Company Bricks User's Software After He Posts A Negative Review

HardOCP News

[H] News
Joined
Dec 31, 1969
Messages
0
What's the best way to instantly turn the world against you? How about bricking a customer's product because they wrote negative review. Yup, that works every time.

A user of Ham Radio Deluxe wasn't too happy with its apparent incompatibility with Windows 10. He posted a negative review of the software at eHam.net, calling out the company for its seeming unwillingness to fix the underlying issue. The company's response? We've intentionally bricked your software because of your negative review at eHam.
 
I see a link there, which takes you the actual story page at [H]ardOCP which then provides the direct link to the actual story posting, it's how this place works, you know. ;)

As for the action that software publisher took, they should be banned from the Windows Store permanently for such bullshit (regardless of whether they use it for software distribution or not), that's unconscionable and I'm certain they're going to regret it for years to come. They get exactly what they deserve for this crap - you reap what you sow, as the saying goes.
 
I see a link there, which takes you the actual story page at [H]ardOCP which then provides the direct link to the actual story posting, it's how this place works, you know. ;)

As for the action that software publisher took, they should be banned from the Windows Store permanently for such bullshit (regardless of whether they use it for software distribution or not), that's unconscionable and I'm certain they're going to regret it for years to come. They get exactly what they deserve for this crap - you reap what you sow, as the saying goes.

It wasn't initially there. Clearly.
 
giphy.gif
 
I love the defense:

Jim,

No one is going to be sued. I made a serious mistake and error of judgement in this and many cases and I am truly sorry.

Jim, I apologize publicly to you. I do have diabetes and sometimes this affects my judgement and it did in that voicemail I truly regret it. I'm talking to my Doctor about changing my medications so I wont have any more low sugars.

Randy, Mike and I are discussing my future with HRD.

Rick - W4PC
 
As much of a dick move as it is , I think its hilarious...and lets be honest, they solved his problem..:)
 
Just because you put something in the TOS, doesn't mean that it is enforceable in court. If this actually made it to court, the company would lose for sure as there is that law that just got signed making this shit illegal, the Consumer Review Fairness Act. I would take them to court and then make them pay my legal fees, along with an extra $1000 or so for my troubles.
 
This is why dealing with large "mega-corps" isn't always a bad thing. Multiple layers of annoying HR and "ethics" departments keep childish shit like this from happening. Small businesses don't have this type of leverage on their employees, so they treat other people like crap.....which is the natural tendency of humans.
 
Not just a dick move but probably illegal would be my guess.

What I see is a violation of Federal and State Computer Crimes laws. Disabling a legally purchased software/system via use of a computer network is pretty much a textbook definition of malicious hacking. It is a rare TOS that can override deliberate violations of Computer Crimes laws.
 
I could see that being partially true. I know a few guys at work and when their sugar levels are out of whack they definitely get a bit loopy and judgement is impaired. More often than not they just have trouble finding a bathroom before shitting themselves.

Regardless though if they know his judgment at times can be impaired by his health condition he either should not be on customer service, or have his interactions being double checked through another person.
 
Rick blamed his diabetes for lapse of judgement he made in this case.

As someone who knows a few people with diabetes, I can safely say that this is actually possible. I personally call it "diabetic rage" - but please, whatever you do, never say that to the person currently suffering from it, because they will Hulk/Reagan Smash you (usually verbally). More clinically I believe it's simply "mood swings" (emotional instability) but anger is very real and possible due to frustration and mental handicaps related to the disease.
 
What I see is a violation of Federal and State Computer Crimes laws. Disabling a legally purchased software/system via use of a computer network is pretty much a textbook definition of malicious hacking. It is a rare TOS that can override deliberate violations of Computer Crimes laws.

Let me start by saying like everyone else I think that their actions were a dick move. Honestly, even with the co-founder leaving I hope this still drags the company into the ground as a way of showing this is never a way to deal with customers. It obliviously sounds like things have been going on for awhile and being ignored until this one brought a much larger light on to the subject.

