Hello!
We are practicing lawyers Zhang Ping, Fu and Zhang Lan from Beijing Fang Yi Law Firm and People's Republic of China (PRC) Dacheng Law Firm. We are entrusted by the parties, Miss Huang Jing and Mr. Zhou Chengyu, to handle all legal affairs between them and ASUS. We take the liberty of disturbing you in your busy schedule, which is really a necessity. Please read the following carefully.
In April 2006, the "Asustek was claimed by sky-high price" incident broke out in Chinese mainland. I don't know if you have heard of it. In this incident, the engineers of ASUS Company replaced the original official processor CPU in the machine with the engineering sample processor CPU when testing the ASUS brand notebook computer purchased by consumers in ASUS Beijing Product Service Center. When consumers found out that they were legally defending their rights through fraudulent means, and Asustek was afraid of serious impact after the incident was exposed, they actually used illegal means to fabricate facts and conceal the truth, and reported to the police that they were blackmailed, causing innocent consumers to be jailed. Asustek's move caused an uproar in the domestic media, and hundreds of websites, newspapers and magazines reported it. However, ASUS made use of powerful corporate resources and public relations power to publish two statements in the media that distorted the facts, vilified consumers' rights protection behavior, and strongly urged the media to stop reporting this incident, so as to clean up and cover up its corporate scandal. We sincerely admire the emergency handling ability of ASUS Public Relations Department, but the truth cannot be concealed. After the incident, the state authorities have made an appraisal conclusion on the evidence involved, and the consumers who were framed and imprisoned by ASUS were also recognized as legitimate rights protection. Finally, the state procuratorate decided not to prosecute and was acquitted. The victim, Huang Jing, has applied for state compensation and entered the compensation confirmation procedure.
It has been two and a half years since it happened, and we are still sorry to see that ASUS has known that it was wrong for so long, but it has never shown a trace of regret. On the contrary, we have always responded to this matter with a tough, arrogant and indifferent negative attitude. To this end, we are deeply puzzled. In this incident, ASUS's performance completely violated the concept that the most important thing in doing business is responsibility. Therefore, we boldly speculate that the relevant departments under ASUS did not pay enough attention to this matter, or even deliberately concealed it and did not report this incident to everyone. In order to safeguard the legitimate rights and interests of the parties, we are also trying our best to properly handle this matter. I hope you can understand the relevant situation and make a positive response. 1.On February 9, 2006, consumer Huang Jing (Long Sisi) bought an ASUS V6800V notebook computer in Beijing as a new Ye Wei Technology Co., Ltd. (ASUS computer agent). The processor configuration is Pentium -m7602.0GCPU produced by Intel Corporation.
2. On February 9, 2006, Huang Jing found that the computer was used abnormally immediately after returning home, and contacted Newcomer Company. Then send the computer to Newcomer Company, accompanied by Newcomer Company, and go to Beijing Haidian Branch of Asustek Computer (Pacific Building 1 1 floor) for testing. After testing, the engineers of ASUS told Huang Jing that the computer had no hardware failure and worked normally after reinstalling the system software. February 65436, 2006.
3. After Huang Jing got back the computer, he found that it still couldn't work normally. On the afternoon of February 10, 2006, Huang Jing sent the computer to ASUS Beijing Haidian Branch for testing again, and asked Newcomer Company to return it. Newcomer company promises to return if there is a hardware failure, and not if there is no hardware failure. After testing the machine, ASUS released the service behavior report of ASUS Royal Club. Asus engineers told Huang Jing that there was no hardware fault in the machine, but the problem was solved after reinstalling the software. Huang Jing was persuaded by ASUS engineers to get the computer back.
On the evening of February 10, 2006, Huang Jing found that the computer was unstable again and crashed frequently, so he turned to his friend Zhou Chengyu for help. After checking with software, Zhou Chengyu found that the original official version of Pentium -m7602.0GCPU in the computer was replaced by the engineering sample processor ES2. 13GCPU. According to the relevant regulations of Intel Corporation, the CPU of engineering sample processor is not allowed to be used in end-user products. At this time, Zhou Chengyu also found that the service behavior report of ASUS Royal Club clearly stated that the original 2.0GCPU was upgraded to 2. 13GCPU in the morning.
