FTC Recognizes Netflix Settlement Is Really Just A Promotional Gimmick
from the do-they-read-Techdirt? dept
Back in November, we mocked the "settlement" that Netflix had agreed to in a class action suit concerning misleading advertising (though we also questioned just how "injured" anyone was by Netflix's original actions). The problem with the settlement went beyond the fact that the lawyers basically racked up most of the cash that Netflix paid out -- we've pretty much come to expect that. The real problem was that the settlement for customers was basically a marketing promotion, rather than any punishment, and was likely to pay off for Netflix rather handsomely in the long run. That's because the settlement meant Netflix customers would receive a "free" one month upgrade (or reinstated account if they had left), but at the end of the month, if they didn't proactively decline to keep the upgrade they would automatically be kept at that level and have to pay the higher fee. It would appear that the folks at the FTC aren't just going around and rubber stamping these deals as they saw the same thing we did (as did a number of others who set up websites to complain). The FTC has now asked the judge to reject the settlement, which they say: "appears dangerously close to being a promotional gimmick." As we said in the original post, if this settlement is allowed to stand, it opens up a great new line of business for some lawyers. Set up random class action lawsuits for some wrong that may have been done by customers and then quickly "settle" it for a few million (seen as an advertising cost by the "guilty" company) and force all their users into unexpected upgrades that many will fail to manually downgrade. It's the sort of thing that would pay for itself almost instantly.
Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.
Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.
While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.
–The Techdirt Team
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
Good for goose, good for landshark
"Counsel, you and your firms all have free upgrades for a month. Members of the Class, you will split $15 Million". If they attorneys are truly acting in the best interest of their clients, this wouldn't be much of an issue.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
We don't learn
[ link to this | view in thread ]
TimeWarner
[ link to this | view in thread ]
No Subject Given
I would expect it from politicians, but from judges? How much more corrupt, lackadaisical, and self-serving can our society become?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Sanction 'em! Big bucks, no wammy, STOP
So long as the penalties for CRIME are not enforced for these people, they will continue to game the system.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: No Subject Given
I'm tired of a few judges deciding what's right or wrong. I'd much rather have the majority decide.
[ link to this | view in thread ]