The Microsoft Windows XP Home Edition EULA states I’m under no obligation to accept the operating system and can receive a refund if I don’t want it, “if applicable.”  The exact wording of the EULA implies that the retailer gives the refund, but this Microsoft site confirms it is the manufacturer’s (Samsung’s) responsibility.  For good measure I contacted Microsoft and got the same information straight from the horse’s mouth.

I emailed Samsung twice, a few days apart, two weeks ago.  I received no reply.  Then last week I called them only to be told that Samsung could do nothing more than acknowledge the receipt of my emails.  As for the refund . . . well it was strictly “no comment.”

Update (Dec. 2): I called Samsung again today and after being put on hold was told that a refund is not possible because the specifications let me know in advance that Windows was part of the package. After I explained that the EULA offers a refund the support specialist told me his supervisor would call me back within a day.

Update (Dec. 2): The previous service specialist’s supervisor, Paul, called me as promised to tell me that he had it straight from “upper management in Korea” that users could not receive Windows refunds on the grounds that the package is a bundle. He specifically cited the “if applicable” clause in the EULA.
Also, I chatted with Microsoft Support and sent them an email asking point blank whether their agreement with OEM license distributors requires they give refunds. Previously (above) I asked whether it was Samsung’s or the retailer’s responsibility, but did not ask whether Microsoft considers the refund an entitlement. The answer should be very interesting.

Update (Dec. 10): I have spent the last week making inquiries to Microsoft support.  Most of the correspondence is too painful to post here, consisting of my asking clear questions and receiving completely irrelevant replies.  After some work though, I did finally get this information  by email:

Whether Samsung is obligated to provide a refund or not:

======

Regarding this issue, I would like to explain that Microsoft has contract with third party computer providers. That third party pay for the copyright of Windows XP and they can customize this operating system and sell it to their own customers. Hence, this is a new system other than the Windows XP copy released by Microsoft.

Legally, this is a new product from the third party manufacturer. Hence, they have their own rights to price the product. As a result, they have their own rights to judge if the product can be refunded.

In most cases, the preinstalled OS are installed as a Free product to the end users. Hence, it may not be refunded by the computer manufacturer.

This reply is very telling, and has convinced me that the commonly held idea in the Linux world that recipients of pre-installed copies of Windows are entitled to a refund is fallacious.  It is based on nothing more than a misreading of the EULA that leaves out the “if applicable” clause.  There is nothing in your agreement with the manufacturer or the manufacturer’s agreement with Microsoft that requires a refund, at least from the information I have gathered.  The only remaining argument concerns the manufacturer’s right to “bundle” products.  The legality of that varies from jurisdiction to jurisdiction so any analysis of that subject would not be universal like the EULA or Microsoft OEM Windows distribution contracts with manufacturers.

after rejecting the EULA