Slashdot Mirror
Register.com Loses Class action Lawsuit
Anonymous Blowhard writes "I found out today I am a member of a class that just beat register.com in New York Supreme Court!! The suit was filed by Michael Zurakov because register.com pointed his newly registered domain(s) to 'coming soon' web pages. Mr. Zurakov receives $12,500 for the harm caused by register.com while members of the class can look forward to a settlement of $5 off their next domain renewals. Register.com will also pay 'reasonable Class Counsel attorneys'
fees and costs in an amount not to exceed $642,500.00, subject to Court approval.' If you want to exclude yourself from the class, giving up any settlement and not being bound by its terms, you have to opt-out."
...and all I got was a $5 off coupon.
$650,000 in court fees, huh? Guess we know who the lawyers were fighting for.
Isn't a Coming Soon page pretty common for most new domains?
Here's what I do: Bitty Browser & Andromeda
$12.5K for that? How was he harmed? He had tools to point it elsewhere.
I regged my first domain with them, when I didn't know any better, and quickly moved it to addresscreation when I saw the alternatives. Are there any advantages to paying the premium registration charge for rdc?
Understandable mistake, but that would be www.theregister.co.uk, I think.
Now I can sue apache for that horrible advertising page that informs me I've successfully installed the apache server and welcomes me to my new home in cyberspace.
slashdot, news for crazed liberal socialist zealots
What exactly is the harm in a coming soon website? Looks to me like its just more people trying to scam the American Taxpayer. How many times do I have to tell the slashdot crowd... GET A JOB!!
The register page was covered with WhenU pop-ups for other registars.
Desi Noise, Live!
You have to opt out to exclude yourself from a class action suit? - What a world!
Grundgesetz * 23. Mai 1949 - 30. November 2007 - http://www.vorratsdatenspeicherung.de/
Just stupid. I've got several sites registered on register.com. I don't see what is so offensive about having a Coming Soon page until it switches to your DNS. That's like 2 days?
What an idiot!
Now, he's costing them $600,000. Which ain't pocket change. I hope they can handle it. They've done pretty good. Customer service is okay. A little slow, but they answer their phones.
Such is the infinite Grace of Popeye.
wow, now you only need 4 more coupons and then what you have left is the average price of a DNS from a company that doesn't rip it's customers off.
Comment: Yes I realise the username 'fuckfuck101' makes me sound intelligent, no you cannot buy it from me.
He didn't win. It was a settlement. Register decided to settle, rather than fight this stupid lawsuit. Note: the lawyer made more money than anyone else in this stupid little charade.
Is it obvious that I'm not exactly impressed with this? Register initially pointed his domain to a "coming soon" page when he registered his domain, and they should have put that they would do this in their contract, fair enough. Is that worthy of a lawsuit? Hell no. Is that worthy of hundreds of thousands of dollars in "damages"? Hell no.
NY is different than most states because the title of their trial court is the "Supreme Court", which is what most people think is the title for the highest court in the state.
But this is the kind of stuff we here in the UK hear about Americans, if they trip over because they're drunk they sue their shoe companies, or the council who made the pavement.
This is a real turn-off, it portrays Americans in a really bad light, I know your corporates are all like this but do you the people need to be to?
Comment: Yes I realise the username 'fuckfuck101' makes me sound intelligent, no you cannot buy it from me.
I think that register.com wanted to offer a service, because maybe in their eyes a "coming soon" page is better than a 404 page. It would have been better (in my opinion) to just write them that you don't want to have this "service" than to suing them. But you can see this as you want...
".Sig Stealer" was here
You get $5 ... so who really won?
Lawyer gets : $642,500
Presumably all the company will do is add a clause to their terms and conditions that allows them to explicitly do this anyway.. But tying up every new attempt to use the technology in clauses and legalese is hardly going to free people to experiment...
---- The Open Source Record Label : : LOCARECORDS.COM
This really puts the icing on the cake, doesn't it?
If you could be told what you can see or read, then it follows that you could be told what to say or think - BoC
Class Members will also agree that they remain bound by the terms of Register.com's Services Agreement, as it is amended from time to time.
Yes! Let's agree to agree on things you never agreed on in the first place! Not that this is NOT worded in quite the same way as their current services agreement words it (which includes a 30 day period in which you can up and leave if they change the services agreement); it would seem that this class action settlement overrides such common sense provisions. Nasty!
The remedy seems worse than the disease.
SCO employee? Check out the bounty
The Justice System working for us...no doubt.
If you're so stupid you can't identify a "Free Parking" page, or read the FAQs, that doesn't entitle you to a retarded lawsuit does it?
I mean really...
clifgriffin > blog
Seems to me it would be a no-brainer to opt out of a $5 class settlement. Why waive all future claims against a measly $5??
Does everything include nothing?
Regiser.com has a good service (especially DNS service), but they started looking a little bit expensive.
Is there a cheaper alternative to Regiser.com which provide similar level of service (DNS & etc.).
I mean, come on now. I read a post a while back here from some guy defending lawyers... and it made some sense. But then you get this kind of nonsense, which is quite obviously a frivolous lawsuit -- and noone really gets anything but the damn lawyers involved...
And the lawyers wonder why we want the vast majority of them boiled in oil?
Oooohhhh Ahhhhhh my domain name pointed to a shitty "coming soon" page for two days!! The humanity!! I want to go bitch slap that guy.
...and all I got was a $5 off coupon.
Register.com today announced their fees are increasing by $5 for new domain registrations and renewals.
Want to improve your Karma? Instead of "Post Anonymously", try the "Post Humously" option.
This case was just a shakedown. To prevent it from happening again, members of the class can object to the attorney's fees awarded in the settlement.
See Sec. VII (C) of the linked document for reference.
RDC actually sends me coupons for more than $5 to entice me to keep using their service. This is pretty much the same thing. So they're effectively paying me nothing, paying the plaintiff $12.5K and paying the lawyers $650K.
I Object!
I used to work for Register.com. They sell domains to people that have less computer knowledge then your average AOL user. Once people have a clue about domains they tend to shift to other Registrars. Register.com domains are costly because of the support given. Guys that don't even realize what a domain is or how it is used tend to be the client base for RCOM. As for the issue with the coming soon page I think the fella was doing a money grab.
Try posting in english you 1d10t
I also received a PDF document with this case explained. I read the document and when my eyes hit the $5 coupon line, it all makes senses to me. People will get a $5 discount on the next renewel, which is a great commercial action by Register.com (they won't lose a customer for another year).
The fun, I never registered a Register.com domain.
Anybody else heard of this kind of customer-binding/spam actions by companies?
Daxy's Networking Blog
From the page:
... was the lawsuit submitted before they revised the SA? If that's the case then the fellow (and the rest of plaintiffs in this class action) does have point in his suit.
On or about March 6, 2001, Register.com revised its Services Agreement to expressly refer to the use of the Coming Soon Page.
Not sure
This Notice is not an admission by Register.com or a finding by the Court that the claims asserted by Plaintiff in this case are valid.
As usual. We'll pay but we don't admit we did anything wrong.
Personally I don't see what the big deal is. Every domain (except NSI ones in the early days) always had a notice.
Which is nice.
Wearing pants should always be optional.
Um yes, which is why I was pointing out the parent poster's mistake. Perhaps YOU didn't read THAT, as it's now been modded down to -1 Offtopic. Since I've been modded down once already the same way for pointing out his mistake, I obviously shouldn't have bothered. I didn't realise it was Offtopic to get confused about URLs, still less to be informative about the situation. [rolls eyes]
However, the article is published on register.com's own website, and I get a feeling that we're only getting one side of the story. Nowhere does it explain how he was possibly harmed by this redirecting. A quote on another site seems to point to something else going on -
Michael Zurakov, the lead plaintiff in the suit, which has yet to be certified as a class, claims it took him several months to stop his Web address -- Laborzionist.org -- from redirecting to the "Coming Soon" page.
