Roy Schestowitz wrote:
> On the contrary, what can is considered illegal practice (although it has
> no concrete proof) is that PC's with a blank hard-drives are more expen-
> sive than PC's with Windows pre-installed. This suggests that there are
> kick-backs involved, but this requires a lawsuit at a level higher than
> that of an individual's.
What about the dishonesty in selling something where it's illegal to re-sell
an unwanted component separately without making this clear to the buyer.
Many buyers (especially game players) buy PC's and change the graphics
cards without worrying about breaking the law re-selling the old one so why
would they expect to be unable to do the same with unwanted software when
they've not been warned before/when buying.
Imagine you buy a new car and replace the installed Radio without switching
on the old one then decide to list the old radio on ebay to get some of
your cash back. The auction gets pulled as the radio's manufacturer has
listed in the unread manual that it cannot be resold separately yet the
buyer wasn't informed of this when buying the car.
Ridiculous isn't it yet MS get away with this everyday - they regularly pull
auctions for sealed copies of their software off ebay despite the seller
getting the unwanted software with their PC - then claim that they've
invalidated the EULA (which the seller hasn't read as only available inside
the sealed package and on the PC they've wiped without booting).