6 ms·

Lawyer sues Microsoft over Surface tablet storage

25 points by boh 14y ago

pdonis 14y ago
Translation: Lawyer fails to read fine print, then is naive enough to publicly admit same.
- Breakthrough 14y ago
  This. I just got some major deja-vu, since I don't think this is the first time someone's tried to troll a major corporation over "storage size claims" (and really, what kind of consumer would ever do his or her own research on a product worth hundreds of dollars before purchasing one? Oh wait, everyone with even the slightest bit of common sense...). Someone should inform this lawyer that he could just format the internal storage. Sure, you lose your entire tablet's operating system, but who needs that when you get MOAR GB's! (Aside: In my teenage years, I used to work for Future Shop. I recall one customer, who came in and insisted that he needed a computer "with the most possible gee-bee's". When I informed him that it was a "gigabyte", he then said "yeah whatever, I just need one with XX many jigas, do you have one?")
- TopTrix 14y ago
  *Conditions Apply.
- flyinRyan 14y ago
  To be fair, just because it's in the fine print doesn't mean it's actually binding. I could put "if you use this device on Friday we get to kill you" but that wouldn't mean we could kill you.
  - pdonis 14y ago
    True, but in this case the "fine print" is simply the technical details of how much of the 32 GB is actually available to the user, which MS does not make obvious, but which is available if you look for it. Lawyers, of course, are supposed to be experts at finding those kinds of details in documents, which is why I thought it amusing that this lawyer is basically admitting that he didn't bother to look below the surface.
- trhtrsh 14y ago
  Or, Lawyer did read the fine print, then is savvy enough to sue and publicly drum up clients.
  - pdonis 14y ago
    But don't you have to actually win the lawsuit for this strategy to work?
atonse 14y ago
Whatever happened to just returning the device? Seems like a much simpler solution. If enough people return the device if it doesn't fit their needs, then companies will get the message.
- jrajav 14y ago
  Yes, I'm sure this lawyer (cough) is merely unsatisfied with the product he purchased.
- rbanffy 14y ago
  > Whatever happened to just returning the device? That wouldn't protect future customers who fall for this false advertisement and never realized they paid for 32 GB of storage but got only 16... False advertising is serious. We HN'ers can see if a device we bought has half the storage we expected it to have, but most people can't.
  - EGreg 14y ago
    They could similarly just return it. False advertising cases usually focus on the fact that you can't return something with impunity. Now, of course there is a gray area -- if you've had the device for a year, banged it up and only THEN noticed you have 16 GB, then yeah. You wouldn't be able to return it. But a grace period in which you can return stuff is normal in the USA.
  - pdonis 14y ago
    The appropriate "protection" for future customers is to publicly ridicule Microsoft for their bad marketing, and for those potential future customers to not become actual customers by not buying the device. It is not a lawsuit.
- georgemcbay 14y ago
  I don't believe for a second that this lawyer was simply a naive consumer who was misled by Microsoft, but having said that it isn't always as easy as people think to return things. The majority of retailers out there have pretty hostile return policies these days, and it can be difficult to actually return something like this without a significant "restocking" fee or such. tl;dr -- always buy expensive electronics from a retail whom you know has a reasonable return policy and/or use a credit card with strong consumer protection.
roc 14y ago
> "Customers understand the operating system and pre-installed applications reside on the device's internal storage thereby reducing the total free space," I think there's a reasonable disagreement to be had over whether the Surface uses an unexpected quantity of internal storage. Even knowledgeable technical people are fairly uniformly shocked at just how much space the Surface OS and bundled apps occupies. I'm not sure whether that translates into a good chance for this guy to win. But I can't say that I'm on board with laughing off or derisively dismissing such a complaint.
- jrajav 14y ago
  I don't think this is an entirely trivial case, either. If the Surface is meant to compete more directly in the mobile space alongside iOS and Android devices, an argument could be made that it should be advertising something close to user-available storage capacity like those are understood to.
  - reddit_clone 14y ago
    Indeed. OS and crapware taking a few GB's off a 2 TB hard disk is one thing. Taking 16 GB's off of advertised 32 GB flash storage is outrageous. This is false advertising. I wouldn't laugh at this lawyer if I were Microsoft.
    - at-fates-hands 14y ago