No more details on why it took that long, but if it was the case that it took several months until he was actually able to use what he'd paid for then it might put a different slant on the story.
This was a 100% frivolous lawsuit. What next, will people sue ISP hosts because there are 404/etc pages where the person forgot to put a page?
This is like that frivolous McDonald's lawsuit, where someone hurt themself by spelling hot coffee on their own lap in their own car: thanks to lawyers lying in the courtroom, the company that sold the coffee (McDonald's) was made to pay for something they never did.
Good point, well presented... if anyone needs me I'll be out playing in the traffic. d'oh
It used to be that the "American Dream" was owning a home. Now, it seems, it is to be able to find something that bothers you ever so slightly and then try to sue someone for it. The "American Dream" is to hire lawyers to take your case and to win a few bucks. If you do it right, you can get several million and invest it and retire at the age of 30. If you screw it up, like Sienfeld's Kramer, then you just keep on trying until you get that million bucks. That is the "American Dream." Screw buying a house. With a million bucks I can buy a mansion!
"Time is long and life is short, so begin to live while you still can." -EV
It is a tiny minority of Americans that file stupid lawsuits.
Americans laugh at these idiots too.
Frequently, the media portrays the lawsuits as idiotic, but when you dig into the details and hear the other side it is not so idiotic. Case in point, the famous case of the old women suing McDonald's for the hot coffee spilled on her. Stupid lawsuit until you read the full story behind it. That McDonald's coffee was the hottest in the industry. That McDonald's coffee temperature was on the "knee of the curve" where a few degrees made the difference between a minor burn and a 3rd degree burn. The women received 3rd degree burns and had to go to a hospital. By pushing their coffee temperature to an extreme, well beyond industry practice, McDonald's created a hazard. The lawsuit is not so stupid in that context.
The case sited in this story does sound stupid, but I would like to hear the whole story before I judge.
I have never bothered to send out a protest letter before but when I received this email, I felt compelled to send a letter to the clerk of court telling them how rediculous the whole thing is....
Perhaps there is a way to sue the lawyers?
Synergies are basically awesome, and they're even better when you leverage them. -PA
Is that the author of the article freely admits to being a law whore. Imagine how greedy you need to be to join a class action suit over something as trivial as that.
-- Be careful what you say. Someone might remind you about it another day.
Of course we do. And I for one welcome our new.. er, in Soviet Russia... nope, that's not it. Screw the RIA... er.. SCO.. Microsoft.. hang on. Sorry - what was the article about again?
I could say the exact same thing about all the drunk English people screaming at their kids and each othere I saw when I went on vacation to Spain
And you'd have a good point, if the topic was drunk holidaymakers. It's not particularly relevant to this lawsuit, though.
Is it now not allowed to notice certain cultural trends? England really does have a lot of people who get drunk and cause trouble on holiday in Spain. America really does have more lawyers than the rest of the world put together. Occasionally one or the other of these observations might be relevant to a slashdot discussion.
(Possibly the parent was making a bad comparison - he thought he was jumping to an unfair conclusion and didn't realise he was seeing a symptom of something which is common knowledge througout Europe)
Not getting what we wanted and starting a war?
..."
Yeah, I hate living in a country that is prepared to fight to the death for the ideals it's own foundations are based upon. I hate how we oppose vicious dictators and are prepared to take it to the battlefield to stand up for our fellow human beings.
Oh, and: "...people screaming at their kids and each othere
Nice spelling yourself, mate.
Comment: Yes I realise the username 'fuckfuck101' makes me sound intelligent, no you cannot buy it from me.
That's what I'll be doing - here's the linked section:
C. IF YOU WANT TO OBJECT TO THE SETTLEMENT, BUT STILL BE A PART OF THE SETTLEMENT CLASS.
If you do not request exclusion from the Settlement Class, you may object to any aspect of the proposed Settlement, including the fairness of the settlement, the attorneys' fees and costs or the adequacy of Plaintiff or Class Counsel or Notice, by filing and serving a written objection. Your written objection must state the case name and number ((Zurakov v. Register.com, Case No. 01-600703), the grounds for your objection and your full name and address, and your objection must be filed with the Clerk of the Court, 60 Centre Street, New York, NY, 10007 with a copy to Counsel. SUCH OBJECTIONS MUST BE RECEIVED NO LATER THAN OCTOBER 14, 2003. If you mail an objection to the Settlement, then you bear the risk of any problems with the mails. Such objections will be considered at the Settlement Hearing (see section VIII below), at which you may appear if you wish.
What happened to the Opt In Class Action?
I think that would be a violation of your legal rights. So who's going door to door to see if anyone ever used register.com to allow them to opt out in case they wish to bring their own lawsuit?
The suit was entirely frivolous. The customers like the coffee that hot. Everyone knows the use caution around hot liquids: if you spill it yourself, it is your fault.
"You go get third degree burns on your dick because of some companies greed and tell me you don't think you need compensation. "
If you pour coffee on your dick, it is your own fault.
So if Macdonalds sold a drink that if you spilled it on yourself, it was lethal, you wouldn't see anything wrong in that? You're an idiot.
" The McDonalds lawsuit wasn't that frivolous - they were selling coffee at a much higher temperature than it is possible to drink it at to people in moving vehicles"
So? This is the way the customers like it. Complaints about the coffee went way up now that they have had to sell it cold.
"They had also consistently ignored the reports of people being seriously hurt by their coffee."
As they should have. It is not their fault if people ignore the typical cautions to be used around hot liquids.
"Sure, if you spill coffee on your lap you don't expect it to be pleasant, but you don't expect to get third degree burns requiring skin"
Hot means hot. Next time, don't spill coffee on yourself.
While the register 'coming soon' page is not professional and just downright nasty this guy is just going too far. At worst the page would only be attached to his site for 48 hours while the DNS got sorted. Id agree with him that having popups on a page I own is wrong and not at all professional, but to sue (and win) that amount of money just seems petty and vindictive.
There's a small article at law.com about it:
2 6
http://www.law.com/jsp/article.jsp?id=10510282390
Apparently he was unable to change it to direct it to his website for several months after registering it.
I suspect that register.com may have shot themselves in the foot by claiming that the contract did not explicitly give Mr Zurakov
exclusive control over the site. The judge did not agree, saying that if if it wasn't explicit in the contract 'to register' a site should give you more than just a listing in whois.
Register.com should have just admitted that something went wrong with their DNS assignment system and settled out of court. They probably could have gotten away with $5000 or so.
It's six of one and half a dozen of the other. You've got people deciding everything is anyone's fault but their own, and lawyers taking up every damn frivolous case. Which came first? If knew, I'd get myself a time machine and go back and slap some sense into the first fool who decided there was a market for suing or to sue someone not because they needed to but because they thought they'd make some quick cash. Sad thing is, I can't see the situation getting any better at all.
Under the terms of the S.1618 Murky bill, this isn't spam because what we do is something other than spam.
(Okay, it's not really spam, but that opt-out looked like all the other BS disclaimers that I get in my email.)
One line blog. I hear that they're called Twitters now.