5. On the morning of February 14, 2006, Huang Jing, accompanied by his lawyer, went to ASUS with recording equipment and camera equipment. Asustek engineers admitted to replacing the CPU, and guaranteed that the replaced CPU was genuine from Asustek, and confirmed that there was no problem in enjoying after-sales service in Asustek.
6. On February 14, 2006, Huang Jing entrusted Zhou Chengyu and Shu Mei, lawyer of Changji Law Firm, to represent ASUS in legal affairs related to rights protection.
7. From February 14, 2006 to March 7, 2006, lawyers Huang Jing, Zhou Chengyu and Shu Mei made several representations with Asustek, and proposed that Asustek should set up the China Anti-Consumer Fraud Foundation with a capital of US$ 5 million as a settlement condition. If the settlement fails, they will bring a civil lawsuit to Haidian District People's Court.
8. During the settlement negotiation, many senior executives of ASUS, including Xu Youjia, general manager of China Business Group, and Kevin·Z, brand director, admitted to replacing the engineering sample CPU and explained the replacement process in detail; On February 17, 2006, at the request of ASUS, ASUS engineers inspected the machine in Beijing Notary Office, and the results confirmed that the CPU of the engineering sample processor was replaced correctly.
9. On February 18, 2006, Huang Jing and Zhou Chengyu went to Intel (China) Co., Ltd. to introduce ASUS's use of engineering sample processor CPU in the service process to Wang Honghua, the public relations manager of Intel. Intel said it attached great importance to this matter and expressed its willingness to urge ASUS to solve it properly as soon as possible.
10, on March 5, 2006, Huang Jing decided to sue the court to solve this matter through legal procedures, and formally notified ASUS to start corresponding legal procedures.
11.On March 7, 2006, ASUS deceived Huang Jing and his agent Zhou Chengyu to the Beijing branch of ASUS, and then called the police to arrest him.
On March 8, 2006, Huang Jing and his agent Zhou Chengyu were criminally detained by Haidian Branch of Beijing Public Security Bureau on suspicion of extortion.
13, April 2006 14, Huang Jing and his agent Zhou Chengyu were arrested by Haidian District People's Procuratorate on suspicion of extortion.
14 and June 13, 2006, Huang Jing and his agent Zhou Chengyu received the Notice of Haidian District People's Procuratorate on Accepting the Rights and Obligations of Two Suspects Suspected of Blackmail.
15, July 26, 2006-165438+ 10/0, Beijing Haidian District People's Procuratorate twice returned to Haidian Branch of Beijing Public Security Bureau for supplementary investigation on the grounds of insufficient evidence.
16, 2006 12.26, Haidian District People's Procuratorate released Huang Jing on bail pending trial on the grounds of insufficient evidence.
17, 2007 1 1.7, Haidian District People's Procuratorate decided not to prosecute Huang Jing because of insufficient evidence.
On June 5th, 2008, the victim Huang Jing filed an application for state compensation for misjudged cases with Haidian District People's Procuratorate.
On June 8, 2008 and June 6, 2008, the People's Procuratorate of Haidian District of Beijing issued a notice for the review of Huang Jing's criminal compensation application, and the compensation request entered the confirmation procedure. Because a notebook computer of ASUS brand broke down, Huang Jing, a consumer, accidentally discovered that ASUS illegally used the engineering sample processor CPU to cheat users during the testing process. But when she legally defended her rights, what she got was not justice, but ASUS's framing and indifference.
Before this happened, Huang Jing was an excellent college girl, a beautiful and lively girl. She has a wide range of hobbies and dares to try and accept challenges. Huang Jing studied in the famous capital university of economics and business, majoring in English. At school, she got excellent grades and loved life. She worked as a student cadre and was deeply loved by her classmates and teachers. Huang Jing was born in a military family, his mother was in business, and his family was superior since childhood. At the end of 2005, Huang Jing's mother bought a company in Beijing, and Huang Jing was the legal representative of the company.