      I think they get screwed either way. You say it has 16GB and then once you turn it on and it says 32GB in the system screen, now people are pissed your OS and apps take up too much room. Tell people its got 32GB and then they find out they only have 16GB of actual storage and they get pissed for you misrepresenting the actual storage amount. I'm sure this will be settled quietly out of court with a nice undisclosed amount for said lawyer.
    - Samuel_Michon 14y ago
      @at-fates-hands: "You say it has 16GB and then once you turn it on and it says 32GB in the system screen, now people are pissed your OS and apps take up too much room." That simply does not happen. The inverse, in which people expect to be able to store plenty of media and apps but can't, does. Most users won't even know that it's the OS that's taking up that much space, but they'll know to blame Microsoft.
makethetick 14y ago
Anyone know how much he's suing for?
- adamman 14y ago
  Something tells me it's more than 16 more gigs.
phpnode 14y ago
I really don't understand this, if you're not happy with a device you buy, return it for a full refund and don't buy another. How is it even possible to sue over an issue like this?
- EGreg 14y ago
  Good point, he would have to demonstrate that the store doesn't accept returns, for example. If it does, without a restocking fee, then I don't think he would have a case. Pointing out how much the operating system takes up is a marketing and PR issue. Not a legal one.
- halostatue 14y ago
  False advertising. Most jurisdictions have laws against it. Microsoft may believe that it has an out with respect to their "fine print", but that also can only go so far, since they actively advertise a 32GB Surface as having 32GB storage (implying that it's user-available, because all of the Surface's competitors explicitly state user-available storage). None of my iPhones, my iPads, nor my Nexus 7 have provided half the advertised storage the way that the 32GB Surface does. I'm not a lawyer, but I think that Microsoft is going to be changing some labelling so that we see user-available storage clearly. It'll work better for Microsoft in the end, too. From a technical perspective, I can't believe that Microsoft couldn't figure out a way to make this work without exposing this to users.
IanDrake 14y ago
I can solve his problem for $21.64 on Amazon: http://amzn.to/XhLWTY http://amzn.to/XhLWTY This guys is a fool. Let's be glad his target is MS and not some startup that didn't live up to his "expectations".
- grecy 14y ago
  I imagine you'd also be happy to buy a car advertised as "seats 5", then you have to spend more money to buy a 5th seat? EDIT: Let me update my analogy a little - let's say the car is advertised as "seats 5", and when you get it, you can only put a small child in the 5th seat (1/2 a person). To seat a 5th adult, you have to buy an extra seat. Still happy?
  - IanDrake 14y ago
    A 32GB iPad doesn't have 32GB of free space either, nor does any computer or device have the advertised space free when pre-loaded with an OS. So, I'm not sure your analogy works. It's standard for space to be taken for the OS. 50% is more than usual. What is the cut off for being able to sue?
  - mmanfrin 14y ago
    Have you bought any electronic with storage at all in the past 10 years? Not even hard drives come with the advertised storage -- they've had to repurpose what 'GB' means (base-10 instead of base-2).
    - fruchtose 14y ago
      That's not false advertising. The drives are measured in SI bytes, which is a decimal system.
      - mmanfrin 14y ago
        Did you read my comment?
TallGuyShort 14y ago
"They make you search and dig for it specifically" Although I also hate it when companies bury details, but I don't agree with this lawsuit. If hard-drive space is an important consideration for you, you should do a little more homework than this guy obviously did. I could see a case being made for him returning his Surface and getting a refund, but I don't see a case being made that Microsoft should have overtly printed, "WARNING: Our device only leaves you with 16 GB of usable space. Additional SD card not included."
driverdan 14y ago
Do the Surface package and main website homepage tell you exactly how much usable memory it includes?
crazygringo 14y ago
What I haven't seen anyone mention is the fact that it's NOT expectations that come from mobile/tablet (we're used to most of the space being available, because OS is usually tiny, but Windows 8 is not) vs expectations that come from the desktop (where we're used to the OS taking up 10+ GB). It's simply a question of percentages. An iOS installation uses anywhere from 1.5% to 6% of available space (1 GB out of 16 to 64). A desktop OS might take up 16GB, but your HD is anywhere from 256-2,048 GB, so still in the range of 1-6%. So, when consumers everywhere are pretty much used to all smartphones and computers both leaving more than 90% of advertised space still available for use, when Microsoft's Surface comes along and leaves only 50%, it really is qualitatively different, and you really have to give weight to the idea that this is deceptive and misleading to customers.