That received the notice, I think the guy that filed the lawsuit is a dick. I'm sorry. Let me rephrase that I think the guy that filed the lawsuit is a DICK. A big floppy dick. How stupid is he? How hard would it have been for him to actually look into what he was purchasing? How much harm did them pointing his page back to their stuff hurt him if he wasn't even smart enough to know it was there? Meanwhile, I use register.com specifically for their webmail and spam blocking. I might get 1 spam a day and have never had a lost email. Their webmail is awesome. I'd kill to know what they are using for spam blocking. I know I sure as hell can't duplicate their system with my customers. I'm impressed enough with their service that I opt to pay them for it when I could set up my own webmail for free with any number of clients that I've done work for. They've never done me any wrong. I've been nothing but impressed with their products and their services for the past 3 years. The guy that filed this frivilous lawsuit should be ashamed of himself.
For every annoying gentoo user, are three even more annoying anti-gentoo crybabies. Take Yosh from #Gimp for example.
I've been poking around the Register.com site and can't find anything about the settlement or the opt out. Has anyone else found it yet?
There is nothing so silly as other peoples traditions, and nothing so sacred as our own.
"Go read the facts, quit spouting off at the mouth. God I hate people. http://www.vanfirm.com/mcdonalds-coffee-lawsuit.ht m"
That makes your case a lot worse, linking to an ambulance-chaser site. This firm is a reason why we need tort reform: these guys get rich lying in courtrooms to get people to pay $$$$ for incidents they are not to blame for.
Will someone please explain to me why anyone in their right mind would "cash in" this $5 renewal discount when they can switch to any of a number of other registrars and pay $25 less than what Register.com charges?
Register.com increased fees by $10 today as a result of a recent class action settlement.
"I don't think it's selfish, to eat defenseless shellfish." -NOFX
This is the case summary that can be found at Domains Magazine.
Pursuant to an online contract, plaintiff paid defendant $35 to register the domain name "Laborzionist.org" in his name for one year and defendant did so. Not stated in the contract is the fact that a domain name newly registered with register.com forwards users to a "Coming Soon" page that contains banner advertisements for register.com and other organizations.
A person who types the newly registered domain name into the Internet is brought to a page that reads, "Coming Soon! We recently registered our domain name at . . . register.com the first step on the web." There follows directly a list of so-called "Additional Services" and, further down on the page, various advertisements.
Looking at the page, it appears that these services are provided by the entity - the "we" - whose domain name forwarded the user to this page, although in fact they are provided by register.com. Similarly, it appears that the advertisements for register.com and for other companies are in some way endorsed by or, at the least, associated with the entity whose domain name forwarded the user to this page.
After plaintiff discovered that his newly registered domain name was pointing users to this "Coming Soon" page, he followed defendant's procedures for removing his registered domain name from the page, a process he asserts took several months.
Plaintiff alleges that he bargained for the right to exclusive use and control of the domain name "Laborzionist.org" and that defendant, by the deception of concealing in its website and not disclosing in the agreement that it intended to use the name, deprived him of this benefit by usurping the name and using it to direct those who typed in the domain name to defendant's own site, which contained advertising for defendant and others.
Thus, plaintiff claims that defendant breached the covenant of good faith and fair dealing implied in every contract by "act[ing] in a manner that, although not expressly forbidden by any contractual provision, would deprive the other party of the right to receive the benefits under their agreement"
How many lawyers does it take to grease a combine?
One, if you feed him in slowly.
>So if Macdonalds sold a drink that if you spilled it on yourself, it was lethal, you wouldn't see anything wrong in that?
Hey, why don't we use the Playskool of all drinks, Kool-Aid as an example. I mean, have you EVER heard of someone allergic to that? It makes an even better example for your side! Kool-aid is meant for ingestion, just like coffee.
That being said, some people have found alternate uses of it for hair colouring -- basically spilling a product meant for ingestion on their hair (And this is for real. Ever wondered how the secretary who has next to no money dyes her hair red, and smells like perfumy strawberries? Now you know). The question is, if it turns out that Kool-aid is safe for ingestion, but causes hair to fall out, and later, death, do I see something wrong with that?
FUCK NO. I challenge you to explain to me WHY I should feel bad about an obvious misuse of the product being dangerous to the user.
Now, the same thing with coffee. If nobody burned their mouth/esophagus with it (and, AFAIK, no such lawsuit was ever entered) then anything else is not a problem with me (Aside from proper use of the product -- perhaps a burned hand would make sense; however, it is exceedingly difficult to drink from your groin, and that would make no sense). What if that cup had been left beside the cat's drink? Sound McDonald's be sued because their product is lethal to small animals?
Again, a strong FUCK NO. Unintended uses/mistreatments of products with macabre consequences are not something you should have a right to compensation for.
Now, since you asked me a question and I answered, here's one for you:
If a chainsaw company sells a product that is lethal, and you hold the chainsaw chain to your chest and start it, you would see something wrong with that, right? I mean, husqvarna should have to put labels on the product "DO NOT START WITH CHAINSAW POINTED AT CHEST", right? Or at least make their chainsaws less lethal, say by using some form of new rubber chain invented by 3m? Even if that does change their product totally and makes it less cost effective for them to produce. No problems with that, right? As long as it saves one man from accidentally pointing the chainsaw at their heart and plunging in, no problems.
It's because of people like you my keyboards come with stickers saying "Studies have shown misuse of this product may cause injury". I'm just waiting for a Fisher Price toy to say that. That'd be fresh. Because, I'm sure of you stuck enough Weebles up your ass, you'd be in for some serious hurt. Let's sue Fisher Price for not making them large enough to prevent anal-insertion. Because, you never do know when a naked dumbass might just sit on one.
We need more natual selection in this world to weed out the true idiots, and also perhaps the bleeding heart liberals.
If you could be told what you can see or read, then it follows that you could be told what to say or think - BoC
IIRC, in Manchester they were stealing the flagstones, then suing the council after "tripping" up on the uneven surface.
I got an email the other day saying that I am part of the class that won the lawsuit. When I read the details I decided that I didn't want the $5... not because it's just a measly $5... but because the lawsuit is a joke.
--
"What do you want me to do? Whack a guy? Off a guy? Whack off a guy? Cause I'm married."
The woman's skin peeled away with her clothing when it was removed. Perhaps not charred and blackened but pretty damned screwed up!
As to the damages - she sued for MEDICAL EXPENSES and the jury went above and beyond. She stated herself that she was shocked at the award and it was later reduced. Note that she attempted to settle with them before suing - she simply wanted her medical expenses taken care of and they refused.
Yes, she should have assumed the liquid was hot but the people serving it out of a window also should have realized that the person they were handing it too might spill it and it should NOT have been so hot as to burn her that badly. No school I'm aware of teaches children that 200 degree liquids is just right for anything edible - get real.
A local takeout place in my area used to hand out hot tea that was so hot it was still undrinkable after an hour's long drive. So hot that it came with two cups AND a damned insulator thing for your hand. Obviously they knew it was scalding hot! After encountering this twice I stopped going there as my complaints fell on deaf ears. I'd sooner juggle a grenade in my car than deal with that - it's an accident waiting to happen. Why would a place hand out something liek this knowing that the person they were giving it too might spill it?
Build it, Drive it, Improve it! Hybridz.org
They are much less painful to work with then NetSol/Verisign, those people are EVIL, and that's with the VIP support line.
For the smallest site (basically, and SEO test site) we'll spend $600-$1000 promoting it to get started, so who cares about $20/year for the domain.
Register.com's software could use some work, but for basic stuff its painless and FAST to use. When I had a problem, I was able to call support and get everything fixed.
The longest that I've been on hold with them is 5 minutes, so no complaints there.
Alex
Usually the plantifs in a class-action settlement get exactly nothing.
Class-action lawsuits are of the lawyers, by the lawyers, for the lawyers. Best law firm scam out there today.
