes
+ -
ok...
HooNoze 19th Feb 2009
Being a Canuck my knowledge of the American Constitution (and law) is also lacking. However I do remember them talking a lot about innocent until proven guilty.

Therefore:

1) Microsoft is not guilty of deception until a court says otherwise.

2) TPB is not massively guilty of aiding copyright infringement until a court says otherwise.

3) Apple is not guilty of misuse of copyright until a court says otherwise.

However:
1) I would agree that on the surface at least, Microsoft's behaviour seems to have been somewhat deceptive.

2) Not so sure about TPB. They simply provide info about where products are available. Finding them guilty on this basis alone would imply that the publishers of the yellowpages in North America should be responsible for the conduct of those listed therein. I don't condone piracy, but this may be an area where the law needs clarification.

3) If the Apple license requires that OSX be only used on Apple hardware, then Pystar maybe violating that agreement. IANAL and I'm not sure how a license agreement is related to copyright.

0 Votes
+ -
Some of us live...
A.Sinic 22nd Feb 2009
... in a TRUE democracy (Switzerland) which also seems to work pretty well, provided you have an informed and engaged populace who look at the issues and think before voting (which we do).

Some examples, here we pay a levy on blank media and devices, but also have the right to rip our owned CDs and DVDs for personal use, and to circumvent any DRM to do so. However, to balance that you can do prison time for "sharing" the things you rip.

Good to read that some Americans appreciate the difference between a democracy and a democratic republic. Both systems can work well, provided that "the people's" opinions are allowed a balanced input, and cannot simply be bought by massive advertising.

Oops.
0 Votes
+ -
Your ruling?
Franciscus101 20th Feb 2009
TPB party is not under US law, thus US legal system does not count, nor should it even be considered. While copyright may be valid in this part of the world, it is not in other countries. Shrink wrap EULA are also not valid in many countries, including the EU if I remember correctly
0 Votes
+ -
A very sneaky method
Ole Man 19th Feb 2009
of letting Microsoft off the hook. What lowly "user" has the capital to fight Microsoft single-handedly? Any one who did would hold their peons responsible, so they (their peons) would get the axe, not Microsoft.
0 Votes
+ -
Maybe they should follow
GuidingLight 19th Feb 2009
the Linux model: You cannot sue us if it does not do what we claim it will because it is free!

So maybe they should just refund the people their 35 dollars for the OEM version and take the disks. Problem solved
0 Votes
+ -
They could have won big time if they had.
TripleII-21189418044173169409978279405827 19th Feb 2009
It would have been a PR win of epic proportions. Not only does it enhance customer loyalty, the mea culpa would have immediately increased their PR image and in one weeks revenue (pure guess, no real idea what a refund program might cost, but not very big) propel them into a customer focused company.

TripleII
0 Votes
+ -
Right on the money (pun intended)
Ole Man 20th Feb 2009
But we know there is zero danger of THAT ever happening, don't we?
0 Votes
+ -
They do.
kozmcrae 19th Feb 2009
If it had a name it would be called the "Pirate Program". No they don't give it away, that would be totally illegal. They just let people steal it. Let the whole country get dependent on it. Don't worry, the developing world will foot the bill. Why enforce strict piracy policies when you're one of the richest companies in the World. Now that Microsoft is starting to feel some economic heat they can start cashing in on their hidden market. Now that's genius.
0 Votes
+ -
Microsoft should pay
FringeMan 19th Feb 2009
Nooo!!
That judge should be shot on sight.
I think Microsoft should pay for that dirty trick.
Microsoft have done some many nasty and dirty tricks that it's time to punish them really hard.
150 billion for damages and thinking that they can get away with anything and 5 million times how many dirty tricks they have done so far

i lack the words to describe how disgusted i am that microsoft gets away with this crap
0 Votes
+ -
How 'bout "Class Action Capable" ?
RobWLA 19th Feb 2009
Rats !

If only the judge had re-classified this suit as
"class action capable" instead of "class action
ready" and let Microsoft's eyes bug wide-open in
horror when they didn't get it.

Just like the public's reception of their marketing
gimmick.

I was hoping the judge would wag his bony finger at
Microsoft and scream "Die You Pond Scum !".

But - alas - I'll have to wait for their next
lawsuit - no doubt in the making as we speak.


Rob
0 Votes
+ -
Wonder how much MS paid for this?
TripleII-21189418044173169409978279405827 19th Feb 2009
They now made it cost each person $350,000 in lawyer fees to get the $75 refund. Brilliant. Also, by not granting complete dismissal, in 6 months, we will be reading about how the Vista Capable suit was completely bogus with zero successful court challenges.

I too think MS is breathing a huge sigh of relief. Course, MS have never bought favor in any way before right?

TripleII
0 Votes
+ -
So, how can Microsoft be held liable for an OEM putting a sticker on a machine that the OEM builds and sells?
And they never keep any of them.

