class-action lawsuit
Latest
More THQ stockholders suing THQ over uDraw
After an initial investigation into whether or not THQ misled its investors about the demand for its uDraw tablet – and a subsequent lawsuit – shareholders have filed another lawsuit against the beleaguered publisher, reports GamesIndustry. The class action suit has been filed in the United States District Court for the Central District of California by New York law firm Levi & Korsinsky on behalf of THQ shareholders. The complaint alleging that THQ "misrepresented or failed to disclose" that the Xbox 360 and PlayStation 3 versions of uDraw were not selling and, thus, THQ "lacked a reasonable basis for their positive statements" about its current condition.As GI points out, this is the second such lawsuit that THQ has faced in as many months. Shareholders wishing to join the suit may do so by filling out a form on the Levi & Korsinsky website.
AUO, LG, Toshiba pay $571 million to settle LCD price fixing lawsuit, broken record keeps skipping
The way LCD price fixing lawsuits keep popping up and settling in short order, you'd think they were going out of style. The latest motley group to face a reckoning includes AU Optronics, LG and Toshiba, the combination of which has agreed to pay a total of $571 million to eight separate American states to either avoid the legal wrath of a class action lawsuit or to pay an outstanding fine. Allegedly, the trio kept LCD prices artificially high between 1996 and 2006, hiking the prices of PCs and TVs in the process. There's a slight twist here: while keeping the display builders honest is the primary goal, the class action status will net some direct rewards for the public. Americans who claim to have been wronged in the scandal can get "at least" $25, which goes a lot further towards buying an LCD than it did six years ago.
iPod owners notified of RealNetworks-related lawsuit's class action status, given chance to cash in (updated: not Real)
Remember the 2005 lawsuit over Apple's effort to keep RealNetworks' Harmony DRM off of the iPod, calling the countermeasures an abuse that locked customers into Apple's FairPlay copy protection and the iTunes Store? You're forgiven if you don't -- the complaint was filed in 2005. Even with iTunes having gone primarily DRM-free over three years ago, though, owners of iPods bought between September 12th, 2006 and March 31st, 2009 are just now getting notices that they qualify for a slice of any damages if they register and Rhapsody's former owner the class action group wins in court. Of course, there's no guarantee that RealNetworks former Rhapsody users will win and get you music money to feed your iPod, iPod classic, iPod nano or iPod touch, but unless you're planning to sue Apple yourself, there's no penalty for a legitimate claim. Update: RealNetworks has chipped in to let us know that it's "not involved in any way" with the lawsuit, which is actually an independent complaint centered around the Rhapsody users themselves. RealNetworks hasn't embroiled itself in a legal fight with Apple to date.
Facebook under fire over virtual currency architecture; lawsuit seeks $5 million
Glynnis Bohannon is none too happy with Facebook right now. She argues her son – who purchased Facebook Credits for use in social games – did not know he was spending real-world money, and is looking for a refund. She's also trying to get Facebook to give back money to all the minors in the US who had laid down cash, and is looking for funds exceeding $5 million, court documents show.Bohannon says Facebook's currency system goes against consumer protection laws in California. Minors from the age of 13 on can create an account on Facebook and purchase Facebook Credits, though there are warnings that individuals under the age of 18 must have permission from a parent. No specific apps were mentioned in the filing.
Antitrust suit carries on against Intel, Apple, Google and others
They can hope and pray all that they want, but Google, Intel, Apple, Adobe, Intuit, Pixar and Lucasfilm will soon be facing some serious accusations in a courtroom under the Sherman Antitrust Act and California's Cartwright Act. After years of trying to dodge legal action over an "informal agreement" to not pinch each others employees, and an effort to have the case dismissed, the seven defendants will have to stand trial as ordered by District Judge Lucy Koh in San Jose, California. In her decision Koh said, not only was there evidence that these agreements were made at the highest levels of the company but, that six such deals were struck in secret in such a short time frame "suggests that these agreements resulted from collusion." There's still time for yet another deal to be struck, however, this time between the defendants and the DOJ. Otherwise it looks like all seven will have to stand trial in June of 2013.
