Poll: Will you opt out of the Sony Class Action Lawsuit?

[Danoloto]

There are a couple of reasons I will not join something like this:
1) I hate the whole American style "I'm mildly inconvinianced by this, so I'll sue the pant off of someone
2) A lawsuit like this looks to me like a money train... for the laywer who started it. He's going to get money together from all the 'angry people', and then he doesn't even have to win the lawsuit anymore... he's in the money!
3) Sony have had enough trouble as it is, I just want to see it up and running again ASAP, and also because
4) I don't always like Sony's approach (account details in plain text, did I really read that right?), but I -LOVE- their games. Uncharted, Resistance, Ratchet&Clank are but three reasons I would not want to see Sony Playstation go bankrupt. I don't want their money, I want quality entertainment.

So there's my 'no', fully explained.

 

[Jumplion]

No, I don't plan to add to the mess that Sony is already dealing with.

We shouldn't be focusing on Sony right at the present moment, we need to be concentrating on catching the bastards who caused this whole mess to begin with. So let Sony take a breather, rip the douchebag hackers who stole the information, take a deep breath, then start getting pissed at Sony for whatever reason you want to get mad at them.

 

[Tsaba]

No, It just isn't a very good time for sony and I'm not hopping on the band wagon to go sue the crap out of them based purely on the fact that I'm upset. It's the internet and I know there are elements out there that are out to hurt us, I would much rather someone go to sony and try and find out who is responsible for this and put them down instead.

 

[Elamdri]

Y'all realize that, if you have a PSN account, you've been automatically named as plaintiffs, right?

You actually have to contact the court and go through the legal paperwork to opt out. (I did so on the PS2 DRE case and it was a pain.) If you don't actively opt out, you will be considered a plaintiff. Usually, the notice of legal action that you get details the onerous process of how to opt out.

Yeah, you're right, I always forget that it's opt out.


I updated the top post with a link to the Joystiq article with the pleadings.

 

[TheAngryDM]

No. No I will not. First of all, a class action lawsuit is a way for a law firm to cash in on the event. The actual members of a successful class action lawsuit, rarely see much money. Literally, it can be on the order of a couple of dollars. The law firm, however, pockets a huge portion of the settlement. That is why law firms are quick to file such lawsuits. They are a potential gold mine for the firm and the members get chump change.

This is a cash in by a law firm that cannot even be sure it has grounds for a lawsuit. It will not be enough to show that people's data was compromised. First, there must be actual damages shown. Second, those damages must be the result of negligence on Sony's part, not merely a result of a criminal act by criminals. No one outside of Sony (and probably not yet inside of Sony) even knows the full extent of the damages yet, let alone whether or not this was because of Sony's failure to protect itself or in spite of Sony's protections.

The law firm is prematurely filing the suit to stake a claim to it, hoping that Sony will settle when all is said and done just to keep things quiet. They cash in for a modest settlement with no basis in reality and the class members (you and me) get an apology and a ten dollar coupon for something or maybe a check for two bucks.

 

[Elamdri]

2) A lawsuit like this looks to me like a money train... for the laywer who started it. He's going to get money together from all the 'angry people', and then he doesn't even have to win the lawsuit anymore... he's in the money!

Plaintiff's lawyers only get paid if they win, it's called a contingency fee. Rather than charge you up front, they take a percentage of the judgement as payment (usually around 30-40 percent).

(NOTE: There are certain instances where this isn't the case, but it's rare).

 

[Tavy]

Y'all realize that, if you have a PSN account, you've been automatically named as plaintiffs, right?

You actually have to contact the court and go through the legal paperwork to opt out. (I did so on the PS2 DRE case and it was a pain.) If you don't actively opt out, you will be considered a plaintiff. Usually, the notice of legal action that you get details the onerous process of how to opt out.

Isn't that just US citizens though? I don't think the US courts have to power to make PSN users in other countries plaintiffs.

They don't. US courts only have power in the US. HOWEVER if the European high courts get in on it then everyone in Europe will be one I suspect. And any individual countries that try. That would be my theory on that.