They should have a class-action suit against them for fraud. "Not furnishing whatever it is they sell".
0 Votes
+ -
The judge did the right thing.
mwagner@... 20th Feb 2009
In truth, the "Vista-Capable" labeling was a long-standing practice of Microsoft's.

Simply put, prior to Windows 7, whatever Microsoft stated as the MINIMUM requirements for their operating systems, was just that. The OS would RUN on that hardware but if you wanted "minimal" performance, you DOUBLED the specifications. If you wanted "acceptable" performance, you DOUBLED IT AGAIN!

Vista-Capable was 800MHz, 512MB. Vista has to have 1.6GHz and 1GB to "get by" and 2GHz and 2GB to run well.

That seems to have finally changed with Windows 7.
0 Votes
+ -
You're kidding, right?
mdsock@... 20th Feb 2009
I mean, that was a joke? Wasn't it?

You know that rule of thumb and I know it, but why should the average consumer know it? Or be responsible for knowing it? I'm not a lawyer and don't claim to have the level of knowledge that hold that title would imply. But I have no doubt that many people bought machines thinking that they were capable of providing the full Vista experience (as unimpressive and sometimes frustrating as I've found it). And that they suffered damage by getting a machine that ran much more slowly under Vista than it would under XP. To me that's deceptive and the internal e-mails would indicate that Microsoft considered that.

As I understand it, the point of a class action is to allow groups that have been harmed by a single entity to collectively bring suit. The purpose being to allow them to reduce their cost, by economies of scale, and make it easier (or even possible) for them to recover damages.

The judge may have done the legal thing. I don't know. Again, I'm not a legal expert. But the right thing? That is highly debatable.
0 Votes
+ -
RE: Vista Capable suit no longer a class action
fred.schwacke@... 20th Feb 2009
I do not know all of the facts, but based upon what I do know, combined with simple right and wrong, Microsoft lied to consumers. Clearly a large number of people bought new computers with the absolute understanding that they would work with Vista, and not a down scaled version.

In my opinion, the Judge made a mistake that greatly benefited MS; individuals feel they cannot fund a fight against a giant. Thank God the EU is not in their pocket like the US justice system is.

My suggestion is that all of the plaintiffs sue MS in small claims court.They are likely to win and it will cost MS a fortune to defend the many tens of thousands of actions that a few wins would create.
0 Votes
+ -
Small Caims as a viable option to Class Action
fred.schwacke@... 20th Feb 2009
Sorry to repeat an earlier post, but it needed a proper title.

I do not know all of the facts, but based upon what I do know, combined with simple right and wrong, Microsoft lied to consumers. Clearly a large number of people bought new computers with the absolute understanding that they would work with Vista, and not a down scaled version.

In my opinion, the Judge made a mistake that greatly benefited MS; individuals feel they cannot fund a fight against a giant. Thank God the EU is not in their pocket like the US justice system is.

My suggestion is that all of the plaintiffs sue MS in small claims court.They are likely to win and it will cost MS a fortune to defend the many tens of thousands of actions that a few wins would create.
0 Votes
+ -
An excellent suggestion, Fred
Ole Man 20th Feb 2009
The only problem is MOST Microsoft customers are too busy trying to make a living and pay the bills, they don't have the TIME, even IF they had the nominal fee to launch a class action suit, and IF they didn't have an aversion to their rapacious Legal System.

Of course they could all call Judge Judy, I suppose. That would back her case load up about 2,109 years.
0 Votes
+ -
RE: Vista Capable suit no longer a class action
computerwiz007969@... 2nd Mar 2009
my pc has that Vista Capable sticker on it, and it runs vista ultimate with aero and all that really nice, so i dont know what the reason to sue them is when it runs fine! LOL!!
0 Votes
+ -
RE: Vista Capable suit no longer a class action
jackson1984-24316069205748857739440257893812 10th Oct
I went on your web based log for that 1st time in addition nfl jerseys 2012 as just been your fanatic. Deal with short article as I am about to arise to understand this day-to-day.
0 Votes
+ -
RE: Vista Capable suit no longer a class action
makrejktt69-24353632235517223654955787814232 Updated - 11th Nov
Almost original wordpress charger jerseys bog. Along san diego chargers jerseys with chargers jerseys subsequently search on top in order to taking a look at because of great deal more discussions.

Join the conversation!

Formatting +
BB Codes - Note: HTML is not supported in forums
  • [b] Bold [/b]
  • [i] Italic [/i]
  • [u] Underline [/u]
  • [s] Strikethrough [/s]
  • [q] "Quote" [/q]
  • [ol][*] 1. Ordered List [/ol]
  • [ul][*] · Unordered List [/ul]
  • [pre] Preformat [/pre]
  • [quote] "Blockquote" [/quote]
ie8 fix
Click Here

The best of ZDNet, delivered

ZDNet Newsletters

Get the best of ZDNet delivered straight to your inbox

Facebook Activity

White Papers, Webcasts, & Resources
ie8 fix