Taking HP to the BBB...?

[I. Khider]

Jamon, 

This is beautiful! Fantastic!

Do you mind if I use this in another e-mail I am composing to Mark
Hurd--I will not mention your name--unless  you want me to. Based on
this, I will take HP to the BBB. On top of that, I want a credit for
Windows. Why should I pay for something I do not want? That money can go
to a new battery or something. I'm not Bill Gates!

I will file the report tommorow or Monday and update the list about the
battle. 

Thanks!

-Ib Khider-

On Thu, 2009-02-19 at 16:31 -0500, Jamon Camisso wrote:

> 
> Yours is a clear case of exclusive dealing and perhaps tied selling,
> not 
> false advertising etc. However, I'm not sure what Canada says about
> it 
> outside of the banking world e.g. 
> http://www.fcac-acfc.gc.ca/eng/consumers/rights/tiedselling/rightstiedselling-eng.asp
> 
> "However, banks in Canada are not allowed to engage in "coercive tied 
> selling" or "forced purchases". This means that banks are not allowed
> to 
> unduly pressure or coerce you into obtaining a product or service
> from 
> them or from their affiliates, as a condition for obtaining another 
> product or service from them. This practice, called coercive tied 
> selling, is illegal in Canada."
> 
> More relevant to your purposes is the Competition Bureau:
> http://www.stratdemo.ca/eic/site/cb-bc.nsf/eng/01246.html
> 
> You have to prove the following (quoting):
> 
> The exclusive dealing, tied-selling and market restriction sections
> of 
> the Competition Act may apply when the following conditions are met:
> 
>      * The conduct is engaged in by a major supplier or is widespread
> in 
> a market. A firm with less than 35 percent market share is not
> generally 
> considered to be a major supplier. However, market share is only one 
> factor that must be considered. Others include the existence of
> barriers 
> to entry that limit competition, a lack of substitute products, and
> lack 
> of competition among existing suppliers.
>      * The conduct in question constitutes a practice. Different 
> restrictive acts considered together, as well as repeated instances
> of 
> one act with one or more customers, may constitute a practice.
>      * The restrictive practice discourages a firm's entry into, or 
> expansion in, the market; in other words, you must show an
> exclusionary 
> effect.
>      * The practice has substantially lessened competition, or is
> likely 
> to do so. This may happen when the supplier's restrictive practice 
> prevents, for example, a rival's entry into the market, potential 
> competition, product innovation or lower prices.
> 
> I know from experience that with Lenovo when buying a thinkpad last 
> year, speaking to a manager and mentioning exclusive dealing and tied 
> selling quiets them down pretty quickly. I got a $75 credit because I 
> refused to accept the vista eula. At first Lenovo said that they 
> wouldn't honour the license from microsoft that plainly explained
> that 
> the oem is responsible for refunding a customer's money. After
> reading 
> it to the manager over the phone he admitted that they don't have an 
> actual price of windows to refer to, which is when I noted the 
> competition bureau would probably have something to say about that.
> 
> I was also told that Linux would not allow me to use my warranty if
> it 
> was installed on the thinkpad with no version of windows that their 
> technicians could use. That despite the fact that Lenovo offered SuSE
> on 
> the very Thinkpad that I purchased..
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://gtalug.org/pipermail/legacy/attachments/20090219/3795c13e/attachment.html>