“The Minneapolis law firm that negotiated a $182 million settlement of a lawsuit charging Microsoft with overcharging Minnesota consumers two years ago is ready to take one more crack at the software giant in an Iowa court next week,” Leslie Brooks Suzukamo reports for The Pioneer Press.
Suzukamo reports, “The Iowa class-action suit accuses Microsoft of using its dominance in the personal computer market to overcharge for its Windows operating system and applications like Office, and the Minneapolis firm of Zelle Hofmann Voelbe & Gette is asking the court to order Microsoft to pay $350 million in damages.”
Suzukamo reports, “The firm also wants Microsoft to pay an additional $50 million to consumers for forcing them to patch their computers against viruses and hacker attacks caused by vulnerabilities in the Microsoft Internet Explorer Web browser, which was ‘bolted’ to the Windows operating system in the mid-1990s, said Rick Hagstrom, the lead attorney for the plaintiffs.”
Suzukamo reports, “The damages would cover consumers and businesses that used Windows operating systems dating from May 1994 through June of this year.”
Full article here.
MacDailyNews Take: If Microsoft were ever forced to pay for all the damage their shoddy software products have caused the world over the years, they’d be bankrupt many times over. The vast majority of personal computer users would be far better off with Apple Macs.
Related MacDailyNews articles:
FBI: Viruses, spyware, other computer-related crimes cost U.S. businesses $67.2 billion per year – February 01, 2006
Symantec researcher: At this time, there are no file-infecting viruses that can infect Mac OS X – July 13, 2006
Symantec CEO: We think more people ought to buy Apple Macs – May 15, 2006
McAfee: Microsoft ‘taking security risks’ with long-delayed, oft-pared-down Windows Vista – October 02, 2006
Why is Apple’s Mac OS X so much more secure than Microsoft’s Windows? – October 01, 2006
Apple Macs are far more secure than Windows PCs – September 26, 2006
Oxymoron: Microsoft security – August 12, 2006
With exploits in wild, Microsoft Windows braces for yet another critical worm attack – August 11, 2006
Sophos: Apple Mac OS X’s security record unscathed; Windows Vista malware just a matter of time – July 07, 2006
Sophos Security: Dump Windows, Get a Mac – July 05, 2006
Apple: ‘Get a Mac. Say ‘Buh-Bye’ to viruses’ – June 01, 2006
Security company Sophos: Apple Mac the best route for security for the masses – December 06, 2005
16-percent of computer users are unaffected by viruses, malware because they use Apple Macs – June 15, 2005
I’ll bet I don’t read this in the L. A. Times.
Satan has created quite an empire there in Redmond. But like all evil things, it will eventually fall.
Bit by bit…byte by byte.
Moooohahahahahaha!!
I think the damage that MS has caused and continues to perpetrate on the world is unconscionable, and the supposed powers that be that allow it all to continue, even more so.
Break MS up, once and for all, so that we can get some real software technology competition going on the planet Earth for the first time ever in the history of the world – Think about it! Wake UP!
Jeez.
Giving it away free would be overcharging for it.
Apple has to be next. Their stuff does not, as they claim, ‘just work’.
In fact, since I am forced to use both OSes(office is completely blind to Mac possibilities) I think plaintiffs taking on Apple would have a better case because Microsoft never claimed that their stuff worked.
One company makes false claims, the other makes no claims, they just issue crap and now the superior company wants to copy them.
And, the Apple faithful, like the group that hovers around this site, are the ones to blame.
Why sue Microsoft? If the majority are dumb enough to choose Windows, they deserve everything they get.
Peterson, you really are the strangest person I know…
Sounds to me like these lawyers just had a taste of cash on their lips and want more. The dark ages of computing are over, and hopefully there will be more (viable)OS choices in the future. I’m really sick of reading everyone bitching about Microsoft copying Apple. Remember when “stow and go” seating came out in minivans? Next year all the other guys did it. It’s a cool feature, just some do it better than others. Shut the hell up about it already. Just pick the one you like better and speak with your wallet.
I’m sorry, MDN’ers, but I seem to have raised my baby boy with no respect whatsoever for his betters. His having only one testicle has weighed heavily on him all of his life, and even paid “professional” ladies have not been able to liberate his badly, badly damaged libido.