There are a couple of reasons I will not join something like this:
1) I hate the whole American style "I'm mildly inconvinianced by this, so I'll sue the pant off of someone
2) A lawsuit like this looks to me like a money train... for the laywer who started it. He's going to get money together from all the 'angry people', and then he doesn't even have to win the lawsuit anymore... he's in the money!
3) Sony have had enough trouble as it is, I just want to see it up and running again ASAP, and also because
4) I don't always like Sony's approach (account details in plain text, did I really read that right?), but I -LOVE- their games. Uncharted, Resistance, Ratchet&Clank are but three reasons I would not want to see Sony Playstation go bankrupt. I don't want their money, I want quality entertainment.

So there's my 'no', fully explained.

Awesome post.
And they have already stated that to send emails to 70 millions accounts would be far to much so they made public announcments.
And for the record....didn't the Pentagon not get hacked once? Or something serious with the American security? And that would be the most powerful security known to man no doubt. Point is no security is full proof and if your security places that guard over your missiles and such can get done over then so can a company like them. Grow up and stop saying them being hacked is their fault. Would you sue your bank if they got held up while you were inside and you got robbed?
Though funnily enough I see that as a yes from some of you....Americans love suing to much >.<

 

[UltraXan]

Nah, and for a number of reasons.

#1, I don't own a ps3.
#2, I don't really care about Sony's fuckups
#3, TEEHEE, THEY'RE GETTING SUED ^____^

 

[Coffinshaker]

well... if initial reports are correct that such a thing could cost the company $24 billion... then no.

I mean, do you like Sony and their games? Do you like the PS3? Then why would you cripple their company? Something like could stunt or even destroy it's growth and I'm sure there will be a lot of jobs lost because of it.

I'm not saying they shouldn't take any responsibility, but demanding that they should payout the big bucks doesn't just punish the company. It punishes the employees and customers too. Sure, they could have had better security, but it wasn't something that was supposed to happen. It's not negligence. It was just a bad day.

Know who you should be filing a class action against? The people responsible for the hacking! Stop giving support and kudos to the people who hack the machines and companies like this. I see a lot of people waving the flag in their favor when they see big time hacks, but it just hurts everyone. Why should Sony have to pay up because some glorified bandit broke in? Round up the posse and lets take him/them out! We should be working WITH Sony to help... not against.

If you still feel angry, get you credit card changed, it costs like $10 at most and if there were illegal transactions made, you can get that fixed. There! Can we be done with all this outrage now?

 

[SomethingUnrelated]

Fuck suing them, let's finish dealing with the problem before we start with the bullshit paperwork. I just want this shit to end.

 

[Elamdri]

No. No I will not. First of all, a class action lawsuit is a way for a law firm to cash in on the event. The actual members of a successful class action lawsuit, rarely see much money. Literally, it can be on the order of a couple of dollars. The law firm, however, pockets a huge portion of the settlement. That is why law firms are quick to file such lawsuits. They are a potential gold mine for the firm and the members get chump change.

This is a cash in by a law firm that cannot even be sure it has grounds for a lawsuit. It will not be enough to show that people's data was compromised. First, there must be actual damages shown. Second, those damages must be the result of negligence on Sony's part, not merely a result of a criminal act by criminals. No one outside of Sony (and probably not yet inside of Sony) even knows the full extent of the damages yet, let alone whether or not this was because of Sony's failure to protect itself or in spite of Sony's protections.

The law firm is prematurely filing the suit to stake a claim to it, hoping that Sony will settle when all is said and done just to keep things quiet. They cash in for a modest settlement with no basis in reality and the class members (you and me) get an apology and a ten dollar coupon for something or maybe a check for two bucks.

I actually had a family member get a settlement from a class action not too long ago that pretty fairly covered the losses we received. Personally, I don't really care that it mostly benefits the firm, because there really isn't much involved in the process besides waiting.

 

[Elamdri]

well... if initial reports are correct that such a thing could cost the company $24 billion... then no.

I mean, do you like Sony and their games? Do you like the PS3? Then why would you cripple their company? Something like could stunt or even destroy it's growth and I'm sure there will be a lot of jobs lost because of it.