25 points by boh 14y ago

pdonis 14y ago

Translation: Lawyer fails to read fine print, then is naive enough to publicly admit same.

Breakthrough 14y ago
This. I just got some major deja-vu, since I don't think this is the first time someone's tried to troll a major corporation over "storage size claims" (and really, what kind of consumer would ever do his or her own research on a product worth hundreds of dollars before purchasing one? Oh wait, everyone with even the slightest bit of common sense...). Someone should inform this lawyer that he could just format the internal storage. Sure, you lose your entire tablet's operating system, but who needs that when you get MOAR GB's! (Aside: In my teenage years, I used to work for Future Shop. I recall one customer, who came in and insisted that he needed a computer "with the most possible gee-bee's". When I informed him that it was a "gigabyte", he then said "yeah whatever, I just need one with XX many jigas, do you have one?")
TopTrix 14y ago
*Conditions Apply.
flyinRyan 14y ago
To be fair, just because it's in the fine print doesn't mean it's actually binding. I could put "if you use this device on Friday we get to kill you" but that wouldn't mean we could kill you.
- pdonis 14y ago
  True, but in this case the "fine print" is simply the technical details of how much of the 32 GB is actually available to the user, which MS does not make obvious, but which is available if you look for it. Lawyers, of course, are supposed to be experts at finding those kinds of details in documents, which is why I thought it amusing that this lawyer is basically admitting that he didn't bother to look below the surface.
trhtrsh 14y ago
Or, Lawyer did read the fine print, then is savvy enough to sue and publicly drum up clients.
- pdonis 14y ago
  But don't you have to actually win the lawsuit for this strategy to work?

atonse 14y ago

Whatever happened to just returning the device? Seems like a much simpler solution. If enough people return the device if it doesn't fit their needs, then companies will get the message.

jrajav 14y ago
Yes, I'm sure this lawyer (cough) is merely unsatisfied with the product he purchased.
rbanffy 14y ago
> Whatever happened to just returning the device? That wouldn't protect future customers who fall for this false advertisement and never realized they paid for 32 GB of storage but got only 16... False advertising is serious. We HN'ers can see if a device we bought has half the storage we expected it to have, but most people can't.
- EGreg 14y ago
  They could similarly just return it. False advertising cases usually focus on the fact that you can't return something with impunity. Now, of course there is a gray area -- if you've had the device for a year, banged it up and only THEN noticed you have 16 GB, then yeah. You wouldn't be able to return it. But a grace period in which you can return stuff is normal in the USA.
- pdonis 14y ago
  The appropriate "protection" for future customers is to publicly ridicule Microsoft for their bad marketing, and for those potential future customers to not become actual customers by not buying the device. It is not a lawsuit.
georgemcbay 14y ago
I don't believe for a second that this lawyer was simply a naive consumer who was misled by Microsoft, but having said that it isn't always as easy as people think to return things. The majority of retailers out there have pretty hostile return policies these days, and it can be difficult to actually return something like this without a significant "restocking" fee or such. tl;dr -- always buy expensive electronics from a retail whom you know has a reasonable return policy and/or use a credit card with strong consumer protection.

roc 14y ago

> "Customers understand the operating system and pre-installed applications reside on the device's internal storage thereby reducing the total free space," I think there's a reasonable disagreement to be had over whether the Surface uses an unexpected quantity of internal storage. Even knowledgeable technical people are fairly uniformly shocked at just how much space the Surface OS and bundled apps occupies. I'm not sure whether that translates into a good chance for this guy to win. But I can't say that I'm on board with laughing off or derisively dismissing such a complaint.

jrajav 14y ago
I don't think this is an entirely trivial case, either. If the Surface is meant to compete more directly in the mobile space alongside iOS and Android devices, an argument could be made that it should be advertising something close to user-available storage capacity like those are understood to.
- reddit_clone 14y ago
  Indeed. OS and crapware taking a few GB's off a 2 TB hard disk is one thing. Taking 16 GB's off of advertised 32 GB flash storage is outrageous. This is false advertising. I wouldn't laugh at this lawyer if I were Microsoft.
  - at-fates-hands 14y ago
    I think they get screwed either way. You say it has 16GB and then once you turn it on and it says 32GB in the system screen, now people are pissed your OS and apps take up too much room. Tell people its got 32GB and then they find out they only have 16GB of actual storage and they get pissed for you misrepresenting the actual storage amount. I'm sure this will be settled quietly out of court with a nice undisclosed amount for said lawyer.
  - Samuel_Michon 14y ago
    @at-fates-hands: "You say it has 16GB and then once you turn it on and it says 32GB in the system screen, now people are pissed your OS and apps take up too much room." That simply does not happen. The inverse, in which people expect to be able to store plenty of media and apps but can't, does. Most users won't even know that it's the OS that's taking up that much space, but they'll know to blame Microsoft.

