Ever had NetFlix?

[Mindf!3ldzX]

Not a current NetFlix customer?Prepare to get paid,something....

What does the Settlement provide?
Netflix has agreed to change its data retention practices so that it separates (known as �decoupling�) Entertainment Content Viewing History (that is, movies and TV shows that someone watched) from identification information for those subscribers who have not been a Netflix subscriber for at least 365 days, with some exceptions.
In addition, Netflix will pay $9 million into a Settlement Fund to:
� Make donations to Court-approved not-for-profit organizations, institutions, or programs.
� Pay notice and settlement administration expenses.
� Pay attorneys� fees of up to 25% or $2.25 million of the Settlement Fund, plus up to $25,000 in expenses.
� Pay a total incentive award of $30,000 to the Named Plaintiffs.
Proposals from potential donation recipients will be sought, and, after consideration, recommendations will be made to the Court. A list of the proposed donation recipients will be posted on the website.
Your Options
If you do nothing, you will remain in the Settlement and your rights will be affected. If you do not want to be included, you must exclude yourself by November 14, 2012. If you exclude yourself you will keep your right to sue Netflix about the claims in this lawsuit. If you remain in the Settlement, you can object to it by November 14, 2012.
The Court will hold a hearing on December 5, 2012 to consider any objections, whether to approve the Settlement, award attorneys� fees, and incentive award. You can appear at the hearing, but you don�t have to. You can hire your own attorney, at your own expense, to appear or speak for you at the hearing.

[wicked_lord]

Hmm not exactly sure wtf is going on, been a customer for 4+ years

[Mindf!3ldzX]

Way back in the day, movie rental companys wasn't allowed to keep a history of what you've rented, someone never told NetFlix about a 20 year old law, and now their ignorance will cost them.

I don't entirely understand it yet, but the more I read, the only people gonna get paid are lawyers. Go fig.

[wicked_lord]

That sucks..

[Mindf!3ldzX]

That sucks..

Yea, I guess they didn't understand the term "Class Action Lawsuit" when they decided lawyers soak up around 2.2Million , 2 initital plantiffs around 30K , and the rest is donated to charities of the Judges choice.


Let me get this straight , rights of thousands on top of thousands of users are violated.

and less than 1% of those users will be compensated for being the entire reason for the class action to exist.

Thats some bullshit, I think I'll opt out and do nothing. Charities may sound and cozy but in reality it depends on the charity and what it represents.

[lohphat]

Been a customer for under a year. Hardly ever watch anything anyway.

It doesn't sound like all those newer customers will get a cut though, just the plaintiffs involved in the litigation, and that if you'd want some of that cash, you'd have to get your own lawyer involved.

[Baker]

I have Netflix and that classic action suit is 10x b.s.

Netflix is guilty of "providing you with your own video watching history" and keeping it around after you cancel for a while so if you sign back up again you won't lose it.

Oh yeah ... and of that $9 Million for Netflix being "evil" and making it so your history is saved so they don't have to irritate you with movies you've already seen --- what jerks! ---

1) $30,000 went to customers. 6 of them got $5,000
2) $2.25 million goes to LAWYERS
3) These scum lawyers sued Netflix on behalf of NetFlix subscribers like me without our consent.
4) The other $6 million goes to charity or something ridiculous

It is insane that some lawyers somewhere I don't even know can sue on behalf of me and the other 29 million people they don't know who subscribe to Netflix.

As far as I can tell, they represented SIX out of 29 million subscribers.

And the lawyers made a killing. Over nothing but Netflix making it so you can keep track of which movies you've seen.

And Netflix did do anything wrong. They state that keep your video history on file so if you come back after you cancel (very common) you still have a list of the movies you've seen and how you rated them.

