Slashdot Mirror
AOL Settles Class Action Suit Over Client Software
An anonymous reader sent in news that AOL is settling a class action suit over their AOL 5.0 software, which usurped people's dial-up networking settings when installed. There's a website for the suit and a
news article about the settlement. Of course, you have to admit you use AOL.
I hate AOL as much as the next guy, but there is no way it screwed up dial up settings as much as Netzero did.
"The United States has no right, no desire, and no intention to impose our form of government on anyone else." - Bush 05
I'm torn about AOL. I used to want their complete destruction. But now I want to see them reinstate Netscape in the browser market, and then I want their complete destruction.
Jon: Hi everybody. My name is Jon and I use AOL.
Everybody: Hi Jon!
--------
Bleah! Heh heh heh... BLEAH BLEAH!!! Ha ha ha ha...
It's about time big companies realize that they can't just take over someone's system because their software is installed. It's not just AOL; programs like Realplayer and Quicktime do this also. Hopefully this settlement will discourage this type of behaviour in the future.
Settlement 15.5 Million
Amount to consumers - 8.7 million
the rest goes to lawyers!
Almost half- goes to lawyers the rest get split up between everyone who claims. So fill out your claim form and sit by the mail box waiting on your check for $1.00. But don't lose the check stub! You've got to pay taxes on that money next April.
This kind of crap just burns me up. AOL throws 15 mil at a problem (I guess they skip sending free CD tins for like a day)- a few lawyers make a killing and everybody else gets jack.
Real victory for the consumer here. And did the lawyer balk at settling? Of course not- they just hit the powerball and won 7 million.
.
It's hard to believe that's how Micronians are made. Why don't we see it right now by having you both kiss one another?
Hello Jon
"The United States has no right, no desire, and no intention to impose our form of government on anyone else." - Bush 05
We need to see more of these kind of lawsuits IMHO, if major software companies can be held accountable for glitches like this then we are a step closer to having better software produced. Support your local class action lawsuit.
Of course I've never personally used AOL, although I've had similar problems with lots of other software, anything from Microsoft for example. I wonder, could the subject of a new similar lawsuit be the many instances of covertly installed spyware along with other software? Hmm.
__ No registration required to read this message. They did it in the Matrix.
Don't worry you didn't lose anything.
When they divvy up the 8 mil that goes to the people who actually were harmed it will break down to a miniscule sum. Noone will be getting a check for a thousand dollars.
Then they have to claim that little bit on their taxes and Uncle Sam takes a bite. So really by the time you would have filled out the paperwork and payed postage to mail in a claim you would have been losing money.
.
It's hard to believe that's how Micronians are made. Why don't we see it right now by having you both kiss one another?
Yes, the insurance company is probably the one who had to shell out the money.
But that's not the point, the effect is still there. More importantly the insurance company will likely have to raise their rates in order to support the payment - effectively costing the companies who carry this kind of insurance more. This translates to the right general effect, although admittedly indirectly.
__ No registration required to read this message. They did it in the Matrix.
From the earlier article:
"The suit seeks damages of up to $1,000 for each of the 8 million consumers estimated to have installed the software."
From the later article:
"America Online has agreed to pay $15.5 million... Under the plan, consumers would be paid about $8.1 million, with the rest going mostly to the attorneys."
That's about $10 per consumer. Looks like two orders of magnititude were lost in the shuffle. Maybe the plaintiffs should consider a class action lawsuit against their own counsel?
They said in the article that the maximum payoff was $250, so don't worry about the $1000 that you're getting ready to poke yourself in the eye about...
__ No registration required to read this message. They did it in the Matrix.
The settlement page indicates that you have to prove damages by producing a receipt showing that your computer was screwed up / unstable / unable to dial any other isp / etc. and you had to have it fixed. What money does a person get if they fix it themselves, or their granddaughter comes over and makes it all better?
and who had to do dialup support back when this came out, and had customers bitching and moaning at US because they were dumb enough to pop a CD someone mailed them into their computer... as always, there will be nothing.
I swear, we should have kept track of the hours spent, and then billed AOL or something.
Get off my launchpad!
were used to make AOL's drink coasters?