That said, I have to disagree with your statement. The problem with your statement is that you are not buying software (or music, games, movies...) you are buying a right to use said item. Picking up the latest album from some band doesn't make you part owner of said group. Just like picking up a copy of software doesn't make you part owner of said software. I don't own part of Microsoft because I bought a copy of Office. I paid them for a right to use some version of Office. If I buy a copy of Office then Microsoft suddenly notices that my 1 key is being used on 50,000 computers they have the right to disable my key without me being able to do anything about it. Unless you think you can fight and win a case in the court system about how you licensing one copy gives you the right to install it on 50,000 computers. I know that people will disagree with this statement that you are paying for a right to use, but that is what it is. You are not the new legal owner of said software. Unless you buy the actual IP from the company which is a very different case. In this case, ignoring the why for a moment, they can disable your software if they want due to some reason that they decide on and it not be considered malicious hacking. That is them making your license to use the software invalid. Which is different from them using the TOS to say that they can do something harmful to your computer on purpose.

All that said, again what they did was wrong and they deserve whatever fallout comes from this.
 
It takes time, a LOT OF TIME, to build goodwill with customers and this company burns it to the ground with their TOS. Wow ... smh
 
As someone who knows a few people with diabetes, I can safely say that this is actually possible.
Its possible every now and again not all the time. It goes away once you fix their blood sugar issue with some meds and then they're fine. Apparently that company has been blacklisting people for around a year for negative reviews if you read the linked thread ways. You have to go 19-20+ pages in I think to see the stuff that was being cross posted from the reddit thread on the same subject.

Here is one of the reddit threads, there were several:
Looks like they're trying to fix things now but only after they were caught out. I'm not a ham radio guy but I'd probably only use their stuff if there were no alternative, at least for a while to see if they showed themselves to have actually changed.
 
This is why dealing with large "mega-corps" isn't always a bad thing. Multiple layers of annoying HR and "ethics" departments keep childish shit like this from happening. Small businesses don't have this type of leverage on their employees, so they treat other people like crap.....which is the natural cultural tendency of humans.

FTFY
 
i loved this comment:

"It can cost a lot of money to get people to like you, but they will hate you for free. They may even spend money to take you down.""
 
Yeah hard to buy the diabetes story when he blacklisted multiple people, and in the case of the guy that outted em, the diabetes guy later called and threatened him with legal action. Days later tell him they'll unlock his software if he removes the bad review. WTF? Amazing he isn't in the hospital if he's having that many issues from diabetes. You'd think co-workers or family would notice the behavior at some point, unless it always miraculously happened when he was "helping" customers or reading reviews of their product.

Then you have their EULA that stated they could remove your license at any time, for any reason. That makes it difficult to buy the other co-owners story that they had no idea blah blah blah. It all makes it appear the only thing they're sorry about is getting called-out and the internet spotlight pointed at em.
 
now how does the diabetes community feel about their affliction being used as a legal defense?
 
Rick blamed his diabetes for lapse of judgement he made in this case.

While I kinda think it's bullshit, I can sorta see it.

Used to have a customer who was a "self medicating" diabetic.

He'd check his blood sugar in the morning, and if he was low, he'd do something ridiculous like DRINK A WHOLE GALLON OF ORANGE JUICE.

He'd get to work and check himself again. And, wonder of wonders, find out that his blood sugar was through the roof.

So he'd take a mega-dose of insulin.

A bit later, he'd go into a meeting, and fall out in a diabetic coma.

And he did this on a REGULAR BASIS for a couple years before he lost his job.

So he wound up starting up a monogramming company. Putting company/school logos on just about anything. And when a local team would win a championship, he'd make up knockoff championship gear for himself and his family.

But the self-medicating totally fried this dude. And he became one of those "destructive tinkerer" types.
He'd read about something online and just HAD to implement it.
He basically destroyed several computers at his business, including ones attached to the monogramming machines.

He wiped down computers that had client data on them, or made changes to them that totally broke EVERYTHING.

Guy was a great pay, but FUCK he was a menace.

His wife finally divorced him and sold the company out from under him with the caveat that he left the company too.
 
Its possible every now and again not all the time. It goes away once you fix their blood sugar issue with some meds and then they're fine.

Depends. Long term history of large swings and multiple instances of diabetic coma can do nasty things to one's cognitive function.
 
Depends. Long term history of large swings and multiple instances of diabetic coma can do nasty things to one's cognitive function.
That doesn't sound much different than any excuse for improper behavior. Next you'll have people blaming their parents for their tendencies.
 