iPhone 4 owners can register for $15 antennagate settlements (updated)
The official website for the iPhone 4 "antennagate" class action settlement is live, as pointed out by co-lead counsel on the case Ira Rothken. Of course, speaking of cases, if you're an iPhone 4 owner who has taken advantage of the free bumpers Apple's been offering since 2010 then you're not still eligible for the $15 settlement. Customers who meet the requirements (experienced antenna issues, couldn't return your phone without incurring costs, don't want to put on a bumper or case and either completed troubleshooting or no longer own the phone) can opt for the payout and file their claim at the website linked below. Of course, assuming you're not a stickler for that skin-to-metal and glass feel the case is probably the better deal overall, but as long as this issue is finally dead and buried we can probably all walk away happy.Update: Turns out it doesn't matter if you scored yourself a free bumper or not, so long as you don't actually use it you can still register for your share of the settlement. So, if you took the consolation prize offered at the time, but have grown to hate it, now's your chance to make $15.
Samsung may cough up millions over kaput TVs
A class action lawsuit filed by owners of faulty Sammy TVs has finally reached a settlement. The manufacturer has promised to foot the bill for new repairs, reimburse for previous repairs and hand out up to $300 to customers who no longer possess their broken TVs but can prove they once did. The fault can affects any of the models listed above -- possibly up to seven million sets in total -- and centers on an errant capacitor in the power circuit that stops the TV turning on, makes it slow to turn on, produces a "clicking sound" or makes it cycle on and off. If you think you're affected then check the source link for details on what to do next. Curious to know how much the lawyers got? A cool half-million for their troubles, which means they'll be upgrading to OLED.Update: A Samsung spokesperson offered up the following response, Approximately 1 percent of Samsung televisions sold in the U.S. from 2006 to 2008 have experienced some performance issues caused by a component called a capacitor. Since originally confirming this issue in early 2010, Samsung has voluntarily provided free repairs for U.S. customers with affected televisions. Recently, a nationwide class settlement covering all affected televisions in the U.S. was reached in Russell, et al. v. Samsung Electronics America, Inc., a lawsuit filed in the District Court of Oklahoma County in the U.S.
DOJ investigation yields fresh evidence against Google, Apple in antitrust lawsuit
Back in 2009, a small controversy began swirling around Google and Apple, amid allegations that the two companies had struck an informal agreement to not poach each other's employees. The Department of Justice launched an investigation into the matter in 2010, but details of the case were only made public for the first time yesterday. TechCrunch was the first to sift through the documents, and has uncovered some ostensibly incriminating evidence against not only Google and Apple, but Pixar, Lucasfilm, Adobe, Intel, and Intuit, as well. According to filings from the US District Court for the Northern District of California, these companies did indeed enter "no poach" agreements with each other, and agreed to refrain from engaging in bidding wars. The documents also suggest that they collectively sought to limit their employees' power to negotiate for higher salaries. Some of the most apparently damning evidence derives from archived e-mails, including one that Adobe CEO Bruce Chizen penned to Steve Jobs in May 2005. In the message, sent under the subject "Recruitment of Apple Employees," Adobe's SVP of human resources explains that "Bruce and Steve Jobs have an agreement that we are not to solicit ANY Apple employees, and vice versa." Pixar's Lori McAdams expressed similar sentiments in an internal e-mail from 2007, writing: "I just got off the phone with Danielle Lambert [of Apple], and we agreed that effective now, we'll follow a Gentleman's agreement with Apple that is similar to our Lucasfilm agreement." This would suggest, as the DOJ writes, that there's "strong evidence that the companies knew about the other express agreements, patterned their own agreements off of them, and operated them concurrently with the others to accomplish the same objective." The DOJ announced in September that it had reached settlements with the six implicated firms, but a class-action lawsuit is scheduled to get underway next week in San Jose.