--Blair
Comment removed based on user account deletion
Yes, I used AOL at that time, because it was the only service in the area I was living in that would allow me access. The only connection available was dial up, as this was rural area. Did the connect to AOL work? Yes, but it also prevented me from dialing into my work and connecting to the local system there.
I guess it doesn't matter at this point. This suit only allows for people who willingly used the AOL service, yet did not know anything was wrong with their system. Funny how the only people who would be able to know something was wrong are the same persons being excluded (because they are able to provide their own solution).
You keep going until you die..."Me".
$15M suit. $8M after lawyers fees. Maximum take per customer that files is $250 (DOLLARS). This seems like the kind of lawsuit that serves no purpose whatsoever. Software modifies your computer, thats all there is to it. From what I gather, there's nothing malicious going on by AOL, they just got users that complained that the aol software:
-made itself default on the system. netscape tries todo this, hell even mozilla does this.
-makes computers more instable. last i knew, AOL runs on windows. if you install ANYTHING, ittl make windows less stable. thats part of the game.
-didnt allow users to connect to remote ISP's. this sounds like a DUN/RAS problem. so, readd the other ISP.
I'm probably oversimplifying the small details, but all in all, this is plain stupid.
People arent going to be taken seriously when real problems occur if people sue for this kind of stuff.
This translates to the right general effect
I really don't understand what you mean. If AOL gets screwed and they pass it off on the insurance co, and the insurance co passes it back by raising rates, do you think that AOL is the one getting screwed? Absolutly not. They are just going to raise thier prices, thus passing it back to the consumer.
Everyone seems to cheer when a big company gets screwed somehow, but I hate to see it personally. Every single time it's the consumer who ends up paying for it. It's just like when someone wins a $50 million dollar medical malpractice suit against a hospial. Everyone says "yeah, get 'em they are way over paid anyway". Is the hostpial really getting screwed? No, they just raise thier rates to pay for it. Who does that affect? The insurance co's. What do they do? Raise thier rates. Who does that affect? Usually our employers. What do they do? Stop paying for heath insurace for employees. So who got screwed by the malpractice suit? Us. Same thing here, who gets screwed by AOL paying out all kinds of cash? AOL customers, who are not the ones doing anything wrong. (nessisarily)
Sigs are out of style, so I'm not going to use one...oh wait..
Then what other Dialup settings would it 'usurp?'
I work at a ISP as a Tech support rep, the isp I work for is a 56k provider, any one that has Windows 95, 98 or ME, will have problems with AOL software 5 and version 4. This is what you do to fix it: 1. R&R Dial up Networking (DUN) Say no to version conflicts (in the control panel go to add remove programs) 2. R&R TCPIP and remove all AOL clients installed in your "Network" in the control panel. Make sure when you are done you have Client For Microsoft Networks, Dial Up Adapter and TCPIP. I normally reinstall everything But Dial Up adapter. Save and it will ask you for your windows cd or cabs, supply them and MAKE SURE YOU SAY "NO" to all version conflicts. It will ask to reboot say "No" 3. GO into msconfig and remove AOL from the startup of your computer!! Press yes and reboot! Now you should be all set! No more curruption. THIS IS THE ONLY WAY TO CLEAN YOUR SYSTEM! And if this doesnt work you have alot of registry hacks to do... P.S. DO NOT OPEN AOL AGAIN or it will recurrupt your system! :)
keanmarine.com
Ok your point is well made. Yes, eventually the costs are either eating into the profit margin or paid by the consumer. But I think you're carrying the analogy too far, health care is a different issue with more difficult implications.
If the effect is that consumers are paying a little more for "better" software then maybe it's worth it. How else are we going to get companies to write software that doesn't suck? I'm open to other ideas..
__ No registration required to read this message. They did it in the Matrix.
"Yes, well, we were planning on increasing our price by $2 per month starting in July, so in lieu of sending out checks we'll only charge everyone $1 more for the month of July. From August on we will be charging the planned $2 increase."
Except using AOL!
On the other hand, without any way to a company responsible for their incompetence, they will continue to be incompetent and then the consumers definately don't benefit.
There does need to be a balance...
30% of the settlement, or an equal share, which ever is less.
That's right up there with "Heads, I win. Tails, you lose."