Please do your best to forgive him, folks. He’s simply the human equivalent of that mangled dog you see every so often in the back alleys of America, digging through garbage cans, howling at the moon, and trying to fit into the functional world as best he can.
I weep for by child.
It’s about freakin’ time!!! I hate lawyers, but in this case, I’ll make an exception. I have been saying this for years – someone should sue Mafia$oft for making products that are known (and ignored) to be defective.
Uh oh, here comes Peterson! Duhhh! Too late.
Hmmmmmmm???? Is it just me or has anyone noticed this fact??
Apple pays $100 million and gets the use of the iPod menu system from Creative. And the News world goes crazy!!!!! AAAAgggg, Apple pays!!!
Microsoft pays $180 million (almost twice as much) and gets —- wait for it — NOTHING in return. And its a press no-show.
Just a thought.
N.
In the interests of fairness and accuracy, Peterson is actually “StockBoy.” You all knew that, right?
Is Peterson Sputnik in a slightly different voice?
I don’t agree with this type of lawsuit. First, I don’t think that there is real proof that MS overcharged for their OS. How much should the OS cost? There’s really no way to determine that. It’s not something that we can compare to anything else, because MS has a virtual monopoly in this area. We can’t compare with cars and say “they cost too much” because all cars are expensive to some folks. We could compare with gasoline, electricity, etc. Exxon has made record profits over the last several quarters, and gas costs over $2 per gallon. This seems as though it would be a much easier lawsuit to prove.
On the other point, the lawsuit is pointing at bugs in the code that allow hackers to create malware to affect Windows. If I were on the bench (scary!) I would say that the problem is not the fact that Microsoft makes shoddy code (even though they do), but that hackers are attacking the code. I’d tell the plaintiff to sue the hackers, not MS. I’d tell them to secure their computers just as they do their cars, knowing that if they lock their cars and park them on the street, they can still be attacked.
Frivolous lawsuits are a problem in this country. We should not support them just because we hate Micro$oft.
Is anyone here (Peterson?) naive enough to think that Creative isn’t ready, willing, and able to sue the bejeebers out of Microsoft the moment the iTurd ships?
If the mockups are at all accurate and representative of the Brown Wonder’s OS as it currently stands, there’s another $100,000,000 just waiting to be redeposited in Creative’s coffers!
And, Gawd, I just can’t wait!
I guess we should also sue all the car makers that ever had someone die in a car accident, for not make it invulnerable to destruction.
We should also sue all of the house builders for anyone that ever had a break in in their house. The house should be invulnerable as well.
While this case is amusing, it is not Microsoft’s fault that someone on this planet exists with evil intentions and wants to input a 15 thousand character web address that the browser will break and let you break into the computer.
We might as well sue the US government for allowing the terrorists to blow up the World trade center.
If these aggrieved citizens were truly serious they would hire the people who sued the tobacco companies. Too bad for Microsoft they didn’t place warning labels on their products initially. It would have bee easier for Microsoft to avoid lawsuits if Microsoft had explicitly cautioned potential buyers of the pain and aggravation that they were likely to suffer using Windows.
Sputnik is better at baiting the Mac faithful than Peterson is.
Right on Jimbo. Well said. People shouldn’t be sued because we don’t like them. The consumers should decide, not the courts, that Microshaft is the wrong choice.
I also agree with Jimbo VW. My disdain for MicroSoft doesn’t begin to compare to my feelings for these filthy, blood sucking leeches on society referred to as lawyers. I wish I could send everyone in this lawfirm back in time to have a little attitude adjustment provided by Vlad the Impaler.
just wait for the Iowa lawsuit to take shape… Bill Gates and monkey boy are going to have to stand trial! Should be very entertaining! Go IOWANS!
So that’s $400M ($350 million in damages + an additional $50 million). The law firm takes a third ($135M in cash) which leaves about $270M.
There are 3M people in Iowa. Does nyone know how many MS users there are in Iowa? 1 million? 2 million? Let’s say 1M.
So each user could expect around $270 for their suffering.
