Slashdot Mirror

Two plaintiffs and a known issue reported widely on the Internet is enough. Two plaintiffs, but the class would have more members than that.

Both tried to contact Google under warranty:

Dr. Weeks contacted Google on March 2, 2017 to report her microphone failure and
seek assistance. A Google representative tried to troubleshoot the problems, but was unable to fix her
phone. The Google representative acknowledged the phone was defective and admitted to Dr. Weeks
that Google was aware of the problems.
17. Dr. Weeks asked Google for her money back or for a new, non-defective replacement.
Google refused.
18. As a result of the microphone defect and Google’s failure to provide warranty service,
Dr. Weeks no longer uses her Pixel and instead uses a replacement phone.

Mr. Anbar contacted Google on January 23, 2018. Google refused to refund Mr.
Anbar’s money or replace his phone with a non-defective model, and instead referred him to
uBreakiFix—Google’s designated third-party repair provider—for paid repairs. After learning the
repairs would cost as much as a brand new device, Mr. Anbar bought a replacement phone.

Or just Read the filing yourself.

Reading the settlement agreement provides the following disbursement

As further described in this Agreement, the Settlement Fund shall be used by the Settlement Administrator to pay for:
(a) all reasonable Administrative Expenses;
(b) the Taxes described in Sections 3;
(c) Service Payments award by the Court, as described in Section 11;
(d) attorneys’ fees and costs approved by the Court, as described in Section 12;
(e) Credit Services as described in Section 4;
(f) Alternative Compensation as described in Section 5;
(g)Out-of-Pocket Costs as described in Section 6.

So the fund also covers taxes and administrative expenses, such as putting up a website where class members can go to register to get their money.

With the entire history of Microsoft, RICO applies, because you can point out continual willful violations of the law for profit and flouting courts, plus tax evasion, etc.

From the above link:

So people on the Internet use "RICO" to sound tough. Do lawyers overuse it too?

Oh hell yes. And judges hate it. It's overcomplicated and most of the time it adds nothing to the case.

It's so overused — especially by crazy pro se plaintiffs — and so needless that a lot of federal judges have special RICO orders they issue in RICO cases demanding that the plaintiff explain, in painful detail, why they think they have a RICO claim. Like this one, for instance. Judges issue them automatically as soon as a RICO case hits their docket to gather information to dismiss the case because it's not fucking RICO you idiot.

Back to your nonsense though...

You must not be a bright lawyer if you can't piece shit together like this.

I never said I'm a lawyer.

If it was so easy to piece all of this together under RICO... you'd think someone, somewhere who has been injured by Microsoft due to racketeering would be able to find a bright lawyer who would bring a successful civil suit against them under RICO.

I'm seeing a settlement from a MS & Best Buy as defendants suit regarding unclear terms regarding MSN service from 99-04 which started out with a claim of RICO... yet still no legal findings to support an assertion under RICO yet, odd that?

I wonder what the lawyers & courts who have made such claims over the years kept failing? Not enough money? Surely there is a Peter Thiel who could be convinced to bankroll such a case... if they thought there was a case... right?

There's also the effect of water absorption causing corrosion to metal parts, and promoting water absorption in certain plastic fuel tanks. The latter has resulted in a lawsuit with motorcycle manufacturer Ducati, where they agreed to replace the tanks that were swelling and in some cases, rupturing due to water absorption. This only happened in the US, after E-10 fuel became popular. Regular octane does not absorb water.

My Ducati's past warranty, so the tank replacement offer doesn't cover me, once my tank swells or ruptures, I'm hosed.

It appears that the attorney's at Girard Gibb's group are gearing up to file a class action suit against EA / SecuROM. Kind of blows a hole in the only .2% of a problem with DRM.

http://www.girardgibbs.com/Securom.asp?_kk=securom&_kt=da55bb6d-29cf-4c4d-bbac-e9bc8fff6b6a&gclid=CI385_3bqZYCFQOjFQodZwn6xw

I take it back they already got sued.

http://www.courthousenews.com/2008/09/23/Spore.pdf

It appears that the attorney's at Girard Gibb's group are gearing up to file a class action suit against EA / SecuROM. Kind of blows a hole in the only .2% of a problem with DRM.

http://www.girardgibbs.com/Securom.asp?_kk=securom&_kt=da55bb6d-29cf-4c4d-bbac-e9bc8fff6b6a&gclid=CI385_3bqZYCFQOjFQodZwn6xw

Read up on the Intel P4 class action lawsuit - all those misleading commercials about the P4's enhanced performance, when, clock-for-clock, it lagged the P3.

Kind of like the "Vista Capable" mess.

This lawsuit alleges that Intel released the Pentium 4 prematurely, and that Intel and HP marketed the Pentium 4 to create the impression that the Pentium 4 outperformed the latest Pentium III, when they knew it did not. The lawsuit further alleges that Intel and HP exploited consumers reasonable expectation that the Pentium 4 would outperform the cheaper Pentium III by charging premium prices for the Pentium 4.

It all seemed innocent enough when checking out at buy.com. "Are you interested in getting $25 cash back on this purchase?" "Well yeah." But, by clicking "yes", you aren't answering that question. Then the welcome email shows up to tell you about wonderful discount programs your membership entitles you to. Surprise! You just signed up for a membership which has a monthly membership fee. "But they didn't even ask for a credit card?" Surprise again! buy.com supplies them with the one you just used to make a purchase. Screwed? Only if you don't realize something is fishy and go to the GreatFun (front name for Trilegiant) website and start reading the fine-print about how to cancel your membership. You wouldn't know a thing until the charges started showing up on the card. So, I canceled my Great Fun membership. Trilegiant, the big credit-card scam company, pays buy.com for access to their customer's credit card numbers. Put another way, Buy.com helps them run their scam on it's own customers and then they split the money. Trilegiant has been sued by several states already and is being investigated for class action law suits. Apparently, Trilegiant has its sticky fingers everywhere, including some large banks. And everywhere they go, they seem to be playing the same game with unwanted memberships. I'm very careful about who gets my card numbers and would have never given them the number without finding out why they wanted it. "Hey, are you offering a rebate or what?" The way buy.com is just handing over information to this third party under false pretense just has to be illegal. I'm sure there was a link to some fine-print somewhere before I clicked "yes" but damn, I trusted buy.com. When I give a website a credit-card number to make a purchase, I trust them to keep that number confidential and not to turn around and hand it to some banner ad scammers that happen to be also on their site. WTF? Am I naive? I say this should be stopped! I'm sure there are thousands that don't even notice for months if ever. Good luck getting your money back. Anyone have similar experiences or ideas on how to shut these scumbags down?

The webpage referenced in this article ( http://www.girardgibbs.com/ipodad.html ) looks to be dead now. Anyone know which rock the bottom feeder lawyers put that page under now?