Huang Jing was detained in Haidian District Detention Center for nearly 10 months for being falsely accused and framed by ASUS. During this period, Huang Jing experienced unimaginable humiliation and torture, both mentally and physically. Due to the seriousness of the case, once convicted, she will be sentenced to heavy punishment. No one from the police to other prisoners understands and sympathizes with her. Huang Jing is under great mental pressure, and there is nowhere to complain about his grievances. In a state of complete despair, he even thought of committing suicide to prove his innocence. Today, nearly two years later, Huang Jing did not dare to recall those things, and time failed to quell the damage caused by all this. Even after she was released from prison, ASUS left too much mental and physical harm to this once beautiful and simple girl. Anyone who mentions the word "ASUS" will make her tremble.
After the incident, Huang Jing was expelled from school. From then on, my studies were interrupted and my future was ruined. The misunderstanding of her classmates, teachers, friends and relatives also put her and her family under great pressure all day, and life has always been dark for her. Early twenties is the best age for a girl, but for Huang Jing, there is no hope. Memories are just hellish nightmares. Two and a half years have passed, but this matter is not over. Asustek, which ruined everything for her, has flourished in these two and a half years, but Huang Jing has become a victim of ASUS's commercial interests. All this is just because Huang Jing, as a consumer, is unwilling to endure the fraud of ASUS and the result of legal rights protection. The wronged people continue to suffer, while the perpetrators are still shouting the slogan of consumers first and people-oriented, blinding the market and getting away with it. But the truth will come out one day, and it will be fair and comfortable. What will ASUS do when all the lies are exposed? ASUS's coping process
1.On February 9th, 2006, when the laptop of Huang Jing, a consumer, broke down, the engineers of ASUS made a judgment that only the test report was needed, and no hardware maintenance was needed.
2. On February 10, 2006, ASUS illegally used the engineering sample processor CPU to replace the original official version of the processor CPU in the consumer notebook computer in Huangjing, and promised that the replaced parts were genuine ASUS and enjoyed the free warranty service of ASUS;
3. On February 5th, 2006, Xu Youjia, general manager of ASUS China Business Group, promised to give treatment advice within 24 hours after testing the laptop with CPU replacement. However, on February 16, ASUS engineers checked the computer in Beijing notary office. After confirming the problem, Xu Youjia stopped responding to this matter.
4. On February 8, 2006, ASUS hired lawyer Qiu, head of the lawyers group of China Consumers Association, and Kevin·Z, brand director of ASUS China Business Group, to interview Huang Jing, agent Zhou Chengyu and attorney. Asustek offered to pay compensation beyond the scope stipulated by law, and offered up to ten days to investigate the matter, which will be solved after the investigation.
5. On March 1 2006, Asustek, on behalf of Kevin·Z and Qiu, overturned the fact that Asustek illegally used an engineering sample processor to replace the original processor in a consumer laptop in jing wong. The representative of ASUS said that it would take longer to investigate, and ASUS delayed the final settlement of this matter indefinitely;
6. On March 2, 2006, Asustek deleted all the information about the maintenance and parts replacement of the notebook computer, and the information about the configuration change of the notebook computer could not be inquired in Asustek, and the related contents of the service record sheet of Asustek Royal Club issued by the notebook computer testing could not be inquired in Asustek Beijing Product Service Center. Before this, all these related information can be queried;
7. ASUS authorized Kevin·Z to report that he had been blackmailed. In the report record, in order to successfully file a criminal case, ASUS claimed that it had never replaced the original official processor CPU in consumer Huang Jing's notebook computer with the engineering sample processor CPU. Consumer Huang Jing and his agent Zhou Chengyu maliciously blackmailed ASUS on this ground;
8. On March 7th, 2006, Asustek authorized Kevin·Z to trick consumer Huang Jing and his agent Zhou Chengyu into going to Asustek Haidian Branch, and at the same time informed the police to arrest him in his company.