[Todd Fairfield]

liberal lawyers with no moral compass

these guys litigating are always liberal lawyers with no moral compass. their sole intent is to get rich quick without regard to destroying the company which may employ hundreds or thousands of american citizens.

one reason they dont want companies matching up movies with names may partly be because of an incident in the 1980's. a nosy liberal washington reporter gave money for a copy of the complete list of VHS tapes rented from a D.C. video store by an old judge named robert bork.

robert bork was a conservative god fearin man & the liberal washington reporter assumed he would find adult XXX rated movies in his history of rented vhs tapes. he assumed this would destroy his reputation and his chance to serve on the supreme court. the sole purpose of digging into what movies he rented was character assassination.

out of 146 movies he found out the good judge watched a lot of alfred hitchc0ck, james bond and john wayne movies. no XXX rated films listed. mostly PG and G and a couple of R rated movies such as jack nicholson's The Shining which they noted he had rented twice.

judge bork turned out to enjoy tame classic movies with cary grant, katherine hepburn, jimmy stewart, roger moore and peter sellers as the pink panther. he never made it past ted kennedy on the vote to be a supreme court justice and the term borked became a verb. ted kennedy burns in hell for the chappaquiddick incident.

fuck teddy kennedy. by the way back alley abortions which kenedy mentions below as he lies about robert bork, turned out to be an invented myth with little or no evidence which very few took place. "jane roe" of roe v wade abortion trial changed her mind and is now pro life.

the first black to hold an office was a republican, the first black & first woman to serve on the supreme court were nominated by the republicans. but anyway in case you didnt catch it fuck ted kennedy.

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oNaasFvvFlE]Flashback: Ted Kennedy 'Borking' Bork (1987) - YouTube[/ame]

[A VERY unoriginal name]

Thats some bullshit, I think I'll opt out and do nothing. Charities may sound and cozy but in reality it depends on the charity and what it represents.

The Charity of Profit

[lohphat]

these guys litigating are always liberal lawyers with no moral compass.

Uhg, nauseatingly partisan.

[Todd Fairfield]

it is what it is

Uhg, nauseatingly partisan.

everyone is partisan. a man who stands for nothing, will fall for anything.

we have a judge in our family, the lawyers mostly know each other and there is a distinct pattern of liberals litigating these sort of cases. on the other hand you generally dont have a lot of conservative lawyers who work for legal-aide which serves vulnerable and disadvantaged people.

as a side note in all the decisions that have substantially enlarged criminal rights, you'll find the liberal ACLU there. again its a pattern.

[lohphat]

Thanks for the anecdote, but you have no evidence that this story about Netflix, or the lawyers who are litigating has anything to do with "liberalism."

[Solecord]

You can opt out of the settlement. I think I'm going to.

[Todd Fairfield]

Thanks for the anecdote, but you have no evidence that this story about Netflix, or the lawyers who are litigating has anything to do with "liberalism."

you sir are correct that i have no evidence at this time.

i'm not a fuckin scientist. but would you like to make a friendly wager and i will see what i can come up with on the law firms political persuasian?

another broad brush generalization made by liberals is that if you dont agree with their issues that you HATE.

for example:Carly McGehee, a Dallas political activist who came up with the idea of the chick-fil-a kiss-in, said more than 15,000 people said they would join the protest since she posted an announcement on her Facebook page on July 19.

Cathy's chick-fil-a company "is continuously supporting hate and bigotry and intolerance," said McGehee, 24.

the company hires blacks,whites, gays, jews, indians, cowboys and did i mention gays? where can you prove the company ceo is a hater? he simply disagrees with the gay interpretation of marriage. gays can marry just not same sex.

why is it this generation above all others throughout world history get to change traditions and when you disagree with them you are labeled a HATER, bigot and intolerant? they then try to destroy your ability to earn a living because you have a different opinion... that is HATE.

i dont hate gays. im not homophobic or afraid of gays, i just dont see tampering with something so simple as marriage to include everybody and anybody.

what is to keep couples from marrying other couples, or why cant a sister marry her brother or why couldnt mormons keep their established tradition of having as many as 27 wives? why cant you marry your mom if your father dies? not gonna have children with her or my sister but neither will reggie get dale pregnant in a gay relationship.

save the hate for the hitlers and child rapists of the world, nothing ever goes viral about dictators and little boy fuckers.

Gay Employees Of Chick-Fil-A Speak Out! They're Caught In The Middle Of A Heated Public Debate | PerezHilton.com

[lohphat]