Onedrive storage down to 5GB from 15 + 15GB

[cha0sman]

As to the legality of the whole thing, that's covered in the terms and conditions. I just think that in addition to that, common sense should reign. What if MS were to scrap OneCloud? Do you expect that OneCloud will exist in its present form forever? Tech redefines the notion of rapid change, and nothing is guaranteed forever. Did you think Zune Music Pass would last forever?

Legally, no it is not covered in the T&Cs, as it was a part of the purchase. The T&C's do not cover the purchase of the phone, if there was any caveats, it would have been needed to be specified in the specs of the phone. Meaning, it would need to say "Subject to the Terms and Conditions of OneDrive". etc.

If MS were to scrap OneCloud, that actually would be fine.Remember, perpetual only means the life of the service. However, if they just renamed the service like they did from SkyDrive to OneDrive, they still would be obliged to honor the license. But say they no longer offered an cloud storage, and but now offer a service that has a Virtual Machine that allows you to enable SMB(for the sake of argument). They would no longer be obliged to honor the license, because it is a totally brand new product that isn't necessarily a rename. It is a whole new service.

But, if Microsoft were to sell services 5 years of a service they knew they were going to be shutting down in 1 year, that in itself is fraud.

Heck, as of last week, they still were advertising the 30 GB on a lot of the phones.
I even took a snapshot of such an instance on the microsoft store but apparently because I don't have 10 posts here, I cant post links..

Zune Music Pass is a little different animal, as it was subjected to terms and conditions as a part of the purchase. It wasn't a service that was included with hardware in it's specifications.

A few years ago, I purchased a perpetual license of MalwareBytes AntiMalware that gave me a life time of updates. Then I believe it was last year that they changed the licensing type to a monthly subscription and no longer selling perpetual. However, because they are legally required to honor the perpetual licenses, they still give those users the same updates etc. But just no longer sell the perpetual licenses. If MalwareBytes decides to create a new product, that is not just a rename of their AntiMalware product, and offer that as only a month to month subscription and no longer support the AntiMalware product, that would be 100% legal. Do you see what I am saying here?

 

[cha0sman]

And MS was true to those words. The parties have different views on for how long it would last, but the amounts were honest and true. I think the focus needs to be on why MS didn't do a better job making sure customers didn't think it was forever (or any amount of time than it is). That and why MS insulted anyone's intelligence by thinking they would buy the bogus excuse of some customers abusing unlimited.

Legally, though, when a time frame is not specified, such a license is perpetual. Meaning the life that the service is offered.(The time that OneDrive is offered to the public).

 

[cha0sman]

On the packaging and on the specs on the website, it says 30 GB of OneDrive[SUP]2[/SUP] Storage

Then here is the description for the subscript 2:

15GB free cloud storage space on OneDrive. Additional 15GB free when you activate Camera roll backup.

 

[BobLobIaw]

On the packaging and on the specs on the website, it says 30 GB of OneDrive[SUP]2[/SUP] Storage

Then here is the description for the subscript 2:

The problem "legally" is that by not specifying a duration, it defaults to the terms and conditions of the service, which are accepted by the consumer prior to use. It does not, as you suggest, make the license perpetual. The purchaser is granted 15GB + 15GB subject to the terms and conditions of the use. The T&Cs are replete with "we can change anything at any time if we give you notice" language. Having said that, clearly if MS sold phones with this advertising as a way of defrauding customers they would be liable IF there is actual harm to the consumer and if there is proof of intent by MS. That's why I mention the useful life of the device. No court is going to award damages if the free storage is reduced after the useful life of the device expires. That's likely the impetus for offering Office 365 and 1TB storage for 2016. By that time the useful life of the devices will be for the most part over.

I get your argument, and I think it is a decent one (certainly better than the entitlement whining), but I don't see that the argument would ever be successful in establishing a perpetual right to a certain amount of free cloud storage that extends beyond the useful life of the device.

 

[sanien]

Is this already implemented? I still have 15+15+10GB (loyalty).

 

[HoosierDaddy]

Legally, no it is not covered in the T&Cs, as it was a part of the purchase.

And as long as customers got the space for a nanosecond, that was all they were legally or ethically obligate to do.

A few years ago, I purchased a perpetual license of MalwareBytes AntiMalware that gave me a life time of updates. Then I believe it was last year that they changed the licensing type to a monthly subscription and no longer selling perpetual. However, because they are legally required to honor the perpetual licenses, they still give those users the same updates etc. But just no longer sell the perpetual licenses. If MalwareBytes decides to create a new product, that is not just a rename of their AntiMalware product, and offer that as only a month to month subscription and no longer support the AntiMalware product, that would be 100% legal. Do you see what I am saying here?

