ClassAction
Latest
Lyft will pay $12.25 million to settle drivers' lawsuit in CA
One company is done battling a gig economy-related lawsuit, at least in California. Lyft has agreed to grant its drivers more workplace protection and to pay $12.5 million to settle a proposed class action lawsuit. The California drivers who filed the lawsuit against the company wanted to be reclassified as employees in order to receive minimum wage and benefits, as well as to get Lyft to pay for their gas and vehicle maintenance. While they've unfortunately failed to get their status changed -- they're still considered contractors -- drivers in the state will get part of the settlement fund based on the hours they've put into working for the company.
Uber might owe you money for charging airport fees
If you've taken an Uber ride to a Californian airport and got hit with a surprise fee, you might be owed some cash. Uber has agreed to pay a settlemement in a class action lawsuit that accuses it of charging an "airport fee toll" years before it was legally required (last November), letting drivers pocket the extra funds. The move will dish out $1.8 million between as many as 355,000 affected passengers. That's not much in practice -- just over $5, if everyone is covered -- but it's welcome if you felt burned on that trip to LAX.
Yahoo faces class action lawsuit over text spamming
Yahoo probably isn't the first company you'd think of as a text spammer, but the courts might soon beg to differ. A judge has ruled that the internet pioneer has to face a class action lawsuit for sending Sprint customers automatic "welcome" messages when someone else pinged them on Yahoo Messenger in 2013. These were effectively small, unwanted sales pitches for Yahoo's services, according to the lawsuit -- and it doesn't help that they sometimes followed spam from another party.
Facebook must deal with class-action lawsuits over its IPO
If Facebook thinks the legal troubles with its initial public stock offering are over, it has another thing coming. A federal judge has ruled that the social network must face two class-action lawsuits accusing it of masking doubts about its growth before the IPO kicked off in 2012. Both of them claim that Facebook pulled a fast one, tricking investors into buying stock at high prices that ultimately lost them money.
Spotify is on the hook for $150 million in class-action suit
A class-action lawsuit filed this week claims that Spotify knowingly and willingly distributes songs without obtaining the proper, mechanical licenses, Billboard reports. The suit, filed by the band Camper Van Beethoven and Cracker frontman David Lowery on December 28th, seeks $150 million in damages. The artists launched a class-action suit because Spotify's actions affect more than 100 people, according to the complaint.
LifeLock forced to pay $100 million FTC fine
LifeLock is a company that purports to provide protection for people at risk of identity theft in exchange for a monthly fee of $10. The FTC doesn't feel that the firm does enough to justify that fee, which is why it's slapped the business with a $100 million fine. Officials believe that LifeLock has been exaggerating the extent of its services, saying that it hasn't done enough -- or anything -- to protect personal data like social security, credit card and bank account numbers. It's not the first time that LifeLock has been told off by the FTC after being found guilty of exaggerating its services in 2012 and failing to protect its customers in 2012.
Uber's updated driver agreement may limit class-action suit
Uber is embroiled in a class-action lawsuit in California, with some drivers fighting to be recognized as employees rather than contracted workers. This week, Judge Edward Chen ruled that the arbitration clause in the company's driver agreement was illegal, potentially allowing most California Uber drivers to participate in the class-action lawsuit. But on Friday, Uber updated its driver agreement in a way that might bar these drivers from hopping aboard. Shannon Liss-Riordan, the plaintiffs' attorney, fears that Uber is attempting to circumvent Judge Chen's existing ruling, Los Angeles Times reports.
Lawsuit claims AMD lied about the number of cores in its chips
Processor makers regularly exaggerate the performance of their chips (remember Intel's obsession with clock speed?), but AMD is learning that there are limits around what you can claim. It's facing a class action lawsuit accusing the company of misleading buyers about the number of cores in its Bulldozer-based CPUs. It would advertise that a given processor had eight cores, for example, when it effectively had four -- each core in AMD-speak was really half of a module, and couldn't operate independently. As such, that Bulldozer part couldn't handle as many simultaneous instructions as you'd expect in a true eight-core design. That was bound to be a disappointment if you were a performance junkie expecting eight-way computing in your gaming PC or server.
Apple sued over iOS 9's eagerness to chew up cellular data
Not happy that iOS 9's WiFi Assist feature is quietly gobbling your iPhone's cellular data for the sake of boosting your WiFi performance? You're not alone -- and you might get compensation for your troubles. A California-based couple has filed a class action lawsuit accusing Apple of doing too little to warn iPhone owners about WiFi Assist's data use. Allegedly, the guide it posted in response to concerns about the feature doesn't cut the mustard. It "downplays" the kind of overage charges you could rack up after upgrading to the newer iOS revision, according to the complaint.
Add this: LinkedIn must pay $13 million to annoyed users
Networking site LinkedIn has agreed to pay out $13 million for overzealous marketing of its services on behalf of users. You've likely received one of the emails, which appear to come from a contact (below), saying something like, "Hi, I'd like to add you to my professional network on LinkedIn." That line actually makes a fine universal cartoon caption, but LinkedIn then sent several similar follow-up emails without saying it would do so in its terms of service. Many users felt that made them look needy (the email mentions your contact's name no less than five times), which is why they launched a class-action suit against the company in Lucy Koh's California court.
Mitsubishi will repair your broken LaserVue for free
You might not remember Mitsubishi's rear-projection LaserVue TVs, unless you purchased one and got stuck with a huge repair bill. If so, we hope you kept those receipts, because you may be entitled to a refund for any work done. Mitsubishi has settled a class-action lawsuit brought by consumers over picture problems, like darkened screen sections that appear after 8,000 to 10,000 hours of use. The legal firm handling the suit said that "if you spent your own money to repair certain problems with your LaserVue TV, you may be entitled to a repair, payment or reimbursement" of at least $500.
