This is what I sent to the original Windows Refund Page. Matt was quick to write back and include the first set of documents I was able to scrounge up. DON'T ANYBODY BLAME HIM, 'k?
Date: Wed, 20 Jan 1999 13:11:41 -0700 From: "Donna."[To: and Cc: lines snipped -d.] Subject: Windows Refund Page Re: http://www.thenoodle.com/refund/ I am pleased to =finally= see some advocacy action being taken on refunds for pre-loaded Windows products. However, if you're interested in some historical accuracy, I feel I deserve at least some credit for "starting it all". In February 1997 I purchased a laptop computer and was outraged to be forced to pay Microsoft a commission when I had no intention of using the prebundled Win95. The wording in the installation led me to read the EULA, and in that document I discovered I was due a refund for returning the preload. I assumed others had seen the EULA and responded to it, so I queried appropriate Linux newsgroups (comp.os.linux.misc, comp.os.linux.advocacy, alt.os.linux.caldera) and mailing lists (the Linux-Women mailing list, the Systers mailing list), for pointers on traveling through what I assumed would be a quagmire. From Systers, I received a few queries about Linux, and from there and from Linux-Women I received well wishes for the adventure ahead of me. The responses I received from the newsgroups were, in general, condescending and assumed I had not researched the possibilities of building my own or of buying a system with Linux pre-installed. (To their credit, a few of the respondees apologized when I pointed out that building my own notebook wasn't an option. At that time, comparable systems offered by VA Research, the only place I could find Linux pre-loaded on notebook computers, cost double the price of the system I ended up buying.) Not one person who replied to me thought a refund would ever really happen. Despite the negative responses, I corresponded with the manufacturer of my laptop and eventually received a refund for my unused Win95. From there, I queried _The Linux Gazette_ for interest in a story of my experiences, but received no response. I submitted a short article of my experiences to http://www.slashdot.org, but it was never posted. At one point, I even sent a letter to Bill Machrone regarding the refund portion of the EULA, but my letter was never published or even referenced in _PC Magazine_ or any other ZD publication, that I could ever discover. Regardless, I continued to mention the refund whenever the subject of preloads came up in various newsgroups and mailing lists, including but not limited to the AM-INFO list and http://www.slashdot.org, My partner talked about the refund, in various places, as well. IOW, word has been out that (1) the EULA gives promise of a refund, and (2) refunds =are= in fact possible, for almost two years now. While it is not my intention to diminish Geoffrey Bennett's contribution, I feel that this situation is typical of the way in which women's contributions become devalued in the history books. For that reason I thought I would at least speak up now and make an attempt to set the record straight. Was it merely that I was ahead of my time, and the world needed the much-publicized monopoly case against Microsoft to care or even believe that a lowly individual could take a stand against the behemoth? Or was it more than that? For the women's history books, at least, it's just another example of a by-now familiar story: they said it couldn't be done; a woman did it, and everyone ignored her; a year and a half later, a man did it, and the world rallies around to make it a movement and a date is set to turn the movement into a "press event". While I'm glad to see people are finally willing to stand up and refuse to pay for a preloaded operating system they had no choice but to accept and have no intention of using, I can't help but wonder what events in the computer industry might have gone differently over the past two years if anyone had listened when I spoke up before. Donna. Cybrarian, NiEstu donna.s@niestu.com