Yes, but it's not the equivalent. First, Microsoft didn't say the OneDrive space was free for life. Second, the MalwareBytes signature updates are the same files for new and grandfathered customers, so it costs MalwareBytes nothing in storage to do that. And of course the bandwidth to download signatures is noting compared to streaming music, etc.. If the COST of providing the signatures to grandfathered customers was as high as the cost for Microsoft to provide free storage for life, they ABSOLUTELY would not be doing it.

There are reasons to be unhappy, but not getting free storage for life isn't one of them.

 

[Reflexx]

Well, it is a comment board where justification of one's position is regularly discussed. I'd also note that you engaged me by responding to my comment. I'm just pointing out your methodology, because there's complaints and then there's reasonable complaints and the two are quite different. I do notice that you didn't answer my questions. Did you expect MS to give you 30GB of cloud storage forever? I think that is an unreasonable expectation on the part of you and others. I also suspect that you will have had the promised storage for the useful life of the limited storage hardware you referenced, so I don't really see how you've been harmed.

Yes, I expected 15 GB for as long as OneDrive exists and I was an active user. I expected the additional 15 GB camera roll for as long as I was a Windows Phone user.

Do you know why I expected that? Because it wasn't sold as temporary storage. It wasn't sold as a 2 yr solution. It was sold as one of the benefits of spending money on MS hardware.

It's not an unreasonable expectation at all.

And I never claimed that I suffered harm from their actions. I just said what they're doing sucks for the consumer, and the reasoning behind it is transparently BS, which makes this suck even more.

 

[cha0sman]

The problem "legally" is that by not specifying a duration, it defaults to the terms and conditions of the service, which are accepted by the consumer prior to use.

I don't necessarily agree with you with that, as the fact of the matter was when I signed up for the service itself, there was no supremacy clause. Meaning, there was nothing saying that these T&Cs void out any previous offers, etc. Without that on initial signup, would in fact make the license perpetual. Even if a supremacy clause was there, given that the purchase has already been made and the initial conditions already being met, the supremacy clause may be held as invalid in the instant case. The problem with the T&Cs is that the purchase has already been made. Further, there was nothing binding the life of the phone with the life of the perpetual license. Just as if headphones were packaged with a phone, and your phone dies, it doesn't invalidate the usage of the headphones. A court in an individual non-class case, would most likely calculate the cost of service of 30 GB for the expected lifetime of OneDrive, plus treble damages on the account of fraud, court costs, and attorney fees. However, what would most likely happen is Microsoft would agree on an individual case to not reduce the storage for that person.

Would it be worth filing a civil suit on an individual basis? No most likely not..

 

[Reflexx]

They could have prevented 95% of the outrage if they had made sure that the free storage is bound to a registered and active windows phone on the account. that would have been no problem at all, just require the user to connect the device to your onedrive account (which already is the case), use onedrive to use the photo upload for +15GB and then have the phone renew a token once every day. Make it clear that not using the registered phone for more than 7 days will cause a notification that your additional storage will be put read only in 30 days and after that it will be deleted if the phone is not active (or a replacement registered) within 6 months.

this way you would get rather nice 30gb of free storage to use across your windows 10 devices and also put some pressure on people to stick with the ecosystem. hand out another 50gb of free storage for every surface registered on the account and you incentivise your users even more to stick to your brand.

but no ... microsoft as usual alienates their fanbase in the most ******** way possible and then is all flustered and quiet when the inevitable ****storm breaks loose.

Agreed. But I'd probably extend the ability to not log in on your phone to something around a month or two. Sometimes people have to send their phones in for repair, or they take a vacation somewhere without internet access.

 

[Reflexx]

Already more than 350 post with nearly all the same arguments.

What was the purpose of this post?

 

[HoosierDaddy]

It's not an unreasonable expectation at all

Yes it is unreasonable based on the legal concept of what a typical person would think.

There are clear and easily understood costs to providing storage.

If a cleaning service cleaned new customer's houses for free in the hopes of doing it for pay afterwards, no judge or jury in the world would find you were entitled to free cleaning for life, no matter what you believed. And even if they did tell you they would (MS did not), all the court would do is refund what you paid for the free cleaning and tell them to stop lying to people.

This is exactly like that. You got something free. In the future it won't be free. You are in no way obligated to pay for anything when it is no longer free.

MS should have done a better job informing customers but at some point common sense enters the equation. And that means its not reasonable to get anything for free without understanding how that's possible.

It is reasonable to be unhappy something is no longer free, but it is not reasonable to blame the source of the free stuff for your unhappiness. In fact reasonableness would pretty much require you to be happier about getting something for free than unhappy when it goes away.

