Vista to XP 'downgrade' lawsuit revised

[DaBees-Knees]

http://www.channelregister.co.uk/2009/03/09/vista_xp_downgrade_lawsuit/

A US woman who is suing Microsoft for allegedly charging her extra to downgrade from Windows Vista to XP had the lawsuit revised late last week. Emma Alvarado of Los Angeles, California amended her complaint at the Seattle federal court last Thursday. She repeated her charges, first filed on 11 February, in which Alvarado claimed that Microsoft violated its dominant market position by requiring consumers to buy computers pre-installed with Vista and then getting them to cough up additional cash to “downgrade” to XP. However, according to Computer World, the revised lawsuit goes into much greater detail about how Microsoft allegedly profits from its Vista downgrade practices. "Microsoft has used its market power to take advantage of consumer demand for the Windows XP operating system by requiring consumers to purchase a PC that includes a licence for the use of the Vista operating system and to pay money (as part of the overall purchase price of the PC) to downgrade to the Windows XP Professional operating system," reads the suit. Her complaint hinges on allegations that Microsoft forced individuals running Vista Basic to first upgrade to Vista Business or Vista Ultimate and then pay for a download licence fee for XP Professional. The suit also points out that XP Professional - Microsoft’s most expensive edition of the operating system - was the only version users were allowed to downgrade to from Vista. Alvarado, who is seeking class action status in the lawsuit, claimed that Microsoft adjusted its rules to “inflate its sales figures for Vista". She also cited a $130 fee incurred by a customer wishing to go through the downgrade process.

Microsoft once again dismissed the claims and repeated the statement it issued last month when the lawsuit landed at its door. “Microsoft does not charge or receive any additional royalty if a customer exercises those [downgrade from Vista to XP] rights. Some customers may choose or need to obtain media or installation services from third parties to install the downgrade version."

An interesting defence being put up by microsoft that "it doesn't make any money" on a downgrade. I find that very hard to believe and can't see it being true in the example quoted.

[Cobra]

This loophole in their reasoning could be partially true *IF* the version of Vista that is installed costs less than XP Pro does, but that's the only way that comes to mind for me.