makethetick 14y ago

Anyone know how much he's suing for?

adamman 14y ago
Something tells me it's more than 16 more gigs.

phpnode 14y ago

I really don't understand this, if you're not happy with a device you buy, return it for a full refund and don't buy another. How is it even possible to sue over an issue like this?

EGreg 14y ago
Good point, he would have to demonstrate that the store doesn't accept returns, for example. If it does, without a restocking fee, then I don't think he would have a case. Pointing out how much the operating system takes up is a marketing and PR issue. Not a legal one.
halostatue 14y ago
False advertising. Most jurisdictions have laws against it. Microsoft may believe that it has an out with respect to their "fine print", but that also can only go so far, since they actively advertise a 32GB Surface as having 32GB storage (implying that it's user-available, because all of the Surface's competitors explicitly state user-available storage). None of my iPhones, my iPads, nor my Nexus 7 have provided half the advertised storage the way that the 32GB Surface does. I'm not a lawyer, but I think that Microsoft is going to be changing some labelling so that we see user-available storage clearly. It'll work better for Microsoft in the end, too. From a technical perspective, I can't believe that Microsoft couldn't figure out a way to make this work without exposing this to users.

IanDrake 14y ago

I can solve his problem for $21.64 on Amazon: http://amzn.to/XhLWTY http://amzn.to/XhLWTY This guys is a fool. Let's be glad his target is MS and not some startup that didn't live up to his "expectations".

grecy 14y ago
I imagine you'd also be happy to buy a car advertised as "seats 5", then you have to spend more money to buy a 5th seat? EDIT: Let me update my analogy a little - let's say the car is advertised as "seats 5", and when you get it, you can only put a small child in the 5th seat (1/2 a person). To seat a 5th adult, you have to buy an extra seat. Still happy?
- IanDrake 14y ago
  A 32GB iPad doesn't have 32GB of free space either, nor does any computer or device have the advertised space free when pre-loaded with an OS. So, I'm not sure your analogy works. It's standard for space to be taken for the OS. 50% is more than usual. What is the cut off for being able to sue?
- mmanfrin 14y ago
  Have you bought any electronic with storage at all in the past 10 years? Not even hard drives come with the advertised storage -- they've had to repurpose what 'GB' means (base-10 instead of base-2).
  - fruchtose 14y ago
    That's not false advertising. The drives are measured in SI bytes, which is a decimal system.
    - mmanfrin 14y ago
      Did you read my comment?

TallGuyShort 14y ago

"They make you search and dig for it specifically" Although I also hate it when companies bury details, but I don't agree with this lawsuit. If hard-drive space is an important consideration for you, you should do a little more homework than this guy obviously did. I could see a case being made for him returning his Surface and getting a refund, but I don't see a case being made that Microsoft should have overtly printed, "WARNING: Our device only leaves you with 16 GB of usable space. Additional SD card not included."

driverdan 14y ago

Do the Surface package and main website homepage tell you exactly how much usable memory it includes?

crazygringo 14y ago

What I haven't seen anyone mention is the fact that it's NOT expectations that come from mobile/tablet (we're used to most of the space being available, because OS is usually tiny, but Windows 8 is not) vs expectations that come from the desktop (where we're used to the OS taking up 10+ GB). It's simply a question of percentages. An iOS installation uses anywhere from 1.5% to 6% of available space (1 GB out of 16 to 64). A desktop OS might take up 16GB, but your HD is anywhere from 256-2,048 GB, so still in the range of 1-6%. So, when consumers everywhere are pretty much used to all smartphones and computers both leaving more than 90% of advertised space still available for use, when Microsoft's Surface comes along and leaves only 50%, it really is qualitatively different, and you really have to give weight to the idea that this is deceptive and misleading to customers.