I'm not saying they shouldn't take any responsibility, but demanding that they should payout the big bucks doesn't just punish the company. It punishes the employees and customers too. Sure, they could have had better security, but it wasn't something that was supposed to happen. It's not negligence. It was just a bad day.

Know who you should be filing a class action against? The people responsible for the hacking! Stop giving support and kudos to the people who hack the machines and companies like this. I see a lot of people waving the flag in their favor when they see big time hacks, but it just hurts everyone. Why should Sony have to pay up because some glorified bandit broke in? Round up the posse and lets take him/them out! We should be working WITH Sony to help... not against.

If you still feel angry, get you credit card changed, it costs like $10 at most and if there were illegal transactions made, you can get that fixed. There! Can we be done with all this outrage now?

Why would you sue the hackers? You have no clue who they are, probably no clue how to find them, and if you could, they probably don't have any money.

 

[Saltyk]

You can't sue them over the PSN outage. They have a contract clause that states the PSN is provided as-is. Voted no. It's pointless.

You know what you CAN sue them for? Them letting my personal information be stolen. The notion of someone suing them for the reason you stated is ludicrous.

Yes. Yes, I will.

Ya lets sue a company for something that they couldnt prevent. Ya cause I'm sure they "LET" the hacker just take all the info right?
You have no right to sue. No one does.
I would understand if they did something so the hacker could get the info, but they did what they were suppose to: they shut off the servers when they noticed it was getting attack.

So lets I leave my phone at your house and someone comes in and robs you and takes it can I sue you for letting him take my phone?

I'll accept this logic when you prove that they couldn't prevent it. I'm willing to wager you have little clue how Sony secured my personal information.

Am I wrong? Do you? Truth is, I entered an agreement with them. They broke it.

Better question: Do you know how they were securing your information? (and mine for that matter) I seriously doubt it.

Honestly, we don't know all the details yet. We don't know anything. We don't know how the hacker got into the network and got this information. If it is revealed that Sony truly did something wrong, I'm all for it. But right now, the only one I know did something wrong (and illegal) is the hacker(s) that did all this. Blame them. When you know Sony actually was negligent, you can blame them. And don't suggest that just because it happened that proves that Sony did something wrong. Even the most secure computers in the world are still vulnerable to attack.

 

[Fiz_The_Toaster]

Nope because it doesn't accomplish anything nor does it have any point.

 

[Coffinshaker]

well... if initial reports are correct that such a thing could cost the company $24 billion... then no.

I mean, do you like Sony and their games? Do you like the PS3? Then why would you cripple their company? Something like could stunt or even destroy it's growth and I'm sure there will be a lot of jobs lost because of it.

I'm not saying they shouldn't take any responsibility, but demanding that they should payout the big bucks doesn't just punish the company. It punishes the employees and customers too. Sure, they could have had better security, but it wasn't something that was supposed to happen. It's not negligence. It was just a bad day.

Know who you should be filing a class action against? The people responsible for the hacking! Stop giving support and kudos to the people who hack the machines and companies like this. I see a lot of people waving the flag in their favor when they see big time hacks, but it just hurts everyone. Why should Sony have to pay up because some glorified bandit broke in? Round up the posse and lets take him/them out! We should be working WITH Sony to help... not against.

If you still feel angry, get you credit card changed, it costs like $10 at most and if there were illegal transactions made, you can get that fixed. There! Can we be done with all this outrage now?

Why would you sue the hackers? You have no clue who they are, probably no clue how to find them, and if you could, they probably don't have any money.

lol, true. I'm just saying they're the ones really responsible. but I do know that it would be next to impossible to actually sue them. >(

 

[KrazyShrink]

I'm going with the "ignore it and hope it doesn't prove to be a problem" strategy.

 

[McMullen]

The gaming industry has enough problems, money is tight enough, layoffs are frequent enough, and the big 3 of gaming are timid enough without a big lawsuit. Fines are already being discussed anyway, in addition to Sony receiving some harsh attention from at least two US Senators (and with 2012 coming up, we can expect more where that came from).