What I see is a violation of Federal and State Computer Crimes laws. Disabling a legally purchased software/system via use of a computer network is pretty much a textbook definition of malicious hacking. It is a rare TOS that can override deliberate violations of Computer Crimes laws.


I don't think you'd get that one to fly. We all know how the software licensing scene works and that it is not unusual to enter into a legal agreement regarding the use and restrictions on the use of a company's products. If the company's representative is correct in his claim, that all he did was blacklist the license as per the TOS, at most you'll have to wrestle with the legality of the TOS, but you are not going to tread into federal criminal court over it. You have a business and a customer and they are having a disagreement over a product and support for that product. I don't see a Federal Prosecutor getting his dick hard over this one. Maybe you have a small claims court case. Somewhere along the way, damages have to add up to something serious enough to warrant the risks of a Civil case.

As for the new law, The Consumer Review Fairness Act of 2016, yes it's just recently signed into law as;
Public Law No: 114-258 (12/14/2016)

It's not a retroactive thing;
The guy posted his review on Sep 2 2016
He posted his support ticket on Dec 4 2016
They basically blacklisted him on Dec 5 2016

So legally this all happened before the law went into effect on the 14th of December.

Now I am not a lawyer, but that is the way it looks to me.




 
That doesn't sound much different than any excuse for improper behavior. Next you'll have people blaming their parents for their tendencies.

Hey, being fried because of long term abuse of a diabetic condition is just as bad as being fried because of a fucked up acid trip. Which is just as fucked up as being fried because of unnecessary electroshock therapy.

Not saying the guy here should escape consequences.

Just saying that I've seen shit like this happen previously. And it's just never pretty.
 
Hey, being fried because of long term abuse of a diabetic condition is just as bad as being fried because of a fucked up acid trip. Which is just as fucked up as being fried because of unnecessary electroshock therapy.

Not saying the guy here should escape consequences.

Just saying that I've seen shit like this happen previously. And it's just never pretty.
You know, I lost a job once because a coworker was messing with me while I was trying to read during my break and I just finished eating some hotter than hell leftover thai food that left my body feeling rather on edge. Better sense left me, and I sort of blacked out and "tought him a lesson." Been there, done that. :D
 
Hey, being fried because of long term abuse of a diabetic condition is just as bad as being fried because of a fucked up acid trip. Which is just as fucked up as being fried because of unnecessary electroshock therapy.

Not saying the guy here should escape consequences.

Just saying that I've seen shit like this happen previously. And it's just never pretty.

Assholes can be diabetic too can't they?
 
Ham radio forums and subreddits are pushing a lot of open source alternatives.

Apparently, news travels pretty fast in the ham world... :)
 
Ham radio forums and subreddits are pushing a lot of open source alternatives.

Apparently, news travels pretty fast in the ham world... :)

Well yeah.

There's over 700,000 in the US alone. And hey, they all talk to one another...go figure.

The Ham community is tightly knit in a way most communal interest groups are not.
 
Well yeah.

There's over 700,000 in the US alone. And hey, they all talk to one another...go figure.

The Ham community is tightly knit in a way most communal interest groups are not.

Yea, it was a tongue in cheek comment. :) KE7UOP here. For those that don't read about it online, there will be others talking about it on the air. It's a nice community where people will go out of their way to help you out. This guy just burned a big bridge. I think him leaving the company will help with some damage control, but won't stop it all.
 
Of course.

I'm just saying I can understand weird reasoning behind why something might occur without forgiving the fact that it DID occur.

Agreed and really, if a guy is serious about making an apology, he apologizes by accepting responsibility for his screw up, not by dodging it with an excuse.

No matter how real that excuse is, it's still an excuse. If you've wronged someone they don't want to hear excuses, they want a sincere apology.

An excuse robs an apology of it's sincerity.


EDIT: OH, and if it's a woman you are apologizing to, don't waste you're breath saying "I'm sorry", the reply will be "Sorry doesn't help".

See, "I'm sorry" is how you feel, women are focused on how they feel, they are angry, how you feel just sounds selfish to them when they feel angry or hurt.

The correct approach when apologizing to a woman is "It was my fault, I was wrong, You are right, YES DEAR".

She's upset and she is upset with you so be a man and take it on yourself. Telling her how you feel won't help her with how she feels.

And listen to William Money, "Deserves got nothing to do with it"
 
Last edited:
Back
Top