Some firms like Milberg-Weiss, sue practically everybody all the time. No kidding hundreds or even thousands of class-actions in a year. If they lose, it costs them practically nothing, if the win Kaa-ching.
Register.com's big mistake was accepting money from jerks. When you accept money from jerks, you might get sued. It's the cost of doing business in America.
I, for one, will not use the $5 coupon.
...with no problems at all. I have 4 domains registered with them, and hosted on my own Linux server at home on a DSL link. I've never thought their prices were out of line, in fact they're right in line with other registrars. I enjoy the convenience of their web-based admin tools and think I get a good deal for the money. They've never let me down or directed my traffic to any site other that what I set up in the DNS they host for me.
/dev/null. But then anyone who registers domain names with *any* registrar should be bright enough to know to do that anyway.
One caveat however, I was smart enough to set up a special email account ahead of time, that's used exclusively for my domain contact and absolutely nothing else. I've set filters on that email account that only email coming from register.com gets accepted and all other sources goes to
"prepared to fight to the death"
Who's death?
Oddly Draconis
Too cynical to live, too stubborn to die.
"McDonalds had ample evidence that their coffee was considerably hotter than people could reasonably expect it to be (700 claims over the previous 10 years) and yet did nothing."
700 out of how many millions of cups sold at the exact same high heat? Obviously, almost no-one had a problem with it
>This is a real turn-off, it portrays Americans in a really bad light, I know your corporates are all like this but do you the people need to be to?
Interesting question, but it sounds like you are already prejudiced... what makes you think a domain-pirate is representative of "people"?
He is a soulless highwayman of domains. That sounds VERY much to me like a "corporation" rather than "Joe Sixpack" as you are asserting.
He may or may not be incorporated, legally... but that's not the point.
It's very difficult to enact reform in the US when rich corporations (including the lawyer caste) have found a profitable loophole in the law. The law exists to be paraded as "red tape", angering those who reflexively want less government and persuading the general population that sufficent laws already exist.
It's like the "gun show loophole", where criminals or about-to-be-criminals can go buy guys with cash, and NO BACKGROUND CHECKS. I don't think they even check ID's at the door to prevent watch-list terrorists or "wanted" criminals from getting inside.
The fact that criminals are given such easy loopholes is then *touted* as evidence that the "Brady Bill" (which mandates background checks at STORES) is ineffective. The intent of the law is noble, but it is deliberately engineered to fail, and thus DECREASE support for a more refined law.
Class-action lawsuits serve a legitimate civil purpose. It grants the SAME power to people that corporations already have (think DMCA, and bully lawsuits). When you have a government who's management is paid by corporations while allegedly representing people, then you have a conflict of interest. Great examples are the Bush White House caving in to Microsoft even though the government had already WON the case. Another is turning a blind eye to years of under-oath Congressional testimony by tobacco execs, that smoking does not cause cancer (you have to be a moron not to see the lie TODAY, but 20-30-40 years ago there were enough corporate-financed "scientists" saying tobacco does not cause cancer... making it all uncertain. Kind of like today how "scientists" claim there's no global warming or ozone hole.)
Class-action lawsuits can also be ABUSED in the same way corporate lawsuits can be abused.
Not that it matters: The pro-corporate folks are winning the propoganda wars, by holding up "class action lawsuits" as a case for legal reform. There are two sides to the coin, and you can bet your ass that when Class Action law is weakened... these "champions' of legal reform will NOT take on Corporate legal abuse, because they don't want reform on both sides.
> Yes, I've actually successfully negotiated such small deals a few times.
> Two kids just actually put themselves through college by being paid to wear label clothing.
Care to share?
i bought this ipod thing a few weeks ago and i had no idea that i would be wearing the apple logo on my lapel (on the clip section of the beautiful silver remote). how dare they let me walk around advertising their brand.
oh wait, i can cover it up with a little white paint...may as well sue them anyway.
i'm not sure about the whole problem with their DNS server that we reported - but it basically sounds to be that this guy was ignorant. ignorance of a law is no grounds for defence - surely it should be that way from a defencive perspective as well. ignorance of not knowing that a coming soon page was up and not knowing how to change a DNS record should not be grounds to win a case.
>Now ISPs will ... be more specific about them in their contracts.
So you are saying register.com will be forced into normal business practices. Welcome to the real world!
MOST of us don't like what's in fine print, but we can't do anything about it. So, they could decide to CONTINUE put up rogue Javascript pages.
register.com can continue the same behavior... the only "right" they lose is the "right not to disclose this behavior in the Terms". And that's not a right.
It's a damn shame you have to put so many things into "fine print" because people are either stupid, or can't read minds.
It's also a damn shame that corporations can be soulless thieves, and feel they can unilaterally do what they wish in the customer-merchant relationship. Under pure capitalism, this protocol is a two-way street.. not dictated by one party (when it IS dictated, that's a monopoly and monopolies are ANTI-market).
Enough flaimebait. Bring on the jailbait!
At the risk of trolling...
;)
I can't believe our hypocrisy. We complain and whine about the SCO suit as being stupid, but when something like this comes along, we gladly take our $5 coupon and celebrate?
I received this email about two weeks ago saying I was entitled to the $5, and I immediately replied to it stating that I would have no part of such an assinine (sp?) lawsuit.
I don't know if the guy had a case or not. I've gotten the "Coming soon" page before, and ya know what... i didnt care. It didnt hurt business at all. Maybe it's time for a Common Sense law to be passed so that the taxpayers will stop being fined for such idiocy by paying for our courts to handle such cruft.
hmmm.. I think I did end up trolling.
Disclaimer: Obviously I know not to solicit Slashdot for real legal advice so don't give me that ask a lawyer copp out, I'm asking out of curiosity not because I want free legal advice.
Vote Quimby.
"I'll grant you though it's not quite as clear cut as people make it out to be. "
It is quite clear cut, once you get rid of the attorney spin. She spilled hot coffee on herself and makde people who had nothing to do with her clumsiness pay for her mistake. A textbook example of a frivolous lawsuit, and why we need tort reform so such things never reach the courtroom again.
"We're only one lawsuit away from retirement."
I buy a brand new domain. It should show up as a 404 error until it is setup on DNS servers. Register.com would take upto a week to one month to set you up yet they obviously did set it up instantly because you'd get redirected to the comming soon page. If they can point my domain to their ad server they can as easily point it to my webhost like I paid them to do.
Slashdot, home of supporters of free software, free music, and free speech.Except for Moderators that disagree with you.
It used to be that one of the requirements for registering a domain was that you already had name servers to specify on the registration form. (Some country code TLDs still require this now; I registered a .mx [Mexico] domain a couple of years ago and it actually queried the servers in real time to make sure they were properly configured.) It also used to be that the domain registration procedure was set up to pretty much require the registrant to have a clue, technically. You didn't have problems like this back then.
As far as I'm aware, it's still perfectly possible to register a domain with register.com and specify your own DNS servers at the time of registration, and no ad will ever be placed in your domain against your will. It's only the clueless people who let the servers default who get "ripped off" this way.
--Dan
Web Tips
I'm sure we could get this greedy pig's address fairly easily. How about sending a boat load of mail and email to this arsehole. I'll bet all those lawyers are his cousins and inlaws.
Its these frivlious lawsuits that America doesn't need.
This is an absolutely silly lawsuit. This is the kind of ridiculous crap that clogs up our legal system and makes the courts unavailable to anyone but the moneyed class. Honestly, this guy could have pointed his domain where ever he wanted or nowhere at all. Register's user interface allows you to modify any part of your domain record, on-line and in real time.