Apple, Samsung, others sued over Carrier IQ scandal
While the tech world was buzzing last week about Carrier IQ, one group of lawyers was busy preparing a class action complaint. The complaint was filed in Federal Court in Wilmington, Delaware by three local law firms: Sianni & Straite of Wilmington, DE; Eichen Crutchlow Zaslow & McElroy of Edison, NJ; and Keefe Bartels of Red Bank, NJ. The complaint asserts that several wireless companies and cell phone manufacturers violated wiretap and computer fraud laws when they included Carrier IQ software on their phones. The suit names wireless carriers T-Mobile, AT&T and Sprint as well as mobile phone manufacturers HTC, Samsung, Motorola and Apple. The Carrier IQ controversy hit the internet last week when 25-year-old Trevor Eckhart posted a video of Carrier IQ in action. Carrier IQ is diagnostic software that's present on a variety of phones (including at least some editions of the iPhone, though Apple says it has pretty much eliminated Carrier IQ in iOS 5). Several wireless carriers use it to troubleshoot network or device problems. Eckhart detailed in several blog posts and a video how the software allegedly logs and transmits keyboard input, website URLs and other potentially sensitive information. The company denied allegations that it violates wiretap laws, but that has not stopped the lawsuits. With the US Senate asking questions about Carrier IQ and now several lawsuits, we are going to hear a lot more about this controversy before it is all ironed out. Until then, iPhone owners can rest easy. Even though Carrier IQ is present in iOS 5, the software is turned off and should be inert. Apple also said it recently stopped using Carrier IQ and promises it will remove any remaining traces of the software in a future update. [Via The Loop]
Apple reaches settlement in MagSafe class action suit, dodges fireball
Apple's MagSafe has been veritable boon to the clumsy, saving MacBooks from accidental drops since 2006. The magnetic solution, however, hasn't been exactly great when keeping those same notebooks spark free. Those who weren't able to convince a Genius to part ways with a replacement gratis should know that Cupertino has just settled a class-action relating to the original's propensity to fray. Provided they fill out the necessary paperwork, those who paid for replacements out of pocket will be reimbursed $79 within the first year of the computer's purchase, decreasing to $50 and $35 respectively in the years that follow. Claims can be submitted up to three years after the original purchase, or until March 21, 2012 -- whichever occurs first. And to those of you rocking the pre-2008 "L" shaped redesign, might we recommend some flame retardant socks?
Jagex levies a lawsuit against RuneScape botters
As RuneScape staggers under the assault of thousands of bots, Jagex is pulling out a pair of big guns to meet the problem head-on. The first weapon was yesterday's "Bot-Nuking Day," in which a patch was released that was supposed to deal with 98% of the botting in the game. The second is an official email sent to suspected botters threatening them with a class-action lawsuit if they don't desist. In the email, Jagex calls out the suspected behavior and offers the player a "one-time amnesty lifeline" to shape up. These players will be placed on a watch list and will be monitored for any further botting action. If the player persists in cheating, then Jagex promises to not only remove their account permanently but to include the player in a mass lawsuit. "If you ignore our offer and instead continue use botting software, we reserve our rights to pursue statutory damages against you for between $200 to $2,500 per act of past, present, and/or future botting," the letter states. A Jagex mod on the RuneScape forums confirmed that these emails are real.
New website provides online opt-out services for game EULAs
If you're like most of us, you don't read the giant wall o' legalese that serves as a speed bump on the way to your favorite virtual world. A group of Redditors has, though, and has set up a new website designed to assist gamers in opting out of the clause that prevents participation in potential class action lawsuits leveled against gaming service providers. Apparently opting out requires that a physical letter be mailed to the gaming company in question, and GamersOptOut.com purports to do the tedious work for you (either for free or for a voluntary donation). The catch is that you'll need to provide personal information, including your name, address, and game account name. The website's creators page lists the online handles (as well as Xbox Live, PSN, and Twitter identities) of those responsible, but given the anonymous nature of the site and the privacy concerns raised by providing your personal info, we suggest you proceed with caution. Currently the website features an opt-out form for Sony's PlayStation network and Electronic Arts' new Origin digital delivery service.
