ClassAction
Latest
Microsoft hit with lawsuit over Fall Update woes
You know, major manufacturers should just start handing out class action lawsuit form letters and business reply mail envelopes with their various electronics, just to make these things easier for everyone involved. A mere year after Microsoft got hit with its first major class action lawsuit regarding the Xbox 360 -- one which was quickly and thoroughly trounced by Microsoft legal -- a certain Kevin Ray of California is drumming up his own, this time in regards to that Xbox-destroying Fall 2006 Update. Unfortunately for Microsoft, Kevin has a bit more traction with his lawsuit, given the fact that the update has bricked his own Xbox 360 (last time around it was unclear if the accuser had even encountered any of the problems listed in his suit), and that Microsoft is refusing to replace his console. So instead of forking over $140 for the repair, Kevin is seeking $5 million in damages -- pain and suffering if we ever heard it -- along with free repairs for all 360s damaged by the update. Some of the wording of the suit is a little shaky, such as a claim by Ray's lawyer that "a Google search of the terms 'xbox 360' and 'brick' or 'bricking' shows over 15,000 results," but there does seem to be a lot of corroborating evidence for the basic claim of the Fall Updating damaging Xbox 360s, so if Microsoft doesn't come up with a fix quick, or start replacing affected boxes on the double, they could be facing a decent bit of hurt from Kevin and co.
Class action lawsuit could be building against Microsoft for 360 fall update woes
Team Xbox has singled out a recent posting on the official Xbox forums declaring a class action lawsuit has been filed against Microsoft because of hardware problems initiated by the Xbox 360 Fall Dashboard Update. The alleged plaintiff, known by gamertag REDRUM6622, has supposedly accused Microsoft of a breach of contract, violation of the Washington Consumer Protection Act, and negligence; and he has demanded that a jury weigh the allegations.There has not yet been official verification of the lawsuit's authenticity, but real or not, someone has taken the time to draft a detailed claim -- could it all be for a few laughs? We shall see.
Double trouble for SRAM makers: class action suit on the way
Things weren't looking so great already for those skeezy SRAM price-fixers, but now it looks like they'll have a class action lawsuit to worry about on top of all that DOJ heat they're currently facing. A certain Kenneth Bagwell of Michigan started up the class action suit, claiming the defendants conspired to "fix, maintain or stabilize prices and to allocate markets for the sale of SRAM." And Kenneth isn't screwing around. He's managed to name just about every SRAM manufacturer under the sun as in cahoots: Alliance, Cypress, Etron, GSI, Hitachi, Hynix, Integrated Silicon Solution, Micron, Crucial, Mitsubishi, NEC, Renesas, Samsung, Sony, Toshiba, Winbond, Fujitsu, IBM, Seiko Epson, Epson, Sharp and ST Microelectronics are all named as defendants of his own personal cash-in on this debacle. Mr. Bagwell already brought his suit to a Michigan district court, so now we just watch and wait for it all to hit the fan -- as if it hadn't already.
Lawsuit takes issue with T-Mobile's ETFs
You don't like early termination fees. We don't like early termination fees. In fact, with the exception of the carriers' bean counters, we can't think of anyone that likes 'em. But the fact of the matter is, a contract's a contract, and the ETF is the (relatively small, in the scheme of things) penance we pay for the right to break it. Be that as it may, a new class action suit brought against T-Mobile in an Idaho federal court claims that the nation's #4 carrier is breaking thirteen state consumer protection laws by charging customers $200 to wiggle out of their agreements. Specifically, the claim stems from the fact that T-Mobile doesn't make allowance for reducing the ETF based on the amount of time the user has been with the carrier, nor the "quality of service" they receive. For its part, T-Mobile isn't commenting on the suit, but we're guessing we can imagine the hand gesture they're doing their best to not display right about now. To the plaintiffs: can we recommend Sprint?[Via The Wireless Report]
Apple settles 17-inch Studio Display class action
Apple has agreed to a settlement in the Class Action Suit regarding allegedly defective inverter boards that caused problems with 17-inch Studio Displays. Although Apple won't admit any wrongdoing (as is usually the case in these kinds of settlements), it has agreed to settle the claim in order to avoid the exorbitant expense of a trial. The lawsuit claimed that "the inverter board of the Apple 17-inch LCD Studio Display was faulty, causing the gradient dimming of the top or bottom half of the screen of the Display and a power light to constantly blink on and off in a short-short-long pattern to signal a problem." Under the terms of the agreement, Apple will provide cash refunds ranging from $75 - $400 to claimants who had their affected displays repaired. The amount refunded will depend on when the repair was performed and whether it was an Apple repair or a repair by a a third party. Only US residents are eligible for the settlement. Additional details, claim forms and a FAQ are available on the suit info site.How many of you are covered by this settlement and plan to submit a claim?