Exactly!
__ No registration required to read this message. They did it in the Matrix.
Your computer isn't worth all that much, neither is the software on it.
AOL didnt't really harm them.
While their practices may be disgusting, how much in damages are you looking to exact?
The only thing that this does is put a bunch of AOL employees in the unemployment category.
I use it when I'm on the road. It might be perceived as a crappy client, but the fact is its wonderful for road warriors. AOL has dial up connections just about anywhere in the world and once you're logged in, you can minimize AOL and run with any browser you like.
AOL provides a valuable service. How would you feel if AOL types were flooding onto certain open source related IRC networks, or other places with generally high quality.
AOL provides idiots a sandbox to play in, and keeps them away from intelligent people. For this, we need to thank them.
I've had enough abrasive sigs. Kittens are cute and fuzzy.
She had one of the best cases against AOL I've heard of. Her kids can't be held to the waiver of liability and AOL did prevent her from connecting to anyone else than AOL. She suffered damage to her property and an inability to perform her work, plus she would have to have her PC repaired, possibly by an expensive house call (mine $ure are for Win98). All of this adds up to tangible losses caused by a company that isn't protected by a waiver of liability.
I told her there was a class action already underway, and that she was basically hosed until a tech can get to her machine.
Good thing she was on the research side, rather than the clinical side...
Veteran, Bermuda Triangle Expeditionary Force, 1992-1951
. .
Okay, it's 5am and I may not be 100% :)
What strikes me is that this settlement is irrelevant :
From discussion above, (Settlement - Legal Fees) / Complainants does not amount to a whole hill of beans for any individual, let alone even real compensation for the time and effort involved in fixing the settings which were hijacked. I agree also that the way that the complainants have to get a "receipt" for their troubles from another ISP is bumkum.
Okay, that notwithstanding, none of this has any benefit to the consuer _at large_ because it was a settlement between private parties.
If it had been a _ruling_ and some case law / precedent were set, then other companies planning this might have to take note and stop hijacking people's configurations.
Maybe I'm missing something about US law, but this strikes me as just a payoff to a few lawyers and a bunch of complainants who bothered to do their (pretty ridiculous) paperwork. If it's just a private settlement, there's nothing to say it will discourage anyone from using the same unplesant practises in future.
Oh well, since when did "public good" pay anyone's bills . . . .
They're probably going to do this at some point, it's just a matter of time. Initially they chose the benefits of making it all one app for sharing data more easily between components. But now the complications incurred by having to support every app's preferences and keyboard shortcuts will probably result is us seeing a stripped down browser (mozilla/browser) as well as autonomous mail/news and chat clients post 1.0.
It just takes picking a different chrome file to load when starting the app. All it will really amount to is the same apps just running in separate processes - they all need the same libraries. So they'll end up sharing pages and using a similar amount of ram separated as when they were joined.
I'm trying to remember when it began. Which version of Windows was it that detected the presence of OS/2 on the hard drive and offered to remove it "to free up disk space?"
I'm sick to death of competitive installations. When I put my mouse over an "upgrade software now" button I feel like I'm playing Russian roulette and am just about to pull the trigger.
What are the chances that I'm going to disable something else I use? Yes, there's a huge grey area: sometimes the effect is innocently (bad SQA). Sometimes it's semi-intentional, the software equivalent of the car rental clerk saying "sign here" over a page of 50%-gray type on a 33%-grey background. You know, what does this gobbledegook about 'making the the default application for opening your media files' mean? I guess I'll just push the return key and take the default....
Sometimes I think it's intentional. Hey, we're just sharp, competitive businessmen, kicking competitors in the groin is what made this country great...
I think needs at the very least to be a "truth-in-installation" law. The installer should disclose clearly, in plain language, EVERYTHING it's going to do in terms that are meaningful to the consumer. ("Increase stability, and, oh, yes, enforce the license agreement by technical means and, by the way, send information to us over the Internet which, according to our just-changed privacy policy we can share with our trusted partners...)
"How to Do Nothing," kids activities, back in print!
A tech actually told the latter line about Mozilla when I asked how I could access my mail account with a user name like "Erris@mycoputer". I ended up using fetchmail to get around the stupid set up, and the blocked incomming port 25, but the tech did NOT help me.
