• Welcome to the LegalBeagles Consumer and Legal Forum.
    Please Register to get the most out of the forum. Registration is free and only needs a username and email address.
    REGISTER
    Please do not post your full name, reference numbers or any identifiable details on the forum.

Tablet Software and Sale of Goods Act

Collapse
Loading...
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Tablet Software and Sale of Goods Act

    I purchased a tablet in May 2013. In April 2014 the media reported that the Heartbleed virus would leave devicces open to attack by hackers, with the Android operating system 4.1.1 being vulnerable. As the tablet I purchased has Andoid 4.1.1 I contacted PC World. I was informed that I should either install an anti-virus (I pointed out that the whole point about the Heartbleed was that it couldnt be detected so what was the use of anti-virus) or to turn the tablet off. I asked to return the device as it is clearly not fit for purpose but they refused and said that software is not covered by the Sale of Goods Act 1979. I have read about LBS vs IBM but that was for application software to be installed and that software had to be returned once the contract finished.

    Qtn: Does an operating system that comes installed on a tablet (computer) constitute goods?
    Tags: None

  • #2
    Re: Tablet Software and Sale of Goods Act

    This is an excellent and very complex question. When one purchases a new personal computer, it normally comes bundled with a number of software programs. Typically, these will include an operating system, a web browser, word processor, messaging and e-mail software, anti-virus, firewall and other anti-malware software & games. These various programs may come preloaded on the computer or may be supplied on DVD, to be loaded by the consumer. There is no English authority on the status of software supplied in these circumstances, but Australian authority suggests that if the hardware and software is supplied as a bundle, for one global price, the contract is treated as one for supply of the computer system as a whole, and therefore properly categorised as a sale of goods.



    Toby Constructions Products Pty Ltd v Computa Bar (Sales) Pty Ltd[1983] 2 NSWLR 48, accepted as correct by Sir Iain Glidewell in the English Court of Appeal inInternational Computers Ltd v St Albans District Council[1996] 4 All ER 481


    This answers your question to an extent I think, but it's worth expanding due to the complexities. These are perhaps best shown via an example.

    Say we both wanted a copy of Norton Anti Virus. I go out and buy a disk with it on. I have a physical, tangible thing containing the software so I am covered under SOGA, having bought goods. You, on the other hand, download your copy directly from the internet, thus having no physical copy you could hand to me. You are not covered by SOGA as you have no goods.

    It is an area which is being addressed and which is massively misunderstood. Entire papers have been written on the subject, but it is best summed up in a simple form in the OLD pdf linked below:

    https://www.gov.uk/government/upload...l-products.pdf

    Your main hurdle, IMO, now is in persuading the retailer that it was not fit for purpose as it could be argued that as long as it did not contract the virus, it was fit for purpose. If it contracted the virus, it would then be rendered unfit for purpose.

    I hope this helps in some way - it is exceedingly complex.



    Comment


    • #3
      Re: Tablet Software and Sale of Goods Act

      If I understand you correctly then I believe that my position is made slightly easier as I mis-stated that Heartbleed is a virus as it is in fact a bug, or more specifically 'Heartbleed is a security bug in the OpenSSL cryptography library' (Wikipedia).

      As it is a bug then that means that that the product was sold with an inherent flaw ... ?

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: Tablet Software and Sale of Goods Act

        You may be right - I hope for your sake you are, as that argument means it is not fit for purpose. Playing devil's advocate you might be asked, "Did the tablet actually have the bug at the time of purchase?" If not, then it was fit for purpose.

        You of course argue that you can't use it for one of its primary purposes due to the risk of it getting the bug.

        Common sense should prevail and the store should either refund or update the software (you could easily do this yourself at home of course). It would then be fit for purpose.

        Good luck anyway - it's been an interesting afternoon reading several very complicated papers to try to make sense of the legislation for you. :beagle:

        Comment


        • #5
          I faced the same problem with me when I bought a new laptop and it had so many problems with the online virus attacks. I have always so much work of graphic designing software and that's why I couldn't take any risk. Well, then my friend told me about the*vogatech.com/ website where I can get the information about the best* graphic design laptop*and really it was very helpful for me.

          Comment


          • #6
            There is a high chance that it will be affected, so be careful word unscrambler

            Comment

            View our Terms and Conditions

            LegalBeagles Group uses cookies to enhance your browsing experience and to create a secure and effective website. By using this website, you are consenting to such use.To find out more and learn how to manage cookies please read our Cookie and Privacy Policy.

            If you would like to opt in, or out, of receiving news and marketing from LegalBeagles Group Ltd you can amend your settings at any time here.


            If you would like to cancel your registration please Contact Us. We will delete your user details on request, however, any previously posted user content will remain on the site with your username removed and 'Guest' inserted.
            Working...
            X