I'm not going to go as far as saying that this case was completely justified (because I do agree it's a fringe case), but it's not as ridiculous as you're saying.
That's why misuse of products shouldn't count. You don't put dangerous items near sensitive organs.
Your "parallel" examples are acid and razors. We're talking coffee here, which is intended to be poured into the mouth. Yes, sensitive organs are involved.
If she had simply used the coffee as directed (drinking it) from any other major chain at the time, she might have experienced some minor burns. Ouch, coffee hasn't cooled enough to drink yet. But this particular coffee was hot enough that she would have required hospitalization (if I understand the case correctly).
Yes, it would have been a stronger case if the burned person had been a rushed businessman who tried to gulp his coffee... but the logical leap is not nearly as big as you're implying.
There are only 10 types of people: those who understand decimal, those who don't, and, uh, 8 other types I forget.
I have 35 domains at Register, never had a problem. I never pay full price. I think the last one I bagged at $12 a year. I'm sure there are cheaper, but really, $12, I could not care any less.
Those who choose to fight for their country. Often called 'soldiers', we do not force people to become soldiers.
Comment: Yes I realise the username 'fuckfuck101' makes me sound intelligent, no you cannot buy it from me.
I mean, have you all seen those f**king annoying pages? Especially annoying when you do a search on Google to find a site that just links to one of those.
Now imagine you are setting up a site for the Slashdot crowd. It takes register.com a bit longer than expected to sort the domain out. You may foolishly announce your site early. Slashdotters go to the site, get the popups and tacky ads and think "this guy's a f**k what a shit site". In my case I would usually then discard that site and not bother revisiting it again. Whereas if I got an error page I would think "well I might try again later, maybe his provider is down....". My opinion of his site and his business has not changed as a result.
Of course, I get really pissed off, especially of late when it comes to broken links and slow servers. I shouldn't have to waste that extra time on 56K dialup just to see some shit ads for stuff I'm not interested in.
I got this e-mail saying I was eligible for the class action settlement..
Does anyone else view $5 off of my next purchase as a coupon, instead of a reward? If register.com is so evil, then shouldn't I not be given reasons to continue shopping with them?
"Often called 'soldiers'"
Ah, other people, then.
How do you feel about collateral damage? Sometimes known as 'civilians', generally not warned that 'soldiers' are going to be in the area or using cluster munitions.
Oddly Draconis
Too cynical to live, too stubborn to die.
There are more and more cheap ones popping up.
I've been using GoDaddy.com very happily for the past few years. They were the first to go really cheap (sub $10/year), I think. And they provide every service I've ever wanted, administration (updating name servers, etc.) is simple, parking is free, etc.. I don't know about customer service since I've never needed any.
There are more now. I just ran across another the other day... secureserver.net.
There are only 10 types of people: those who understand decimal, those who don't, and, uh, 8 other types I forget.
That would mean the domain exists and the webserver it points to exists, but that the page can't be found on the web server. What you should get is a DNS error.
We just got into the registrar business thanks to the ever so awesome enom. And like many who are starting out we are going with inexpensive and already available tools that are out there. Such as Modernbill, CPanel, and DRAM.
The issue now is now we have to hope that these developers can add tools to work around such lawsuites as this.
We now have to give the option to not have a Comming Soon page available, as well as ask them which DNS they want to use to point to while they register. Maybe go as far as to do a temp host a custom page for them with their companies information, or site information.
I can understand pop-ups and links, and the "Free Advertisement" as being wrong. However, the domain is still pointing at the registrars servers, and is using their space at no cost to "hold" the domain name until it propogates to correct server. So that really should not be a major argument, but I do agree that customers should have the right to opt out of having a ad-run comming soon page with the registrars information. However there will now have to be an option available to customers on what they want instead.
These are tools we have to hope our software providers can implement because many out there don't have the knowledge to develope these tools on there own, nor can they afford to.
A lawsuite like this is ludicrous, but i'm glad it was done to a company that can afford to lose it and provide an education for the rest of us. It's better than having some poor small business guy who, doesn't know any better, loose his house, because some guy decided he was to lazy to do anything about his website.
The word "innovation" is being used in all kinds of interesting ways these days. In this case, it can be defined as "the ability to push advertising technology to include popups/unders and web bugs."
Take a look for yourself (thanks spydir31).
You heard it hear first.
TheRegister
She burned herself because she placed the coffee between her legs, took the top off and proceeded to stir in sugar. Other details were left out because the media were suddenly stricken with the sort of hysterical laughter that comes from reading Darwin Awards.
It's nothing but crumpled porno and Ayn Rand.
Register.com has been my registrar of choice for several years - they have always done a good job the admin interface has been great. I'm glad to see that we are rewarding companies that do a godo job with class action law suits. Way to go.
The coffee in the McDonald's case was kept between 185-195 degrees Farenheit; that is well below the boiling point of water.
It's nothing but crumpled porno and Ayn Rand.
First off -- as a past REGISTER.COM customer -- the coupon sucks. Granted it is a $5 coupon, but they are going to gain money since their services are outrageously priced. I just want $5 in cash. I had 3 domains under REGISTER.COM before I learned how it was cheaper via GODADDY.COM.
Second -- I am waiting for someone to sue REGISTER.COM and other higher priced domain registers for its pricing levels. When I went to transfer my domain(s) I was offered a lower cost to renew my domain through REGISTER.COM. It is a shame a company uses these practices.
Enough preaching now.....
Why couldn't this guy have been in a plane that hit a building? Instead, he is alive today to go around wasting people's time and money.
What a POS.
" No, McDonalds was being punished because they're already had 700 complaints filed against them for keeping their coffee too hot."
700 complaints out of millions of satisfied customers who drank coffee of the same temperature. It's nothing.
"You realize it takes 20 seconds to cause third degree burns if the coffee "
If you spill hot coffee on your lap, who cares if it takes 10 seconds or 3 minutes? If you are worried about it, don't spill hot coffee on your lap. If you do, blame yourself, not the company that sold you hot coffee.
"McDonalds was punished because, in court, they made the argument that this lady's burns didn't matter because 700 cases of burns are statistically insignificant"
They were punished for telling the truth? This case should have never made it to court, and the lawyers who argued it should be jailed.
Its really not worth my time to snail-mail them my opt-out request, and the website with the opt-out info seemed to only have instructions on how to snail-mail the opt-out request and what info to include, in fact it was the exact same info that was in the PDF I was emailed a week ago regarding this.
Its a stupid lawsuit if you ask me, not that it has absolutely no merit, but I really don't think its a very big problem/inconvenience.
Apparently, a couple other people here agree with me, i wonder how much register.com would save if they had an online opt-out form.
Please keep in my that my ADHD keeps me a little scatter brained and I sometimes can't focus long enough to
I don't suppose I would have as much problem with these lawsuits if they were "opt in", because then the plaintiffs arguably can be identified as people with a grievance. As it stands, "opt out" is nothing more than a nifty way for lawyers to fatten the size of their own paychecks. It's disgusting.
DFL
Never send a human to do a machine's job.
"McLie No. 1: For years, McDonald's had known they had a problem with the way they make their coffee - that their coffee was served much hotter (at least 20 degrees more so) than at other restaurants."
It wasn't a problem. Almost all of their customers liked it this way.
"McLie No. 2: McDonald's knew its coffee sometimes caused serious injuries - more than 700 incidents of scalding coffee burns in the past decade have been settled by the Corporation - and yet they never so much as consulted a burn expert regarding the issue."
Only if you spilled it on yourself like you were not supposed to. 700 incidents out of millions. Why consult a burn expert? Only an idiot would not know that hot means hot.