Uber appeals class action status in lawsuit over driver compensation
Californian Uber drivers may have won class action status in a lawsuit demanding that they be treated like employees rather than contractors, but Uber isn't about to let this decision go without a fight. It's appealing the class action ruling on the grounds that there isn't really such a thing as a common Uber driver. They all operate differently, the ridesharing service says. Moreover, treating drivers as employees would supposedly force drivers to give up their flexible hours.
California Uber drivers can join in class-action lawsuit
Uber drivers are not employees of the ride hailing company. Instead they are contractors responsible for their own gas, vehicle upkeep and if anything happens to the driver or car while they are searching for a passenger, it's on them. Three drivers are challenging the way Uber does business by saying that the current situation violates California labor laws. Today that challenge got a boost when a San Francisco federal court judge said that their suit against the company is entitled to class action status. That means drivers can sue the company as a group over their employment status. The suit only applies to California drivers that started driving for the company before June 2014. But if the drivers are victorious, it could seriously change Uber's business model.
Apple won't face class action lawsuit over iMessage problems
If you were hoping to get a payout from Apple after an iMessage flaw prevented you from seeing some text messages on your Android phone... well, you'll probably be disappointed. Judge Lucy Koh (she of the Apple-versus-Samsung trials) has ruled that a lawsuit over iMessage's problems won't reach class action status. According to Koh, it's not clear that everyone who would have been included (basically, any American who switched away from an iPhone) was affected. Even if the plaintiff could prove that Apple's messaging tech has "systematic" problems, the judge says, that wouldn't prove that people missed out on important conversations.
Lawsuit claims MakerBot knowingly sold glitchy 3D printers
If you bought one of MakerBot's fifth-generation 3D printers only to have trouble running it, you're not alone. A recently filed class action lawsuit alleges that MakerBot and its parent company Stratasys committed a "fraudulent scheme" by knowingly shipping these Replicator printers with flawed extruders (the part that melts and deposits filament) that tend to clog. Supposedly, management was bragging about rapid growth to investors at the same time it was skimping on quality control and dealing with loads of returns and repairs. By the time MakerBot was starting to lay off workers and otherwise admit that things had gone off the rails, shareholders had lost millions of dollars.
China nails Samsung and Oppo over smartphone bloatware
A minor Chinese consumer protection group has filed lawsuits against Samsung and Oppo to contest the pair's use of bloatware on their smartphones. The Shanghai Consumer Council believes that the two companies install far too many additional apps on their devices and then make it difficult for them to be easily removed. The group says that it was motivated to launch the legal broadside after a high number of complaints from users. It believes that people are aggrieved that they've got less storage space than expected, and that these apps slurp down excessive quantities of data.
Walmart vs. Netflix DVD battle snags $12 each for 1.2 million people
Ready for a blast from the past? Ten years ago, Walmart's plan to undercut Netflix on DVD-by-mail rental pricing failed, and the retail giant turned that part of its business over to the movie service in exchange for a cut of the revenue, referral bonuses and Netflix promoting Walmart's DVD sales to rental customers. A class action lawsuit against the two followed in 2009, with customers alleging they illegally restrained trade and kept prices high. Walmart settled the case for $27 million in 2011, which will turn into about $12 (paid out in gift cards or cash) for the 1.2 million people who filed claims. While the deadline to file has long passed, the payout has been held up due to appeals in the 9th Circuit Court in San Francisco against Walmart and Netflix -- until now.
The claim process for Sony's $15 million PSN breach lawsuit starts now
Been waiting for Sony to start dishing out the $15 million in restitution for the 2011 breach that took its PlayStation Network and Qriocity services down back in 2011? Well, thanks to the outfit putting a claim form online, now you can start the payment redemption process. It's limited to those who had either a PSN, Qriocity or Sony Online Entertainment account prior to the intrusion (May 15, 2011), and the payouts aren't all that different from what the firm gave out as part of its "Welcome Back" program at the time. Of course, back then PlayStation 3 and PlayStation Portable games and themes were a bit more desirable, but three months of PlayStation Plus is actually a bit more valuable now than it once was. Sony doling out the goods could still take a bit longer, though.
Apple and Google want to settle no-poaching lawsuit for $415 million
Google, Apple, Adobe and Intel do not want to go to trial in April -- they've made that clear by agreeing to a $415 million settlement for the no-poaching class action lawsuit filed by over 60,000 employees years ago. The companies originally offered $324.5 million in 2014, but Judge Lucy Koh turned it down, as she believed the plaintiffs deserve a lot more than that. That's still far from the $3 billion the plaintiffs originally wanted, but it's still $90 million more to divvy up amongst themselves. What's this no-poaching lawsuit about anyway? Well, between 2005 and 2009, these four Silicon Valley corporations along with Lucasfilm, Intuit and Pixar had an agreement not to steal each other's employees.
Facebook facing class-action lawsuit over unauthorized message scanning
We know: Despite its best attempts at proving otherwise, Facebook and privacy have an oil/water reputation -- the latest legal news regarding the company won't help that any, either. A California judge recently ruled that The Social Network will face a class-action lawsuit following accusations that it peeked at users' private messages without consent to deliver targeted advertising. Facebook tried to dismiss the claims, saying that it didn't break any laws and that the alleged message scans were protected under an exception in the Electronic Communications Privacy Act, according to Reuters. Which one specifically? That these "interceptions" are lawful if they occur over the "ordinary course" of a service provider's business. The presiding judge countered, saying that Zuckerberg and Co. failed to offer explanation of how the scans fell under the website's ordinary course of business.
