There is a lawsuit filed against Microsoft for claiming, allegedly, that a Windows XP machine was ‘Windows Vista Capable’:
“…The suit alleges that the “Vista Capable” stickers were deceptive because many of those Windows XP machines were capable of running only Windows Vista Home Basic, which doesn’t include many of the highly touted features available in advanced versions of the operating system.
A lawyer for Microsoft, Stephen Rummage of law firm Davis Wright Tremaine, argued in court Tuesday that the lead plaintiff in the case, Dianne Kelley of Camano Island, did not make allegations sufficient to show that she was harmed by any of Microsoft’s actions, or even influenced by the labels.”
link: PC buyers suing over ‘Vista Capable’ labels can proceed
When a machine is not able to do what supposedly it claims to be able to do, is that not sufficient cause? Must the plaintiff prove harm? Are the labels not on the machines for the purpose of ‘influencing’ the consumer? It would seem that the onus is on Microsoft to make valid statements and not mislead the consumer. Others consumers may be experiencing the same frustrations and may want to contact Jeffrey Tilden of the law firm Gordon Tilden Thomas & Cordell.
Catherine Forsythe
[tags]microsoft, lawsuit, vista, consumer protection, court ruling, lawyers, labels[/tags]