Motorola slapped with lawsuit over Bluetooth headsets
We've personally had more trouble with headsets not being loud enough, but a California man has worked himself into a lather over "injury" allegedly suffered from using a Motorola Bluetooth headset at high volume. A lawsuit has been filed (naturally) against Moto on behalf of the suffering individual, seeking class action status with unspecified damages -- suggesting that many of us are victims of our own stupidity and are hard of hearing as a result. Ultimately, the issue is that the headsets can apparently reach 85-100 decibels, a volume that risks causing gradual hearing loss, and nothing in Motorola's safety documentation makes mention of the danger (someone actually reads that booklet?). Though we think this is a typically silly suit looking to shake the Motorola tree for some free goodies, we'll admittedly be the last to complain if a free H5 comes our way. Sorry, could you speak up a bit?[Via The Inquirer]
Disgruntled MacBook owners organising class action suit
AppleInsider has a story about a group of Mac users who have had enough of their faulty MacBooks, and they're not going to take it anymore. The group has set up a page at ClassAction.com and is looking for support to force Apple into a recall of the company's newest consumer notebook. AppleInsider also points to macbookrandomshutdown.com, a site dedicated to RSS (random shutdown syndrome) that already has over 1,250 reports of afflicted laptops.This shouldn't be much of a surprise. There have been reports of random MacBook shutdowns for months, and Apple even copped to the problem last month, but there's not been much movement since then.I didn't sign up at either of the petitioning sites, but I could have. I bought my fiancee a MacBook about a month after they were released and within a week it was shutting down at will. We were lucky, though. We made an appointment at Apple's main store in London and after the Genius witnessed two shutdowns in as many minutes, he said he'd give us a brand new MacBook. Things have been OK so far.Are any of you still suffering with the same problem? How has Apple handled your complaints? Sound off in comments.
Cingular slaps surcharge on TDMA accounts
We trust folks frequenting Engadget Mobile don't fall into this category (do they?), but for the 4.7 million Cingular customers soldiering on with legacy AMPS and TDMA hardware, the pressure to upgrade is about to get kicked up a notch. Starting next month this, uh, very special contingent of users will find a new $4.99 monthly charge on their bill, having committed no crime other than failing to make the switch to GSM. What's more, Cingular seems to be offering little or no incentive for folks hoping to avoid the surcharge by getting a new handset, saying only that "some customers will qualify for discounts on their new phones." If anyone was still in doubt that Cingular was thumbing their nose at their pending TDMA class action suit, this pretty much seals the deal.[Thanks, BeeRT and Tim UF]
Cingular, Verizon slapped with class action suits
Wireless carriers in this country are no strangers to all manner of legal action, so it comes as little surprise to us to hear that we have a couple fresh lawsuits brewing of the class-action variety. In Cingular's case, it seems a group of former AT&T Wireless customers are worked up over the degredation of AT&T's legacy network following the merger, forcing many of them to either deal with the inferior reception, buy so-called "orange" phones and get on Cingular's network proper -- often incurring a transfer fee in addition to the cost of the phone, or leave Cingular entirely and pay the early-termination fee of $175. Verizon meanwhile is taking heat for covertly slapping some of its customers with their roadside assistance option starting in January 2004 at $2 / month, then later refusing refunds when folks got wise to the charge. We dream of one day achieving world peace between human- and carrier-kind -- but in the meantime, good luck sticking it to the Man, folks.
iPod nano "scratch" lawsuit: lead plaintiff never wanted to be involved
In an open letter to the Mac community, Jason Tomczak, the so-called lead-plaintiff in the iPod nano "Scratch" class-action lawsuit, says he never wanted anything to do with the case. The fact that he was named lead-plantiff was a mistake according to Jason, as he never sought out, nor hired the firms of David P. Meyer & Associates or Hagens Berman Sobol Shapiro to represent him. Sure, he did respond to their request for information after Jason complained about scratches on his personal blog and within other Mac-related forums. However, Jason claims that the lawyers prepared the paperwork and filed the iPod Nano Class Action suit in California using Jason's name as Lead Plaintiff "without his knowledge or consent," even after Jason requested not to be involved, and without Jason signing an attorney-client agreement. On top of this, the poor kid's name has become synonymous with the class action resulting in threats, hate mail, and other forms of harassment from the more fanatical-types amongst the Mac zealotry. Jason is currently suing the two firms -- a move being met by the type of aggressive and staunch defense you'd expect from a couple of powerful and scheming law firms. If true, well, you just gotta feel sorry for the guy. So let's cut him some slack as this thing unfolds, aight?[Via TechDirt]
Sony BMG "rootkit" class action settled: time to submit your claim
Listen up anyone who "purchased, received, came into possession of or otherwise used" music CDs containing Sony's flawed DRM software anytime after August 1, 2003. Under the terms of the class action settlement approved Monday, you are entitled to file a claim for a replacement CD, free downloads of music from that CD (with Apple's iTunes named as one of the three download services, ironically), and even "additional cash payments" which we presume are likely to amount to a stack of Abes, not Benjamins, folks. Pretty much what Sony BMG was already offering to their customers when this whole fiasco hit back in November. Additionally, Sony BMG definitively agreed to halt manufacture or distribution of that XCP and MediaMax nastiness masked by the rootkit. Now be sure to get your claim in now consumers, so that Sony BMG hears loud and clear that you do know what a rootkit is, and yes, you care. Afterall, the settlement only lasts until the end of 2007 at which point Sony BMG is free to introduce copy protection software once again. Click the read link for a PDF copy of the settlement.[Via c|net News]
Apple to face iPod/iTunes antitrust suit
That's right, folks. Thomas Slattery is suing Apple because the iPod won't play music files from other online music stores, and because you have to use iTunes to sync your music to your iPod. A judge in California ruled that Apple must face some of Slattery's charges (though it did dismiss a few other claims including 'unjust enrichment with prejudice,' which doesn't sound good).Now, I'm no lawyer, but I hope that this lawsuit doesn't have any legs because one of the biggest strengths of the iPod/iTunes combo is the level of integration between the two.[via Paul Thurrot's Internet Nexus]
