Suit Against T-Mobile for Early Termination Fees and Phone-Locking
October 16, 2007
The California Supreme Court has recently ok’d a class-action lawsuit against T-Mobile. The plaintiffs in the case are T-Mobile customers, and they are seeking two things:
- To prevent T-Mobile from charging a fee for early contract termination (currently the fee is about $200)
- To require T-Mobile to unlock cell phones if customers decide to switch carriers (so that customers aren’t forced to purchase a new cell phone)
Practices such as charging early terminations fees and locking phones are standard among major carriers (such as AT&T, Verizon Wireless, and Sprint Nextel), so if T-Mobile loses this lawsuit, major changes to the relationship between carriers and customers could result. For instance, carriers might have to do away entirely with early termination fees, or might be required by law to unlock phones when a subscriber requests it.
But carriers claim that locking the phones is the only way they are able to make a profit — that if they are forced to unlock phones, consumers will have to start paying a lot more to purchase cell phones. So who knows — if the plaintiffs end up winning, the decision could end up being a bad thing for some consumers.
Here are some other blog entries on the T-Mobile class action case from Ars Technica, Slashdot, and iPod Observer.
P.S. - Several weeks ago, a separate (but similar) class-action lawsuit was filed against Apple regarding software locks on Apple’s iPhone.
Suit against Mattel toy company over lead paint
August 22, 2007
A lawsuit was filed on Monday against Mattel — America’s largest toy company — because several of the company’s products were found to contain excessive amounts of lead.
A little over a week ago, Mattel recalled hundreds of thousands of die-cast toy cars because the paint used on the toys contained unsafe levels of lead. (The cars portrayed the character of “Sarge” from the 2006 Pixar film Cars.)
Several weeks before that, nearly 1 million toys were recalled by a subsidiary of Mattel for the same reason. (These toys included ones that portrayed characters from both Sesame Street and Dora the Explorer.)
All of the products in question had actually been manufactured in China.
The suit, filed by attorney Jeffrey Killino in California, aims to “compel the toy giant to set up a fund to test kids who may have been exposed to the recalled products for lead poisoning” according to CNN. Killino said he will consider expanding the suit into a class action if many children are found to have been poisoned by the metal.
A similar (but separate) suit filed earlier this month in Florida is also aiming for class action status.
Lead is particularly toxic to the bodies and brains of young children. It can cause learning disabilities, blood disorders, brain disorders, and damage the nervous system.
Mattel is the parent company of Fisher-Price, American Girl, and Radica USA. If you think you own a toy that was affected by one of the recalls (complete list can be found here) contact Mattel directly.
MacBook owners sue Apple over displays
May 18, 2007
MacBook and MacBook Pro owners, believing Apple made exaggerations about the quality of the MacBook display, have filed a class action lawsuit against Apple that accuses the company of false advertising.
Apple claimed, for instance, that the MacBook could display “millions of colors.” But the MacBook can only perform this feat when dithering is employed.
The plaintiffs claim that Apple’s operating system is the culprit because the display issues vanish when Windows is booted on the MacBook.
(Other general complaints regarding MacBook displays include: graininess, ’sparkly’-ness, uneven illumination, poor color saturation, and poor color contrast. Also, AppleDefects.com states that there are “ridiculous amounts of cathode bleed along the bottom of the display, with patches of light and dark throughout the remainder.”)
This is not the first time Apple has been targeted by unhappy MacBook users. Severals months ago, an earlier class action lawsuit was initiated against Apple in response to the issue of MacBooks shutting themselves down at random.
The MacBook was launched by Apple in early 2006.
[Sources: CNET News, Engadget]
Class Action against YouTube and Google
May 10, 2007
A proposed class-action lawsuit alleging copyright infringement has been filed against YouTube and Google (the owner of YouTube since November of last year).
The proposed lawsuit was filed on May 4th by Football Association Premier League of England and the music publisher Bourne Co.
The companies allege that YouTube is slow to remove copyrighted material from its site, despite the fact that the Digital Millennium Copyright Act requires prompt removal of such materials.
They also allege that YouTube and Google should be using a filter system to ensure that copyrighted material isn’t posted in the first place. They say that YouTube already filters videos for certain content owners, but that it won’t provide the same service for other content owners.
The lead attorney thinks that this case may eventually be consolidated with a similar case filed by Viacom back in March. In that case, Viacom is alleging infringement on the part of YouTube and is seeking damages of over $1 billion.
Premier League and Bourne, co-filers of the initial complaint, are now actively seeking other content owners to join the proposed class action. For more information on the case and how to join, they’ve set up the website YouTube Class Action.
[Source: The Hollywood Reporter]
Jurors Side with Merck on Vioxx
April 1, 2007
Jurors sided with Merck in a Vioxx trial late last week, according to a recent news article.
The case concerned a 52-year-old Illinois woman named Patty Schwaller. Patty, an obese woman with diabetes and high blood pressure, had been taking Vioxx for nearly 2 years when she died from a heart attack in 2003.
The jurors agreed with Merck that it was likely her poor health and not the painkiller Vioxx that led to Patty’s killer heart attack.
As far as future Vioxx lawsuits go, there are still 27,000 personal injury lawsuits and 265 potential class-action lawsuits in the works, so stay tuned because there’s much more to come…
Honda and Nissan Odometer Lawsuits
March 15, 2007
Have you been paying attention to your odometer lately?
If you drive a Honda or a Nissan, hopefully you have been. These two car makers have been accused of designing cars with faulty odometers that rack up miles faster than they’re supposed to. The extra miles can affect a whole slew of things, from your warranty coverage to your car’s resale value, according to CBS News.
The class action lawsuit brought against Honda was settled in November of 2006. You may be entitled to receive benefits from the settlement if you “bought or leased a model year 2002 through 2006 Honda or Acura automobile or a model year 2007 Honda Fit, in the United States or its territories, between April 13, 2002 and November 7, 2006,” according to HondaOdometerClassAction.com.
The Nissan odometer class action is still underway. For more information about it, you can visit EagerOdometers.com or the homepage of attorney James Holmes.
Be Wary of Class Action Lawsuits
December 12, 2006
People sue left and right for every reason under the sun. From a splinter at the bowling alley to tripping over a loose stone and of course “hot” coffee. However you should be wary if you are approached to get involved in a class action lawsuit. There are lawyers who seem to wait to hear the news on a product then manage to get into contact with many consumers who brought the product and attempt to file a class action lawsuit. Once they have these people together they file a claim on “their” behalf and usually win.
The problem? You will be lucky to get $5 while the lawyers walk off with the millions. Think it’s unfair? Then read the microscopic wording in the papers you signed…
Wal-Mart loses suit in PA
October 16, 2006
A jury has just ordered Walmart to pay at least $78 million for violating Pennsylvania state labor laws.
Wal-Mart forced employees “to work through rest breaks and off the clock.” (It did not deny workers their meal breaks, though, the jury decided.)
This class-action suit involves 187,000 current and former employees who worked at Walmart and Sam’s Clubs in Pennsylvania from March 1998 through May 2006.
Walmart Loses Class Action Lawsuit
October 13, 2006
Jurors found Walmart guilty of making their employees work off the clock and through breaks without pay. Walmart may now be forced to pay them 78 million dollars.
BJ Wholesale Is Sued For Racism
October 10, 2006
The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) is behind a lawsuit against BJ Wholesale that has to do with racism and harrassment against African Americans and Hispanics.