Former QA tester files litigation against Take-Two, seeks class-action suit
Ex-Take-Two Interactive employee Aaron Martinez believes he was mistreated while employed by the publisher, and he's suing. In a notice sent to other QA employees, the former Visual Concepts (currently known as 2K Sports) quality assurance tester claims "Take-Two Quality Assurance Testers were not paid for all hours worked, were not provided required off duty meal and rest breaks, and were not paid all wages due at the time of termination." Resultantly, he's trying to gather other employees/ex-employees together in a class action suit. For its part, Take-Two denies all claims, but the presiding court in California has yet to determine much about potential future legal actions. When we spoke with Martinez's lawyer, Michael Righetti, earlier today, he explained that his client has filed a punitive class action suit, and that the letter popping up online (seen in part above) was sent out last week as an act of compromise between Martinez and Take-Two, as well as to notify other employees of the suit. Martinez was employed by Visual Concepts/Take-Two beginning in December of 2006, and it is unclear when his time with the studio ended. Bizarrely, in order to solicit contact information of other employees at Take-Two during Martinez's time of employment, the letter had to be sent by a third party working as an intermediary. Those receiving the letter have until Sept. 25 to opt out of having their information released, at which time their contact information will otherwise be given to the complainant's legal counsel. The original complaint was filed by Martinez way back in June of 2010, and given the snail's pace at which the suit has proceeded thus far, we don't expect to hear much more anytime soon. With all that extra time, however, we suggest you pore over the latest version of the filing, in the gallery below.%Gallery-132200%
Apple forced to cough up cash over iPhone location tracking in South Korea
You probably thought all the drama surrounding the iPhone location tracking fiasco was over. Oh, how wrong you were. In fact, the controversy seems ripe for a resurgence after a Korean court ordered that country's Apple arm to pay 1 million won (about $946) to Kim Hyung-suk. The payment was awarded last month, but now Kim's law firm is prepping a class action suit that could put further pressure on the Cupertino crew -- especially in the home of Samsung. This could just be the first in a series of pay outs, as even American courts may look to the decision when considering the fate of other plaintiffs looking to ring a few bucks out of iDevice purveyors. Hit up the source link for a few more details and a host of non sequiturs. [Thanks, Wesley]
SOE games down until Friday at the earliest, class action suit launched, Anonymous denies involvement [Updated]
The latest news in the Sony Online Entertainment debacle finds the besieged MMORPG maker turning to outside sources for help. According to MSNBC, SOE has hired security experts from Data Forte, Guidance Software, and Robert Half International to assist in plugging the holes in its IT infrastructure. Legal issues are waiting in the wings as well, and Tuesday brought the first hint of a proposed class-action suit. McPhadden Samac Tuovi LLP is preparing a $1.05 billion suit on behalf of a 21-year old PlayStation customer from Mississauga, Ontario. In other related news, SOE's Taina Rodriguez told the San Diego Union-Tribune that the company's game services will remain offline through Friday and possibly longer. [Update: In its most recent update, SOE commented further on the delay between the attacks and SOE's becoming aware of them, noting that "Essentially the perpetrators used sophisticated means not only to access the data, but also to cover their tracks. We committed to continue the investigation and in doing so, uncovered further information that we did not have when we initially believed the data was not stolen." Meanwhile, our sister publication Joystiq is among news agencies reporting that SOE has suggested to Congress that Anonymous is responsible for the attacks. Anonymous has denied involvement.]