"McLie No. 3: The woman involved in this infamous case suffered very serious injuries - third degree burns on her groin, thighs and buttocks that required skin grafts and a seven-day hospital stay."
If you spill hot coffee in your crotch, it is your own fault.
"McLie No. 4: The woman, an 81-year old former department store clerk who had never before filed suit against anyone, said she wouldn't have brought the lawsuit against McDonald's had the Corporation not dismissed her request for compensation for medical bills."
Of course it should have been dismissed: it was her fault, not McDonald's.
"McLie No. 5: A McDonald's quality assurance manager testified in the case that the Corporation was aware of the risk of serving dangerously hot coffee"
So they labeled the coffee Hot. big deal.
"McLie No. 6: After careful deliberation, the jury found McDonald's was liable because the facts were overwhelmingly against the company."
The facts were overwhelmingly in favor of the company: they did not spill the coffee!. The jury was not careful since they ignored the obvious.
"McFact No. 7: On appeal, a judge lowered the award to $480,000, a fact not widely publicized in the media."
This is a fact, and it was reported all over the media. Of course, 1 cent is too much, so this sum is outrageous.
"McLie No. 8: A report in Liability Week, September 29, 1997, indicated that Kathleen Gilliam, 73, suffered first degree burns when a cup of coffee spilled onto her lap. Reports also indicate that McDonald's consistently keeps its coffee at 185 degrees, still approximately 20 degrees hotter than at other restaurants."
That is the way the customers like it. In fact, McDonald's has received a large number of complaints (far more than 700) since they made their coffee colder in response to the frivolous lawsuit. No one has a problem with the coffee unless they choose to pour it into their crotch.
" Have you read any of the parent thread?"
Yes. It contains a lot of spin and lies by those who think that non-involved people should pay for the mistakes of others (the lifeblood of the frivolous lawsuit industry). Occasionally, there is some common sense bringing up the damning fact: she spilled the coffee, not McDonalds.
You are a loser for touting your $5 award. You should be ashamed for jumping onto the bandwagon. The tort system in the US is completely screwed up. The new American Dream is to win a big fat lawsuit.
What a bunch of dimwits...
Who's death?
Death? He's a popular character in Terry Pratchet's Disc World novels.
What? Oh, you meant whose death? Oh.
Funny thing.. I read this on /., went to check my email accounts and there is one of the emails about this and the PDF file of the settlement.
At first I thought it was from the RIAA.. then remembered I don't have kazza or any other fileshare installed.
" The other damming fact is that McDonalds persistently sold coffee that was considerably hotter than it should have been"
But that is not a fact. Indeed, it is not true. McDonald's sold its coffee at the right temperature, not "too hot". After they gave in to the courtroom-liars, there was a great increase in "coffee too cold" complaints.
I believe cluster munitions are internationally banned, certainly none of them were used in the overthrow of Saddam.
Comment: Yes I realise the username 'fuckfuck101' makes me sound intelligent, no you cannot buy it from me.
"Think about it: if the liquid is hot enough to cause 3rd degree burns, is it prudent to give it to people strapped into a moving vehicle? I'd argue not."
The woman who filed the frivolous lawsuit spilled the coffee in a stopped vehicle. It could have happened in her house. Regardless, the stupid things you do with the coffee after you buy it are your own fault, not the coffee-sellers.
""It's the same reason childrens' clothing manufacturers are required to add fireproofing: Duh, textiles burn."
How does that have anything to do with anything? It doesn't, since I've never heard of anyone intentionally buying piping-hot kid's clothes. Hot coffee, on the other hand....
Actually, the American Dream (TM) is still the same. .. get a bunch of cash, a nice house, raise some kids, etc.
However, the American Way has now shifted to lawsuits and bullshit, at least for some people, as opposed to the old-fashioned method of actually earning stuff.
Almost everyone would like a nice big house and a few toys, but an increasing amount of idiots prefer to gain thus at the expense of others (which in the end, is at the expense of everyone)
Don't think I'll do anything with it though, $5 off their services isn't worth the bother since better registers are available for more than $5 less (did that make sense? didn't think so).
my karma will be here long after I'm gone
"Food served for immediate consumption is unfit if it is served that hot. It is simply a matter of public safety."
Yet, coffee typically is served scalding hot. Unfit for consumption? No, coffee-drinkers prefer to buy it this way. They also preferred the nicely-hot McDonald's coffee before the frivolous lawsuit than after when it was cooled down for no reason at all.
"I suspect that this is the result of corporate takeovers of public affairs in the US, but that is only my surmise"
That hasn't happened. In fact, the trend is the other way: more and more regulations are piled on business all the time.
A friend of mine had a domain name which
expired on register.com. They wanted $200.00
for him to renew it. And kept the domain in
limbo for months, limbo meaning...it was
not registerable.
When he checked the domain a few months after,
it was a porn site. I think register.com
are criminals, and this policy seems to underscore Register's business practices - which to say the least are predatory.
There will be more lawsuits
coming.
New York is too sophisticated for a REGULAR court ;)
Sivaram Velauthapillai
Sivaram Velauthapillai
Seeking the meaning of life... @slashdot of all places
"All folks ever remember is the initial judgement ($2.7M here), and they almost never hear the facts of the case."
No, the facts are well known, and with the facts in, it is still a 100% frivolous lawsuit.
"
(McDonald's knew for a long time their coffee was incredibly dangerously hot and refused to do anything about it."
That is false. The coffee was not dangerously hot, as they sold millions of cups for years with only 700 having a problem with it. That's pretty safe. Of course, most people know how to handle liquids labelled as hot.
"They also refused to compensate Plaintiff for her medical costs, which is why she chose to sue.)"
Of course they refused, it was not their fault.
"Note that the judgement was reduced by 5x on appeal: this is the norm."
So? This does not change that it was frivolous.
"The American justice system does occasionally run amok."
As it did in this case.
" But if the story is that some ordinary individual or small business has beaten up a multinational corporation in court, you can usually bet that justice was seriously on the side of the little guy."
In this case, justice was on the side of the big guy, as they should not have paid one cent for someone else's mistake that was not their fault.
This is just like the recent ruling by U.S. District Judge Alvin Hellerstein that said that lawsuits blaming airlines, the Port Authority and the Boeing Co. for injuries and deaths in the September 11 terrorist attacks can proceed. Talk about absurd. How the hell could Boeing have predicted that fanatics might take over an airplane and crash it into a building. Boeing just built the plane and sold to an airline? How the hell could NYC's Port Authority have predicted that fanatics would crash a plane into a building, not to mention how they hell were they supposed to guard against it? This is complete and utter bullshit. Why not sue International for constructing the chassis that Ryder builds their rental vans on that Timothy McVeigh used in the Oklahoma City bombing? Why not sue Stanley for making the side cutters and wire strippers that Wal-Mart sells to a group of terrorists hell bent on creating a bomb? There's a wacko driving around Wichita for the past couple of weeks trying to pick up little girls at school bus stops. Why shouldn't the parents of those little girls sue Ford for making the vehicle that this nut job used to try and pick up girls? Why not sue McDonalds or Pizza Hut for providing food to any old wack job that commits a crime? It's bullshit. If this is the message that this country is sending to the international community then I don't know if US citizenship is really worth claiming. The whole damned legal system is seriously fucked up.
Panel Revives Case Over Domain-Name Registry
... and not to grant him exclusive control of it."
Tom Perrotta
New York Law Journal
04-23-2003
A ruling Tuesday by a Manhattan appeals court could clear the way for a class action lawsuit against the Internet's second-largest domain-name registration company for its past advertising practices.