AOL has to go to all of these lenghts because M$ will break their client if they do not. That fact makes this whole lawsuit a bunch of BULLSHIT. TWO PIECES OF SOFTWARE DID NOT WORK TOGETHER. ONE OF THEM REFUSES TO WORK WITH SOFTWARE FROM MANY OTHER COMPANIES, AND OLDER VERSIONS OF THEIR OWN SOFTWARE. WHICH PIECE OF SOFTWARE DO YOU THINK WAS AT FAULT IN THIS CASE?
Yes, I'm an AOL user. I've had an account for freaking ever. I access it through AOL anywhere with Mozilla on any computer with a browser. My OS preference is Debian. There is much AOL could do better, but there's not much they can do about their M$ client software.
DMCA, Hollings, Palladium. What might have sounded like paranoia is now common sense.
How about a lawsuit against M$ for letting it happen? It's their googey system that boned everyone. They built a userless OS with a flimsy registry that any software can stick any old binary crap into but will break your computer. They did it so they could force MSN, AOL used the exact same mechanisms. The whole Hell Desk thing is a direct result of this kind of intentional push. Is is AOL's fault M$ spagetti coded everything to break if you want an ISP that is not M$?
Look at the numbers. Are one in ten techs at your ISP on standby for Apple calls? How about Linux? No? How about the number of acutal calls? Apple, Linux, BSD, Solaris, not giving you problems? Hmmmmm, that's a wide spectrum of users that don't have this and other kinds of problems. What do the majority of calls have in common? NEXT!
DMCA, Hollings, Palladium. What might have sounded like paranoia is now common sense.
Is is AOL's fault M$ spagetti coded everything to break if you want an ISP that is not M$?
Did you read the article? DUN (Microsoft's Dial Up Networking applet) isn't the problem, here.
DUN works fine with non-MS ISPs. Other ISPs are not on trial here for screwing up settings with their broken proprietary software.
Or is your idea of a real ISP someone who forces you to install a proprietary dialer and other software that tracks your usage and tries to market to you, and also uses proprietary protocols for mail, etc.?
This isn't talk radio. Get a clue, or at least read the article, before you spew. It is definitely AOL's fault, not only for releasing buggy code, but for denying that it was a problem for days and weeks afterwords, after it became public knowledge and we began warning our customers. You would be all over Microsoft if they did this; why are you defending AOL?
Look at the numbers. Are one in ten techs at your ISP on standby for Apple calls? How about Linux? No? How about the number of acutal calls?
*nix installs, with the exception of OSX, are not sufficiently end-user-friendly enough for us to do much troubleshooting for customers. Just think of where all your RPMs might be, whether your permissions are set properly, etc. Oh, yah, and do you think maybe the reason that a huge number of our calls are for MS Windows boxes is because almost all of our end users use MS Windows, anyway? Mac users would know to delete and rebuild if things get "corrupted" (they "corrupt" more often than our MS users) and *nix users either know how to administer their systems or have admins on staff.
Get off my launchpad!
Eh? I am over M$. Their crap banished to a network blind computer in the corner of my room that talks to cameras and a scanner. A real OS is used on the same machine to transfer files off it.
The reason that is so is because I got sick of rebuilding broken M$ garbage. M$ built a flimsy OS so that it would easier to replace than fix. Face it, most people who actually use and rely on M$ junk have to rebuild their computer once every two months or so, or it gets all slow and broken. If AOL's stuff broke M$ it's M$'s fault, period. If M$ had a reasonable OS it would not be broken that way, all the time. If every M$ software maker was held to this standard, they would all be hit, especially M$. Show me one Win95 or 98 box that has been used that has not required a rebuild. Don't tell me w2k is any better, I'm forced to use that buggy junk at work.
Oh, yah, and do you think maybe the reason that a huge number of our calls are for MS Windows boxes is because almost all of our end users use MS Windows, anyway?
I think 10% of your users have macs, and at leat 7% use Linux. If 1 in 6 of your calls are not about mac or linux problems, you can be sure that what people say about M$ being crap is true.
DMCA, Hollings, Palladium. What might have sounded like paranoia is now common sense.