9. On April 10, 2006, ASUS issued a statement on many domestic portals and well-known websites, saying: "Recently, Zhou Chengyu and Long Sisi both extorted $5 million from ASUS computers on the grounds that they used a beta CPU for maintenance. It seriously violated the legitimate rights and interests of our company and also had a great impact on the normal business of our company. "
On June 10 and April 1 1 0, 2006, ASUS issued a second statement on many domestic portals and well-known websites, saying: "As this incident has entered the judicial process, all employees of the company have not been interviewed by any media. The company reserves the right to make legal recourse against any false reports of the media. Please don't quote false reports. "
11April, 2006 13, Xu Youjia, general manager of China business group of Asustek Company, said in an exclusive interview with Dayang.com-Guangzhou Daily: "Asustek is a victim, and a criminal suspect blackmailed Asustek. Asus never sells so-called fake CPUs or test CPUs, which is absolutely responsible, so they dare to report the case. " 1, a laptop computer, which breaks down twice a day, is of good quality and has its own public opinion. Perhaps ASUS can be explained as an individual phenomenon. Then, when consumers send laptops to ASUS product service center, why does ASUS repeatedly emphasize to consumers that there is no hardware failure in the machine, and only need to detect and reinstall the system to solve it? And openly in the "ASUS Royal Club Service Record Sheet" in black and white.
2. Because the product service center of ASUS Company judges that the computer has no hardware failure, it only tests the report. Without consumers' knowledge, why did ASUS replace the original official processor CPU in the consumer computer with an engineering sample processor CPU that it knew was unqualified and could not be sold? And inform consumers that this is a free upgrade of ASUS, and the replaced CPU can be guaranteed at any service center of ASUS.
3. When consumers found that ASUS had replaced the original official version of CPU with the engineering test sample processor CPU, the top official of ASUS China repeatedly shifted the responsibility to employees and agents. Break one's word, promise to solve the time twice in a row, but both times were overthrown by oneself. In a month's time, I never expressed my sincerity and concrete plan to solve things.
4. Before things are about to be exposed and consumers defend their rights through litigation. Asustek hired the most famous barrister in the field of consumer rights protection in China. After careful planning, it deleted all the maintenance and replacement records of notebook computers and reported to the police that the user's CPU had never been replaced. It was the user who fabricated the reason to maliciously blackmail ASUS for $5 million, and ASUS was the victim. Such a despicable means, it is hard to believe that it comes from a well-known enterprise like ASUS.
When the media began to report this news, ASUS responded very quickly, and issued a statement in the mainstream domestic media within two days, condemning consumers for extortion and warning the media not to participate in reporting this incident again, so as not to have a negative impact on ASUS. Is it more difficult for ASUS to admit its mistakes than to ascend to heaven? Asustek is unwilling to put down its attitude and communicate sincerely with consumers when things can be properly solved, but it spares no effort to adopt so-called public relations means, thinking that enterprise resources and public relations forces can reverse black and white. ASUS's Conscience and Responsibility
Is ASUS a responsible enterprise? Is ASUS a conscientious enterprise? The slogan "Asustek's quality is rock solid" has been deeply rooted in the hearts of the people in mainland China, and the image of Asustek has always been very positive. However, in the face of such a thing, ASUS's behavior is puzzling, and more is to make consumers feel chilling.
In the global market, ASUS is a successful enterprise founded by Chinese and supported by countless consumers who trust ASUS brand. We are born from the same root, so why are we in such a hurry? We can be cruel to our compatriots on the mainland, who are both China people and consumers on which ASUS depends. Everyone will think that ASUS's image is rock solid only because of its heart, not its quality. In developed markets such as Europe and North America, users are more concerned about a company's respect for human nature, its affinity for consumers, and the corresponding laws are more perfect. Once a company dares to cheat consumers, it will be severely punished. As a global multinational enterprise, does Asustek think that users in mainland China are weak, even flouting the laws of China, playing with the judicial organs of China, and using the legal power of the state to crack down and punish consumers? Asustek even thinks that having the money to hire famous barristers and public relations power is enough to control the spread of media public opinion, and it can confuse people with black and white. Even if the scandal is exposed, due to the lack and imperfection of relevant laws in China, the so-called consumer fraud in double indemnity will not make ASUS have the slightest scruples.
