Posted on

Microsoft Retroactively Extends Xbox 360 Warranty from 90 Days to One Year

Text of New Xbox 360 Warranty

In the wake of both an online petition “demanding” Microsoft extend its warranty and a possible class action suit for “bricked” Xbox 360’s, Microsoft is retroactively extending its XBox 360 warranty from 90 days to a full year in North America. This change brings Microsoft in line with Sony and Nintendo, each of which provide 1 year warranties on their PS3 and Wii consoles respectively.

Xbox 360 owners that have previously paid out-of-warranty repair charges within their first year of ownership will automatically receive reimbursement checks within 10 weeks for the amount of their console repair from Microsoft.

The text of the new warranty can be read here.

Sources: Joystiq | Xbox360 Fanboy | Team Xbox | GameSpot | ZDNet | Daily Tech | MSN Money (AP) | Gizmodo | Seattlepi.com | GameDaily.biz | Gamasutra | XBox.com – How to Contact Us | Xbox.com | Microsoft Press Release | Text of New 360 Warranty

Posted on

Fall-Update “Brick” Class Action Brought Against Microsoft

Text of Complaint (Nov 29, 2006)
Microsoft has been sued over an allegation that its XBox 360 Fall Update (ie: a mandatory XBox 360 download) caused a total system malfunction (turned the units into “bricks”) for some users.

The claim alleges that Microsoft is refusing to pay the shipping, repair or replacement costs of affected units. Microsoft says it is paying shipping costs to fix or replace all affected units. The claim alleges breach of contract, negligence and violation of Washington’s Consumer Protection Act. It seeks $5 million in damages – presumably for the a yet-to-be-certified class and not just for the particular aggrieved plaintiff Kevin Ray.

Of particular interest the claim alleges that the limitations of liability, warranty and remedies clauses contained in Microsoft’s Terms of Use (TOU) are unenforceable due to unconscionability in that:

  • XBox owners were never shown to the Class/Plaintiff: This isn’t likely. I specifically recall being presented with Microsoft’s TOU when I signed up for Xbox Live.
  • the limitations and disclaimers were not specifically shown to each member of the Class – Case after case have upheld click wrap agreements of this kind. Unless there is something specific under Washington consumer protection law on this point, I’d be enormously surprised if this is relevant to any court.
  • the limited remedy under the TOU fails in its essential purpose because it deprives the Class of the substantive value of its bargain – again, such clauses are commonplace in click-wrap agreements and routinely enforced by courts.

Sources: ars technica | Seattle Post Intelligencer | GameSpot | ZDNet | Joystiq | Next Generation

Posted on

Motion Filed to Dismiss Xbox 360 Overheating Lawsuit

In the motion to dismiss, Microsoft notes that “Significantly, Plaintiff omits the fact that his Xbox 360, purchased in November 2005, is still covered by a 90-day warranty, under which Microsoft agreed to repair or replace it, or issue a refund. In fact, Plaintiff does not allege that he contacted anyone at Microsoft about the alleged defect, let alone that Microsoft refused to honor the terms of its warranty. Moreover, Plaintiff does not allege that his Xbox 360 ever malfunctioned. He alleges only that “members of the class have experienced malfunctions” with their Xbox 360s – not that he has.

[March 29, 2006 Update: ars technica reports that On March 29, 2006, the complainant Robert Byers filed for voluntary dismissal of the case.]

Sources: Xbox 360 Fanboy | Xbox Today | Planet XBox 360

Posted on

Man Commences Class Action Suit Against Microsoft over Alleged Xbox 360 Glitch

Text of Complaint

The proposed class action suit claims that Microsoft released a “defectively designed” product that is prone to failure due to overheaing.

Dale’s Comment: While initially denying the extend of this problem in late 2005 and early 2006, in October of 2006 Microsoft offered to replace all defective units without charge.

[March 29, 2006 Update: ars technica reports that On March 29, 2006, the complainant Robert Byers filed for voluntary dismissal of the case.]

Sources: BBC | GameIndustry.biz | GameDaily