The suit, filed in state Supreme Court in Manhattan, alleges that Register.com, which registers domain names for a $35 fee, misused the Internet addresses of new customers by redirecting those links to a "Coming Soon" Web page until the customers developed Web sites of their own.
The "Coming Soon" page contained advertisements for Register.com and other companies.
Michael Zurakov, the lead plaintiff in the suit, which has yet to be certified as a class, claims it took him several months to stop his Web address -- Laborzionist.org -- from redirecting to the "Coming Soon" page.
In that time, he alleges, Register.com used his Web address without his permission to direct others to the company's own site and to sell advertisements.
In a suit before Supreme Court Justice Karla Moskowitz, Zurakov alleged that Register.com had breached its contract because he had purchased the exclusive right to Laborzionist.org.
Justice Moskowitz disagreed in July 2001 and granted Register.com's motion to dismiss, saying Zurakov had simply paid Register.com to "register" his site, or make a record of it, since the word "register" was not otherwise defined in the contract. She noted that the word "control" did not appear in the contract.
But Tuesday, a unanimous panel of the Appellate Division, First Department, partially reversed the judge's ruling, saying Zurakov's claim for breach of implied covenant of good faith and for deceptive practices under General Business Law 349 could go forward.
"There is no question that the instant contract does not in express terms grant plaintiff control over the domain name or the exclusive right to use the name," Justice Betty Weinberg Ellerin wrote for the court. "However, the benefit to plaintiff of his contract with defendant would be rendered illusory if the effect of registering the domain name in his name were merely to have the domain name placed next to his name in some official record
Justice Ellerin noted that the "exclusiveness" of a registered domain name is "already a familiar concept of law," citing the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit's holding in Name.Space v. Network Solutions, 202 F3d 573 (2000), and the First Circuit's holding in Sallen v. Corinthians Licenciamentos LTDA, 273 F3d 14 (2001).
The judge also reinstated a claim for deceptive business practices, saying the record was inconclusive as to whether a reasonable consumer would turn to Register.com's Web site, which contained a disclaimer about the "Coming Soon" page, rather than rely solely on the domain-name registration contract.
Shortly after Zurakov filed his suit two years ago, Register.com changed its domain-name contract to include a disclaimer about the "Coming Soon" page and an option to avoid it, said Zurakov's attorney, John Blim of Blim & Edelson in Chicago.
Blim said he would immediately move to certify a class, which he estimated to comprise 3 million plaintiffs. He declined to estimate the amount of damages the class would seek.
"They've taken from each of their customers some portion of what those people paid their money for," he said. "It's a little like a pizza man who delivers you a pizza but takes a bite out if it."
Scott D. Brown of Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom, who represents Register.com, could not be reached for comment.
Justices Eugene Nardelli, Angela M. Mazzarelli, Joseph P. Sullivan and George D. Marlow concurred with Justice Ellerin's opinion.
This is totally wrong.
ICANN requires that every registrar have a transfer agreement with another registrar in place in case it goes out of business.
GANDI used to have more about this, but it still has a little: GANDI FAQ.
"The coffee was super-hot... because the company had an active policy of keeping coffee at high temps in order to extend its life, thereby saving money"
Actaully, it was hot because the customer preferred the product that way.
It was not unsafe. The 700 complaints amounts to less than 1 per restaurant over 10 years. Do you have any idea how many cups of coffee each restaurant sells in a year? Of course it was not unsafe. It was only unsafe if you did stupid things with it, like pour it into your crotch.
I suppose next McDonalds should do something about the "unsafe" chicken mcnugget, which can be fatal if you breathe it in, or the plastic fork which can be used to gouge out your own eye.
The 700 idiots who complained were probably prone to slamming their own hands in car doors. They have probably moved on to suing Campbell's Soup because the soup is too hot after you heat it in the microwave.
"The woman simply wanted to have her medical expenses ($20,000) reimbursed, not anything beyond that. McDonald's refused and then she sued."
The woman simply made an outrageous request that someone who had nothing to do it pay for her actions. Anyone would refuse.
"McDonald's made a business decision to serve a product that it knew was unsafe"
It was safe. Using your logic, everything sold is unsafe. An Apple Powerbook might kill a person if it is dropped on their head.
"Later the much-publicized $2.7 million punitive award was reduced to about 1/5 of that amount."
The reduction was much publicized.
"but the manufacturer was aware of the danger and continued making its product that way regardless. So they share in the responsibility and are liable."
Neither company should be held liable, since neither company is responsible for it. McDonald's in no way intends people to pour hot coffee into their crotches, and no manufacturer of any shooting device wants you to shoot yourself in the head with it.
This is getting ridiculous. Everyone is to blame except the idiot who is actually at fault...
We need tort reform, so no one ever thinks of wasting the court's time on this silliness ever again.
you know what, I'm going to sue the hammer company because it really HURTS like HELL when I use a ball-peen hammer to drive a spike into my left ear.
It doesn't make any sense that if she only received "minor" burns she wouldn't have the right to sue -- if one agrees for major burns she can sue, then it follows that she can sue for minor ones as well.
Let me clarify. If she had received only minor burns, that would be par for the course, as expected, and due to her stupidity. A case like that should be thrown out instantly because coffee is normally hot enough to cause minor burns. So, she took what could be reasonably assumed to be a small risk (because that's the temp of normal fast food coffee) when she held the coffee in a precarious way. This case DOES have some (limited) merit because McDonalds didn't warn customers of this much-greater-than-normal risk with this coffee alone. They couldn't have predicted that the coffee would be spilled in someone's crotch, but they *can* predict that a decent percentage of their customers will spill on themselves.
Look, I'm not saying this is the strongest case in the world. I'm mostly just surprised at how black and white you seem to think these decisions are.
I'll suggest putting you to work for awhile in an Industrial Revolution era factory (the machines are perfectly safe as long as you use them correctly! just don't slip on the oil-soaked floor while your hands are an inch away from the spinning blades; that's "misuse" and "carelessness").
There are only 10 types of people: those who understand decimal, those who don't, and, uh, 8 other types I forget.
How about a class action lawsuit against that plaintiff that got $12,500? His suit led directly to register.com needing to raise their fees by $10 . His actions hurt a large group of people.
skkkoooonnnggggkkk ptui
Shhhh. Don't speak common sense. There's mucho money to be made by crooked lawyers.
"McDonalds admitted that it had received over 700 complaints from customers about the coffee being too hot, and it is safe to assume that many consumers simply did not complain."
Safe to assume? This is real rich. You are now making up imaginary complaints because the actual number is so small that it does not matter. No, sorry, there is only a complaint if there is a complaint.
I guess it is safe to assume that that 37% who did not vote in the last election were Lyndon Larouche voters as well.
"I've heard this "they gave the customers what they wanted" garbage for a long time"
Because it is true, and there have been a lot more than 700 complaints since they were forced to make their coffee colder for no reason than to make it safe for genital contact.
"but the fact is that McDonalds failed to change their dangerous practices despite being on notice of potential problems for years"
It wasn't dangerous, so why change it? The fact that almost everyone was able to drink their nice hot coffee without burning themselves shows this.
Yeah, it is dangerous to pour it into your crotch. The lesson learned here should have been "next time, do not pour it into our crotch".
" I don't think that 79 year old ladies deserve to have third degree burns on their genitals"
If they pour hot coffee onto their genitals, that is exactly what they deserve. That is no more cold-hearted than saying if Granny jumps off a cliff, she deserves to go splat. (while you will be sueing Nike for the shoes she chose to jump in)
""but the fact is that McDonalds failed to change their dangerous practices despite being on notice of potential problems for years"
You guys won't be satisfied until McDonald's only serves lukewarm coffee (you know, the colder coffee the court demanded that they serve now is hot enough to burn if missused: better sue!)
