Free one year subscription to Microsoft technet

Deleted member 77746 · 5 Jun 2009 at 13:23

howiepoohs said:
Anyone tried phoning them? 0800 281 221
Edit, ringing now

Let us know what was said please.

DampCat · 5 Jun 2009 at 13:24

optitech-uk said:
However, it was not offered by Microsoft it was a mistake in their systems.

It was an error on their part. They set it to be a public agreement. Unless it say's in the T+C's that the offer is only open to whichever people they were supposed to be targetting (it doesn't) then this argument doesn't hold.

alexhull24 said:
Has anyone actually read the T's and C's to check whether you need this additional thingy to qualify? If they say that your argument has little weight.

I can't see anything that mentions needing to be a member of that other subscription service as they implied in their statement.

Burnsy2023 · 5 Jun 2009 at 13:26

alexhull24 said:
That's what I thought. It was a good run but don't expect anything. If you pursue it legally I think you're wasting your time, we didn't do anything to deserve the free subscription. There are legal arguments to be made, but any sensible person in court would realise it was a genuine mistake on MS's part and lots of freeloaders tried to take advantage of it (me included!).

Oh this is hilarious. Not exactly unexpected though surely.

Deleted member 77746 · 5 Jun 2009 at 13:26

DampCat said:
It was an error on their part. They set it to be a public agreement. Unless it say's in the T+C's that the offer is only open to whichever people they were supposed to be targetting (it doesn't) then this argument doesn't hold.

In that case everyone who signed up to it should be eligible for free technet plus subscriptions then.

something daft already!! · 5 Jun 2009 at 13:27

Ok, they say it was an error and it should have only gone to those who took part in a survey. but someone who did posted the link on a blog and from there it spread like wild fire. They are blacklisting the keys and they will be useless. Although that part remains to be seen. I might try a key tonight. They tell me they have lots of "cherry picking" to do to remove the naughty serials, so maybe they wont black list them. They said they only realised a while after it had happened.

[RB] · 5 Jun 2009 at 13:27

optitech-uk said:
In that case everyone who signed up to it should be eligible for free technet plus subscriptions then.

Having read through the T+C's This does seem to be the case.

Whether this ends up being the case is another matter

Burnsy2023 · 5 Jun 2009 at 13:28

optitech-uk said:
In that case everyone who signed up to it should be eligible for free technet plus subscriptions then.

Don't be silly.

As for the legal side, if it ever did go that far for whatever reason you could only claim damages to what you have lost, which is nothing.

alex24 · 5 Jun 2009 at 13:30

Burnsy2023 said:
Oh this is hilarious. Not exactly unexpected though surely.

Just telling it like it is. They must have known something was up when their servers were getting hammered for keys, probably just took them a while to figure out where, by which point it was too late.

I wonder how many people got subscriptions, and what they stand to lose of they're told they need to uphold them? A few thousand people or a few hundred thousand I wonder.

DampCat · 5 Jun 2009 at 13:30

Burnsy2023 said:
Don't be silly.

As for the legal side, if it ever did go that far for whatever reason you could only claim damages to what you have lost, which is nothing.

This is the unfortunate part

Rainmaker · 5 Jun 2009 at 13:32

DampCat said:
If you go to a shop like Tesco or Asda, wherever, and you pick up a product from a shelf advertised at £1.50, but when the cashier scans it through it comes up as £1.75, they have to sell it to you for £1.50, as that's the advertised price.

Nope. Look up 'invitation to treat'. The shop can withdraw its offer at any time, and change its terms at any time up until the sale has actually been agreed by both parties and taken place. They don't have to honour the price at all.

DampCat said:
Um, the contract was offered publically to anyone who opened it. The price agreement works as follows:

*You take the product to the seller and offer a price
*the seller agrees the price and the contract is set, or the seller rejects the price and the contract isn't set.

The price on the shelf has nothign to do with the contract being in place. The contract isn't set until the payment offer is accepted. The shelf price is just an indication of what the seller will accept, and what they wont.

I took the product offered by microsoft to their salespoint, and they accepted my offer. But "lol" at knowing what you're talking about

Which you seem to acknowledge here.

But you're possibly right, they did accept the transaction and it was a 'done deal' once they accepted our personal information and the sign-up, and returned this with an invoice/acceptance and valid login details. Interesting.

You could (or MS could) argue that it's like a bank leaving a blank loan contract on a table in the public part of the branch. Some random filling it in doesn't mean they're legally entitled to that £10m, BUT in this case MS actually did fulfil the contract by supplying the service.