Steve Jobs ordered to provide antitrust deposition
There are some days when it feels like Steve Jobs is the only person who works at Apple, judging by the number of times his name is cited when anyone has a complaint against the company. Now, a US judge has ordered him to answer questions relating to monopolistic behavior over the iPod and the iTunes Store back in 2004. Then, Apple made changes to the iPod software which disrupted RealNetwork's Harmony software, designed to allow songs purchased from the RealNetworks online store to be transferred to the iPod. Thomas Slattery, who filed the class action suit against Apple in 2005, said this violated antitrust and unfair competition laws. At worst, lawyers can force Steve Jobs to spend two hours answering questions for a deposition on the matter, although Apple lawyers are pushing to have the whole case dismissed next month -- parts of it have already been dismissed. Today, you can put music downloaded or ripped from just about anywhere on your iPod, iPhone or iPad via iTunes, and music tracks sold in the iTunes Store no longer come with DRM. "The court finds that Jobs has unique, non-repetitive, firsthand knowledge about the issues at the center of the dispute over RealNetworks software," said magistrate Judge Howard R. Lloyd in San Jose, California. Like I said, some days Steve Jobs is the only person who's ever worked at Apple. [Via Macstories]
Overheating iPad suit dismissed
Shortly after the first iPad shipped last April, there were some allegations from users that the device overheated quickly in warm weather or direct sunlight. By July of 2010, three disgruntled iPad owners -- John Browning, Jacob Balthazar and Claudia Keller -- had filed a class-action lawsuit against Apple. Due to the alleged shut down problem from overheating, the trio stated that they felt that they had been taken in by Apple marketing claims that said that "reading on iPad is just like reading a book." Since books never overheat and shut down, the group accused Apple of fraud, deceptive advertising, and violating State of California consumer protection laws by producing, advertising and selling defective tablets. Last Thursday, US District Court Judge Jeremy Fogel dismissed the lawsuit, saying that the trio's charges were "inadequate" and that they should have cited specific advertising where the claims of "reading on iPad is just like reading a book" were made. He's given the group 30 days to file an amended complaint with the information he's requested. I don't know about you, but I have never thought that reading on an iPad is like reading a book. I don't have to charge a book, I don't have to turn a book on, and a book can't do other things (like play music in the background) while I'm reading it. Have you ever had your iPad overheat and shut down? If you have, let us know in the comments. [via The Mac Observer]
Lawsuit pending over iPhone 3G's iOS 4 performance issues
By now it's no secret that the iPhone 3G's performance suffered tremendously following the iOS 4 update. Soon after widespread reports of stuttering, freezing, and crashing, Apple said it would "look into" the problem. A month went by with no relief for iPhone 3G performance issues, but Steve Jobs himself promised a software update was coming "soon" -- and "soon" turned out to be a couple weeks later. With the release of iOS 4.1, the iPhone 3G's performance issues under iOS 4 finally disappeared. Those two months or so were hell for iPhone 3G owners, but reports (and our own personal experiences) indicate that the 4.1 update resolved most, if not all performance issues. That's not good enough for California resident Bianca Wofford, however, who is filing a class action lawsuit against Apple over the iPhone 3G's performance. Her claim? "In essence, Apple knowingly and intentionally released what it called a system software 'upgrade' that, in fact, made hundreds of thousands of the Third Generation iPhones (sic) that were exclusively tethered to AT&T data plans 'useless' for their intended purpose." Let's ignore for the moment the lawsuit's issue with terminology (the iPhone 3G is the second-generation iPhone) and concentrate instead on its core claim. Wofford's lawsuit alleges that Apple knowingly and intentionally released an OS update that would render the iPhone 3G and 3GS "useless" in order to pump up sales of the new iPhone 4. That particular theory got thrown around quite a bit on the internet during the early weeks of the iPhone 3G under iOS 4 debacle, but does the claim hold up? Well, maybe... but only if you think Apple's "evil geniuses" have intellects comparable to Wile E. Coyote's. For more juicy bits from the law brief itself (hat tip to Wired), grab your tinfoil and click "Read More."
Zynga hit with class action lawsuit over alleged FarmVille privacy leaks
We're not sure why people place so much value on their own privacy -- after all, we spend our days pouring out our hearts on this here public website -- but apparently, it's enough to warrant a class action lawsuit over Zynga's alleged leaks of Facebook users' private info. According to a press release from law firm Edelson McGuire, the suit, filed in a San Francisco federal court by St. Paul, Minn. resident Nancy Graf, seeks "monetary relief for those whose data was wrongly shared, and injunctive relief to prevent continued privacy abuses." No specific amount was mentioned regarding the extent of the aforementioned "monetary relief," but seeing as how the announcement claims the leaks affected 218 million Facebook users, we're guessing the damages sought will be ... significant.
Webcam-spying school district settles out of court, FBI declines to press charges
Looks like the Lower Merion School District will be paying off kids who got zinged by its laptop tracking program -- to the tune of some $610,000. As you might recall, there was quite a bit of hubbub earlier this year when students discovered that their school issued computers tended to activate their webcams and shoot the photos back to administrators. Apparently the FBI has decided not to bring any charges in the case after all, and the various families of the students settled with the school district out of court. And yes, the schools have discontinued the tracking program.