Once it is cold, you can keep suing McDonald's because a person can drown in a bathtub filled with McDonald's Coffee.
After that, there is Starbucks, next frontier.
I'm wondering about the beliefs of the owner of register.com. If you look on the Coming Soon page under the "Search the Internet for these topics" area, the first search is for "end times". Everything else is about web services.
I don't know if that's the point. One person negotiating a problem for himself still leaves the problem for the many that were unaware of the illegal activity.
Clearly, a company will take care of the squeaky wheel while allowing a breach of contract and deceptive trade practice to continue for thousands, if not hundreds of thousands of others, if it profits from the practice.
I am a class action attorney. [Ah, yes. I feel the love in the room.] The big fees certainly are an incentive to litigate. Judges award these fees to encourage plaintiffs to bring suits and attorneys to take them on as "private attorneys general".
That's why Congress and State Legislatures enact laws with a private right of action: so that the public can enforce the law if need be. Otherwise, to fund enforcement of every AG's office would cost a fortune, more than the fees paid to the class attorney.
And since I don't get paid unless I win, I only bring suits that have merit. I would be a fool to waste my time and treasure to take a shot at a non-sure thing.
Thus, Judges have seen fees as an incentive to enforce the law, but only in cases where it is obvious the law has been broken.
Pay no attention to the man behind the curtain with all your metadata.
I was fully convinced that this suit was frivolous until I clicked on their "placeholder" link.
... the browser gets completely hijacked??!!!
8 popup/under/departure windows???!!!
Yikes!!!!
They should pay any internet user who ever visited any of those links for intentionally interfering with the use of a remote computer.
That is beyond the pale. A simple "sponsored by register.com" or similar placeholder could easily be overlooked and understood, but they used other people's purchased domains to web-spam on an extremely abusive level, and generated who knows how much revenue, and crashed who knows how many browsers under someone else name.
It's the first time I changed my mind about a lawsuit within 5 seconds of clicking a single link.
Downright parasitic, offensive, and potentially libelous and defamatory to the legitimate owner of the domain. I would never return to such a domain, or do business with anyone who ran such a site. How would the average user know that the domain owner themselves did not put those pop/up/unders there to generate spam revenue while they were building their site?
This is also an issue of potential reputation damage to the domain holder.
My opinion is now that Register.com got off real, real, light.
If I was a business that ever used these folks, I would consider opting out of the class just so I could sue them myself for defamation and slander.
Yes! You are paying for a service, and they are making money off of it. It is as though you bought a new Jetta GLX, and before turning over the keys, the dealer rented it to other people for a couple of days. It is not at all like a shirt that you purchase. You are *wearing* it - that's it's intended use. Now, if Nike showed up and used or rented out your shirt AFTER selling it to you and without warning, wouldn't you be a touch peeved? What if you ordered a new W/D from Sears, and they lent it to a Laundromat for a few days before shipping it out? That's the same thing - branded apparel and cars are not. Register.com used something they already sold for it's indended use.
Second, their "advertising" is obnoxious. You can barely get it closed once it opens. Several times, I have registered a domain to provide myself with an email address, and delayed putting up a webpage. That would have meant that all of my curious friends would have been subjected to a pop* barrage. Boo!
I personally use doteasy.com - I know it's probably not the right service for the techno-savvy types here, but for $25, I get registration and an easy to use web based email system and hosting as well. Plus, the coming soon page is there, but not obnoxious.
Finally, yes, you should get a part of all revenues received when using your property to solicit said revenues. Would you let, for example, your realtor use your new house for a garage sale before you moved in? What about a vacation rental? Just because you haven't "moved in" doesn't mean that the property isn't *yours*. Google has a program in place already where they provide advertising for your page and you receive a portion of the revenues. What would be so hard about allowing someone to opt-in on something similar at registration?
Finally (really this time), if I was cruising for a friend's recently mentioned domain and saw all that crap, you can be assured I would *never* use the same service. Such business practices are bad karma and suicide.
Vocatus atque non vocatus, Deus aderit.
There *are* a lot of frivolous lawsuits in our country. I personally spilled hot coffee on myself and received a second-degree burn. (Actually, my dog did it, but she doesn't have any assets, but bwahhahaha, since I won in small claims court, all of her future wages will be garnished!)
But what about the lawsuit for people who are unable to stop stuffing their faces with fast food? Should they get compensation for their lack of self control? I think not. Many, many lawsuits in this country are won because the legal system is shot to hell. A friend of mine lost his kids for two months because the Child Proective Services believed his wife's blatant lie that he was an "immediate danger" to her and his kids - when she was the one with the felony assault.
I agree with above poster that we have way too many stupid warning signs in this country as a result of frivolous lawsuits. I have seen several candy bars that say, This product produced on machinary that may be used to process products that contain nuts. WTF?
However, I do believe that good can come from some "stupid" lawsuits, as I myself have scalded my tongue or slightly burnt a finger or leg on fast food coffee. And for other posters - 200 degrees is rediculous. Starbucks makes my latte at 170 to 175 and that is perfect. Things that you consume, by definition, should not cause you immediate physical harm in their properly prepared form. That's retarded.
Vocatus atque non vocatus, Deus aderit.
All the free advertising about the "$5 off." For my $25, with doteasy.com, I get hosted email, registration, and hosting - certainly not the choice of most /.ers but still a better deal.
Consumers - $5 off of a bad deal
Lawyers - $642,500
Register.com - Free advertising for their new lower rate
Natalie Portman - Priceless.
Vocatus atque non vocatus, Deus aderit.
...is like f*ing for chastity.
Vocatus atque non vocatus, Deus aderit.
"Several Months" makes a huge difference. Same as I said before - if you bought a house and the mortgage closed, but your realtor decided to use it as a vacation rental for a few months before "letting" you move in - you'd have a pretty good case.
Vocatus atque non vocatus, Deus aderit.
Good rebuttal.
Vocatus atque non vocatus, Deus aderit.
Register.com was using this guy's property for it's indended purpose without his permission. It's more like once you buy your house, the realtor uses it as a vacation rental for FOUR MONTHS for their own profit, making you live elsewhere, paying your new mortgage with no new house.
Vocatus atque non vocatus, Deus aderit.
"I believe"
Shame.
"certainly none of them were used in the overthrow of Saddam."
No?
Seems that they aren't telling you much. Here's a US military source.
Here's a source from a human rights organisation Who originally mentioned that cluster bomblets were being found, incidentally, I couldn't believe seeing them myself at the time, but I suppose they could have planted them. Yes, thats it, those vicious ungrateful civilians planted the submunitions...
Hmm. How do we explain away the use of cluster bombs in Afghanistan?
Yeah, I did use the BBC heavily so here's another source and Another and Another...
Hopefully you might catch a clue.
Oddly Draconis
Too cynical to live, too stubborn to die.
The registry itself charges registrars $6/year for registrations. Theoretically a registrar can charge you as little as $6.01 and still make a profit on the sale. However in practice you get get registration prices on the cheap registrars (the ones that don't rip you off) for around $9 or less per year.
I'm English, I live in England, and Great Britain, and the United Kingdom.
I AM NOT FROM THE US.
All your links point to the US using cluster bombs... I fail to see a challenge to my post.
Also I suggest you never use the BBC, they're so anti-American and anti-British it's an absolute joke.
Comment: Yes I realise the username 'fuckfuck101' makes me sound intelligent, no you cannot buy it from me.
$12,500. That's what the court gave the defendent, how much did the attorneys give him as a 'sales commission'?