Consumers are called gods in business circles. We want to share a short story with you: a man who claimed to be a devout believer opened a shop selling fake goods, and God happened to pass by him and found his fraud. God persuaded him to apologize to all the customers. But he was afraid of exposure and responsibility, so he couldn't help kicking God over, taking off his pants, beating and cursing God in front of everyone and accusing him of being a thief. Finally, the truth came out after the judge's investigation, but he still had no remorse and even refused to apologize. Do you think people will forgive this so-called devout believer?
As one of the top 500 enterprises in the world and one of the most successful high-tech enterprises founded by China people, the growth experience of ASUS is amazing. You are the highest decision-maker of ASUS, and you are the idol of China technology entrepreneurs. You once said in an interview: "The most important thing in doing business is responsibility, but money is not the key." As a powerful and mature multinational company like ASUS, we believe that corporate responsibility is the most basic and fundamental principle in dealing with anything. Asus made a mistake in this incident, deceiving consumers and making mistakes first. It is the right way to bravely assume relevant responsibilities and actively solve problems. However, we regret to see that ASUS's series of actions in this matter run counter to the basic principles of responsible and conscientious enterprises. 1, 65438+February 26th, 2006, the consumer was unjustly imprisoned for ten months, and the state judicial organs found out the truth and declared Huang Jing innocent. However, from this time on, ASUS did not take the initiative to make any statement, nor did it respond.
2. After consumer Huang Jing applied for state compensation for misjudged cases and entered the confirmation procedure, we sent a lawyer's letter to Intel (China) Co., Ltd. on July 8, 2008, and interviewed the company's representatives. The company later said that it had passed the relevant information to ASUS, but ASUS did not respond.
3. On August 7th, 2008, we sent a lawyer's letter to Kevin·Z, brand director of ASUS China Business Group. On August 1 1, Kevin·Z failed to reply within the time limit. Lawyer Zhang Ping called Kevin·Z himself, and she simply replied that it would be handled by the company's legal department. This matter has nothing to do with her, and she ignores it.
4. On August, 2008 1 1, Mr. Zhou Chengyu called Kevin·Z personally, but she didn't care, claiming that she didn't care where to sue ASUS, then rudely hung up and never answered our calls again.
Since then, no one has communicated with us to solve this matter, nor has he received any feedback from ASUS, nor has anyone expressed his position on behalf of ASUS. It's been more than two and a half years, and it's still being delayed indefinitely when all the facts are very clear. In these two and a half years, Huang Jing and her agent Zhou Chengyu, as well as their families, have suffered great harm, both physically and mentally, which will be hard to eliminate throughout their lives. However, from beginning to end, ASUS has never taken any positive actions such as recognition, apology, correction and compensation in any form at any time. Whether as an individual or a business, it is possible to make mistakes. However, after making mistakes, ASUS does not want to learn lessons to correct and make up for them. But constantly cover up with new mistakes to avoid responsibility. Throughout the world famous enterprises, this incident seems to be the first case. Does ASUS think there is nothing wrong with deceiving consumers? If consumers dare to defend their rights after being cheated, ASUS should take extreme measures to block consumers in order not to damage the brand image. In order to safeguard the commercial interests of ASUS, we can do whatever it takes, even if we frame consumers to go to jail. ASUS's indifference to consumers is chilling; What is even more frightening is that buying ASUS computers to protect rights will be arrested and sent to prison.
Asus is a large-scale company. As the highest person in charge, you are busy with official business. The relevant staff of ASUS in China may not have reported this matter to the top decision-making level of ASUS. We believe that you didn't know this before. As lawyers, entrusted by clients, we should protect the legitimate rights and interests of clients within the scope of law. We also hope that ASUS will take a positive attitude and take the initiative to solve this matter. Today, on behalf of the parties, Miss Huang Jing and Mr. Zhou Chengyu, we will briefly introduce this incident to you, hoping to get your attention. At the same time, we also hope that you can contact us before the prescribed time limit to show ASUS's attitude towards this matter. We are also making final efforts and attempts to properly handle this matter.
Hereby!
welcome
Signature of members of lawyers' group
Lawyer Zhang Ping:
Pay a lawyer:
Lawyer Zhang Lan:
Date: September 2008 17