 

[BobLobIaw]

Those were your personal expectations, but they certainly aren't reasonable. It's not a criticism of you personally, but a criticism of your position. I hope you don't have a similar expectation that by using Bing as long as it exists that you will get free Bing Rewards Credits.

 

[wplee]

UPDATE – 10TH NOV 2015

As promised, instead of complaining here, I’ve now taken some Official action in the UK by making 2 separate complaints to the relevant UK Consumer Protection bodies; the UK Consumer Ombudsman and the Advertising Standards Authority. I’ve created a separate thread for UK Lumia Owners who bought a Lumia for/part for the advertised included 30GB OneDrive Storage.

http://forums.windowscentral.com/on...n-about-onedrive-mis-selling.html#post3286951

Microsoft UK are still advertising the Lumia 950 with 30GB OneDrive included with ZERO info about the upcoming changes :angry:

If you are in the UK, bought a Lumia here for (or in part) OneDrive and want to complain then please read the thread above with step-by-step instructions of how to complain online. It takes about 5 minutes. If you feel this is "Bait & Switch" then please click through (UK members only), we need to raise our voice officially guys. I'm just one guy, we need more official complaints on Step 1 above.

This is not a class action lawsuit or anything like that. I'm still a Microsoft fan, but want them to honour what I have paid. I don't expect free storage forever, but just while I still use my Lumia - this seems fair enough. If you agree, please follow this thread: http://forums.windowscentral.com/on...n-about-onedrive-mis-selling.html#post3286951 :unhappy:

 

[Vertego]

Of course, in the UK the consumer is protected by the Sale of Goods Act 1979 (and since October, the Consumer Rights Act 2015). The contract of course is with the seller and not the manufacturer. The seller must ensure that the goods sold are 'as described'.

 

[theefman]

UPDATE – 10TH NOV 2015

As promised, instead of complaining here, I’ve now taken some Official action in the UK by making 2 separate complaints to the relevant UK Consumer Protection bodies; the UK Consumer Ombudsman and the Advertising Standards Authority. I’ve created a separate thread for UK Lumia Owners who bought a Lumia for/part for the advertised included 30GB OneDrive Storage.

http://forums.windowscentral.com/on...n-about-onedrive-mis-selling.html#post3286951

Microsoft UK are still advertising the Lumia 950 with 30GB OneDrive included with ZERO info about the upcoming changes :angry:

If you are in the UK, bought a Lumia here for (or in part) OneDrive and want to complain then please read the thread above with step-by-step instructions of how to complain online. It takes about 5 minutes. If you feel this is "Bait & Switch" then please click through (UK members only), we need to raise our voice officially guys. I'm just one guy, we need more official complaints on Step 1 above.

This is not a class action lawsuit or anything like that. I'm still a Microsoft fan, but want them to honour what I have paid. I don't expect free storage forever, but just while I still use my Lumia - this seems fair enough. If you agree, please follow this thread: http://forums.windowscentral.com/on...n-about-onedrive-mis-selling.html#post3286951 :unhappy:

God save the Queen!!!

 

[phelme]

Originally Posted by Harrie-S

Already more than 350 post with nearly all the same arguments.

What was the purpose of this post?

 

[xandros9]

Is this already implemented? I still have 15+15+10GB (loyalty).

it's slated for next year

 

[Reflexx]

View attachment 115977

I'd rather this keeps on being a major issue until MS addresses these concerns and arguments publicly.
If these are the same few points over and over, it should make it easy for MS to know what concerns we have and address them.

 

[Reflexx]

Those were your personal expectations, but they certainly aren't reasonable. It's not a criticism of you personally, but a criticism of your position. I hope you don't have a similar expectation that by using Bing as long as it exists that you will get free Bing Rewards Credits.

Who is it to say my expectations (which is mainly to keep current WP users with the camera roll bonus) weren't reasonable?

Certainly not you.

 

[Reflexx]

Yes it is unreasonable based on the legal concept of what a typical person would think.

There are clear and easily understood costs to providing storage.

If a cleaning service cleaned new customer's houses for free in the hopes of doing it for pay afterwards, no judge or jury in the world would find you were entitled to free cleaning for life, no matter what you believed. And even if they did tell you they would (MS did not), all the court would do is refund what you paid for the free cleaning and tell them to stop lying to people.

This is exactly like that. You got something free. In the future it won't be free. You are in no way obligated to pay for anything when it is no longer free.

MS should have done a better job informing customers but at some point common sense enters the equation. And that means its not reasonable to get anything for free without understanding how that's possible.

It is reasonable to be unhappy something is no longer free, but it is not reasonable to blame the source of the free stuff for your unhappiness. In fact reasonableness would pretty much require you to be happier about getting something for free than unhappy when it goes away.

It's not "free" when it was marketed as a selling point to purchase hardware.