Hackers will get what they want, whenever they want it bad enough. Someone suggested that Sony could have done more to keep the info secure, like keeping it on a server not connected to the network. Before I read that, I hadn't really grasped how out of touch some of the anti-Sony crowd are. If the info is there, it's at risk. The simple fact is that, in much the same way your body is never completely safe in the physical world, your information is never completely safe in the digital one. If you're a part of either, you are risking everything.

Maybe Sony could have done more, maybe not. Yes, the six-day delay was regrettable, but the corporate world is constructed in such a way that sounding the alarm days before having any hard data would probably be regarded as an irresponsible overreaction, even though from our standpoint a false alarm would definitely be preferable to what happened. Sony was screwed no matter what.

Sony did not commit a crime. The hackers did. I've heard a lot about what various groups are getting ready to do to Sony. I've heard nothing about what anyone with any authority is doing about the hackers.

One thing I've been wondering about is whether Anon will try to salvage its reputation by outing the hacker. In the past they've exposed quite a few corrupt politicians and executives, animal abusers, and just plain disgusting people.

I'm not sure if Anon has some sort of taboo against outing a fellow hacker, even one who has caused such comprehensive harm (seriously, this whole incident isn't good for anyone but the thieves and the lawyers), but I definitely think that this is a case that could use their particularly effective brand of vigilantism. Imagine the justice of this hacker having all his/her/their info being spread all over the net, for all their victims, and law enforcement, to see. That would be good times.

 

[TheAngryDM]

I actually had a family member get a settlement from a class action not too long ago that pretty fairly covered the losses we received. Personally, I don't really care that it mostly benefits the firm, because there really isn't much involved in the process besides waiting.

All right... I won't say it isn't possible. And there are well-intentioned and fair class-action suits. Call it a knee jerk reaction from someone who has seen a few of the other kind. I apologize.

I don't this suit is going to be one of the fair and well-intentioned ones. I think its going to be hard to prove damages and the investigation isn't even over yet, so it is uncertain as to whether this lawsuit has any grounds. This particular lawsuit has all of the earmarks of a cash-in, a hope by a law firm for a quick, out of court settlement. They take half the settlement and leave several million named plaintiffs to divide the other half. They won't fight for a fair amount. They will take whatever Sony offers. If Sony offers 50 million, that's 25 million to the lawyer and 25 million divided among... hell, even if its only ten million class members, that's a whopping $2.50 each. Huzzah!

What I mind is that this is ghoulish behavior. The law firm is not even waiting for the corpse to cool before it starts picking away - because some law firm was going to file. And it will benefit no one but the law firm involved. Sony will lose. You and I won't get anything worth anything. But the law firm will make out well. That's not something I want my name on.

 

[Elamdri]

I actually had a family member get a settlement from a class action not too long ago that pretty fairly covered the losses we received. Personally, I don't really care that it mostly benefits the firm, because there really isn't much involved in the process besides waiting.

All right... I won't say it isn't possible. And there are well-intentioned and fair class-action suits. Call it a knee jerk reaction from someone who has seen a few of the other kind. I apologize.

I don't this suit is going to be one of the fair and well-intentioned ones. I think its going to be hard to prove damages and the investigation isn't even over yet, so it is uncertain as to whether this lawsuit has any grounds. This particular lawsuit has all of the earmarks of a cash-in, a hope by a law firm for a quick, out of court settlement. They take half the settlement and leave several million named plaintiffs to divide the other half. They won't fight for a fair amount. They will take whatever Sony offers. If Sony offers 50 million, that's 25 million to the lawyer and 25 million divided among... hell, even if its only ten million class members, that's a whopping $2.50 each. Huzzah!

I will happily take my $2.50 settlement, even if it costs me more than $2.50 to drive to the bank to cash the check.

EDIT: I feel bad for plaintiffs who have to deal with Wal-Marts 3 dollar cash checking fees.

 

[-Drifter-]

No, I'm not, because it's fucking stupid. You're suing SONY because they got hacked? Where's the sense in that?