Interesting stuff one way or the other. Definitely even more interesting than free access to TechNet lol

DampCat · 5 Jun 2009 at 13:32

alexhull24 said:
Just telling it like it is. They must have known something was up when their servers were getting hammered for keys, probably just took them a while to figure out where, by which point it was too late.

I wonder how many people got subscriptions, and what they stand to lose of they're told they need to uphold them? A few thousand people or a few hundred thousand I wonder.

According to a post on the technet forum it was tens of thousands. Wasn't an MS response though, so who knows.

Deleted member 77746 · 5 Jun 2009 at 13:33

Burnsy2023 said:
Don't be silly.

As for the legal side, if it ever did go that far for whatever reason you could only claim damages to what you have lost, which is nothing.

They made the mistake so they should pay for it. Microsoft make too much money anyway theiving barstuards.

Rainmaker · 5 Jun 2009 at 13:34

Burnsy2023 said:
Don't be silly.

As for the legal side, if it ever did go that far for whatever reason you could only claim damages to what you have lost, which is nothing.

But is that true? MS offered me 12 months free access to a service which should have cost >£200 in return for my filling in a sign-up form with my personal (legally protected) data. This included my email and home address.

MS now have said personal information and fulfilled and 'shook on' a contract to provide said service. By denying me access, MS would now have my personal information and I'm going to lose >£200 if I want access to the contracted service again.

I have lost out?

Burnsy2023 · 5 Jun 2009 at 13:34

alexhull24 said:
I wonder how many people got subscriptions, and what they stand to lose of they're told they need to uphold them? A few thousand people or a few hundred thousand I wonder.

That would never happen.

Ronaldo · 5 Jun 2009 at 13:35

DampCat said:
Um, the contract was offered publically to anyone who opened it. The price agreement works as follows:

*You take the product to the seller and offer a price
*the seller agrees the price and the contract is set, or the seller rejects the price and the contract isn't set.

The price on the shelf has nothign to do with the contract being in place. The contract isn't set until the payment offer is accepted. The shelf price is just an indication of what the seller will accept, and what they wont.

I took the product offered by microsoft to their salespoint, and they accepted my offer. But "lol" at knowing what you're talking about

since you know what you are talking about please inform us how you are going to claim and when you do win post for us to read. I'll keep a look out for you future post regarding this..."LOL"

DampCat · 5 Jun 2009 at 13:35

Rainmaker said:
Which you seem to acknowledge here. But you're possibly right, they did accept the transaction and it was a 'done deal' once they accepted our personal information and the sign-up, and returned this with an invoice/acceptance and valid login details. Interesting.

You could (or MS could) argue that it's like a bank leaving a blank loan contract on a table in the public part of the branch. Some random filling it in doesn't mean they're legally entitled to that £10m, BUT in this case MS actually did fulfil the contract by supplying the service.

Interesting stuff one way or the other. Definitely even more interesting than free access to TechNet lol

Yeah. You could definately have an argument with them over it, but as Burnsy says.. at most they'll offer to refund your money or compensate you for damages. Which, of course, is bugger all.

I do claim a moral victory however! Hooray for us!

DampCat · 5 Jun 2009 at 13:36

Ronaldo said:
since you know what you are talking about please inform us how you are going to claim and when you do win post for us to read. I'll keep a look out for you future post regarding this..."LOL"

Of course i'm not going to take Microsoft to court, but that doesn't make you any less wrong.

Lol.

Rainmaker · 5 Jun 2009 at 13:38

DampCat said:
...compensate you for damages. Which, of course, is bugger all.

As I just posted above; no it's not really bugger all. If I want to have my contracted access to the service I'll now have to fork out >£200, when the contract was originally £0 and my personal details. I'm now going to be >£200 out of pocket due to their reneging on the contract, and MS STILL have my details. I'd call that a financial and material loss, wouldn't you? I'd pay £30 to the courts just to find out if a solicitor thought it was worth a crack.

alex24 · 5 Jun 2009 at 13:38

Burnsy2023 said:
That would never happen.

I agree, it's not going to, but you can use it as a judge to how darn quickly they want to fix the accounts and blacklist the keys issued!

Burnsy2023 · 5 Jun 2009 at 13:40

Rainmaker said:
I have lost out?

You because it's what you have lost, not what you would have lost. Besides, they could bar you from ever being able to get another subscription if it went that far anyway.