Coincidentally, this is just about the price for a new Vista license!! How much do you want to bet if MS settles, they give each plaintiff a free copy of Vista (Home Basic of course, they can pay $50 more for Premium).
Class Action Law suits ARE A JOKE!! But the only ones laughing are the lawyers.
I think Peterson needs a group hug.
I think Peterson needs a colonic.
Hackers are not responsible for the Microsoft Virus plague.
Take the car analogy. If people have an accident and are injured or die because of poorly designed brakes or faulty steering mechanisms, the car’s manufacturer is at fault and can be sued.
If a car maker makes a vehicle that can be opened and stolen using a universal remote available free on e-bay then the manufacturer can be sued for installing faulty locks.
Microsoft released XP with integrated IE knowing full well that the combo was not designed to be safe on the wild and wooly internet. Let’s forget the bugs they knew that were in the code. They also knew the OS + IE was a sitting target. Vista’s delay and working on the XP SP2 release was all about avoiding lawsuits of this kind.
Microsoft knows it’s guilty. They have started a FUD campaign to shift the blame to the hackers and have even had laws passed in order to sway public opinion to their way of thinking. All to avoid lawsuits of this kind.
Hackers are, for the most part, offshore, greedy pirating scum bags.
Microsoft is not offshore.
Big Al,
So if someone breaks into your car, you can sue the car manufacturer?
“So if someone breaks into your car, you can sue the car manufacturer?”
If the car was made so the doors did not lock and the key could not be removed from the ignition, then certainly you could sue the manufacturer.
Jim,
That is doubtful in the same way that if my bike is stolen, I can’t sue the manufacturer for not having an integrated security system installed in my bike. If I leave my car unlocked and someone steals my car, I can’t sue the manufacturer for not making it so that the car locks itself whenever I’m not around it. Security is a feature, nothing more.
Now if you want to sue MS for making an unstable operating system, then you might have a chance.
realist, if the car comes with locks but the locks don’t work very well i.e. they can be easily picked with a bobby pin, then that car manufacturer ought to be held accountable and pay if the car gets stolen.
If the doors have locks it is reasonable for anyone to assume that the locks will keep a theif from entering via the door.
Windows and IE should be presumed to be safe. MS is always talking about their security and always dishing out patches. This gives a false impression. The average PC Windows user is NOT an IT technician. He or she should not have to be a computer geek to know how to keep from getting an infested computer.
Microsoft is selling ‘locks’ that can be easily picked. They deserve to pay all damages incurred.
Realist,
Taking the car analogy again, when cars were first mass produced, they did not come with any security whatsoever.
When cars began to be stolen in a big way, cars came with door and ignition locks.
Windows was never secure. When Windows encountered the internet in the 90’s it was broken into at will. Unlike the auto companies, Microsoft has never sold a secure OS, or browser, for that mater. They have blamed hackers, they have improved their current insecure OS & browser but they have never released a secure product.
Vista may be secure when it hits the market but it will be about 10 years late to the internet party. It will not be secure because all of the exploits have been found but it might be secure because the built in security system is so much better.
XP should have had that built in security system before it was released. Microsoft decided that cash flow was more important than security. The only way they can learn their lesson is to lose some of that cash.
“Make ’em work nights !!!” —Veruka Salt
The car analogy only semi works cuz the auto industry is well established. Standards evolve as technology evolves. As the pc industry only really has windows, MacOSX, & Linux there isn’t really a way to standardise and regulate. Its as if each car manufacturer has also invented its own type of road that its car can run on. Sure I’m being vagueish here, but hopefully you can get what i mean. I think for this reason MSFT has been given some leaniency. This is still the wild west. You cant regulate the wild west as it would stifle progress.
I know, its hard to put MSFT and progress in the same paragraph.
Sue the hackers? Well when they are caught, don’t they get fined.
Most of the reason Windows has security problems is not because the hackers are sooo good, but because Windows makes it attainable. Windows leaves tons of open services just waiting for a virus to latch on to it and they won’t shut it down because that would mean shutting down their own spyware. If they can prove that the opportunity to tighten up the OS is there and M$ doesn’t do it, THEY SHOULD GET SUED.
There is a struggle for power in Windows and M$ does NOT want to grant that to it’s users. When you run Windows YOU are the client.