Wow, before taking any costs out each person having their data illegally collected and used is worth just over $.50
The $115 million settlement fund will be used to pay valid claims submitted by class members, as well as attorneys' fees, administrative costs, and other expenses related to the lawsuit.
impacts an estimated 220 million U.S. residents
Wow, before taking any costs out each person having their data illegally collected and used is worth just over $.50
Good news is, this is probably no small part of why Oracle is now getting out of the ad business entirely. Bad news, Oracle admits no fault. I'd like to see a law passed that requires the company...
Good news is, this is probably no small part of why Oracle is now getting out of the ad business entirely.
Bad news, Oracle admits no fault. I'd like to see a law passed that requires the company to declare guilt or innocence, along with a pledge to not engage in said illegal behavior going forward.
This could then be used as evidence in future trials.
That’s not how American law works, but fair minded judges could and should reject settlements that allow such shielding from liability and allow such low recovery for the actual plaintiffs.
That’s not how American law works, but fair minded judges could and should reject settlements that allow such shielding from liability and allow such low recovery for the actual plaintiffs.
The judge has no say. From a courts perspective, a settlement basically just looks like the plaintiff going “yeah nvm I’m good, not suing anymore, have a nice day”. And I don’t see how a judge...
The judge has no say. From a courts perspective, a settlement basically just looks like the plaintiff going “yeah nvm I’m good, not suing anymore, have a nice day”. And I don’t see how a judge could force a plaintiff to continue a suit, that seems even more silly.
What does that even mean? If you want a declaration of guilt you can simply actually take them to trial and finish it, as opposed to going for a settlement. The government forcing you to declare...
I'd like to see a law passed that requires the company to declare guilt or innocence, along with a pledge to not engage in said illegal behavior going forward.
What does that even mean? If you want a declaration of guilt you can simply actually take them to trial and finish it, as opposed to going for a settlement.
The government forcing you to declare your own guilt is like some stalin shit. Guilt is proven, not a label to be forced upon.
1 AM brain speaking here, but essentially treating these settlements akin to a plea bargain like the plebs avoiding jail time have to take. They either have to admit guilt, taking steps to come...
1 AM brain speaking here, but essentially treating these settlements akin to a plea bargain like the plebs avoiding jail time have to take. They either have to admit guilt, taking steps to come into compliance voluntarily (like a reduced sentence in a plea deal) or declare innocence (which could be leveraged against them if its found through other proceedings that they're lying). Right now settlements like this seem more like bribes than proceedings, and this would close the gap.
Gaps like this allow them tooperate in
legal grey areas forever, because a large enough bribe results in the problem going away before precedence gets set.
Corportations are not people, and we need to stop treating them like they are. They need to kept on a tight leash, audited and prosecuted ruthlessly to insure they're remaining in compliance. Because history shows that time and time and time again that if we don't do that, they fall back on bad behavior pretty quickly.
Settlements fundamentally aren’t plea bargains. For one, this is civil court, not criminal court. It’s a matter between private citizens - neither side is privileged. It doesn’t make any sense for...
Settlements fundamentally aren’t plea bargains. For one, this is civil court, not criminal court. It’s a matter between private citizens - neither side is privileged. It doesn’t make any sense for the plaintiff to not be able to enter agreements that don’t have penalties for them.
That assumes that they are inherently in the wrong.
Think of it this way - right now, I can sue for you any reason. Does it make sense that you can only enter settlements, which in the end are just mutual agreements to end the proceedings, by admitting fault? Whereas I can end the suit by fiat?
You’d only make civil court even more of a weapon than it already is for sides with more resources to bully sides with less resources.
Generally not. If the bribe is high enough that the class won't likely get a better risk-adjusted reward than going to court, the company has neutered the incentive to see it through the very...
Generally not. If the bribe is high enough that the class won't likely get a better risk-adjusted reward than going to court, the company has neutered the incentive to see it through the very expensive process of discovery and proving guilt.
Wow, before taking any costs out each person having their data illegally collected and used is worth just over $.50
Good news is, this is probably no small part of why Oracle is now getting out of the ad business entirely.
Bad news, Oracle admits no fault. I'd like to see a law passed that requires the company to declare guilt or innocence, along with a pledge to not engage in said illegal behavior going forward.
This could then be used as evidence in future trials.
That’s not how American law works, but fair minded judges could and should reject settlements that allow such shielding from liability and allow such low recovery for the actual plaintiffs.
The judge has no say. From a courts perspective, a settlement basically just looks like the plaintiff going “yeah nvm I’m good, not suing anymore, have a nice day”. And I don’t see how a judge could force a plaintiff to continue a suit, that seems even more silly.
federal judge rejects opioid settlement
Judge denied quick amc settlement
It's rare, but it happens.
Judges have to accept most settlement agreements, especially if it’s a class action.
What does that even mean? If you want a declaration of guilt you can simply actually take them to trial and finish it, as opposed to going for a settlement.
The government forcing you to declare your own guilt is like some stalin shit. Guilt is proven, not a label to be forced upon.
1 AM brain speaking here, but essentially treating these settlements akin to a plea bargain like the plebs avoiding jail time have to take. They either have to admit guilt, taking steps to come into compliance voluntarily (like a reduced sentence in a plea deal) or declare innocence (which could be leveraged against them if its found through other proceedings that they're lying). Right now settlements like this seem more like bribes than proceedings, and this would close the gap.
Gaps like this allow them tooperate in
legal grey areas forever, because a large enough bribe results in the problem going away before precedence gets set.
Corportations are not people, and we need to stop treating them like they are. They need to kept on a tight leash, audited and prosecuted ruthlessly to insure they're remaining in compliance. Because history shows that time and time and time again that if we don't do that, they fall back on bad behavior pretty quickly.
Settlements fundamentally aren’t plea bargains. For one, this is civil court, not criminal court. It’s a matter between private citizens - neither side is privileged. It doesn’t make any sense for the plaintiff to not be able to enter agreements that don’t have penalties for them.
That assumes that they are inherently in the wrong.
Think of it this way - right now, I can sue for you any reason. Does it make sense that you can only enter settlements, which in the end are just mutual agreements to end the proceedings, by admitting fault? Whereas I can end the suit by fiat?
You’d only make civil court even more of a weapon than it already is for sides with more resources to bully sides with less resources.
Are we ever going to not settle and see one of these trials through to the end?
Generally not. If the bribe is high enough that the class won't likely get a better risk-adjusted reward than going to court, the company has neutered the incentive to see it through the very expensive process of discovery and proving guilt.