|
Search
Search through the thousands of lawsuits, complaints and recalls on our site.
 |
Case ID: 3532 | Technology | 08/13/2004
The parties have reached a settlement valued at $104.6 million in a class action filed against Microsoft Corporation on behalf of consumers who, between January 12, 1996, and December 31, 2002, resided in Arizona and indirectly purchased Microsoft operating system, productivity suite, spreadsheet, or word processing software for use in Arizona. The action alleged that Microsoft violated Arizona's antitrust and unfair competition laws by illegitimately using its monopoly power. Persons eligible to take part in the settlement may contact attorneys for the class for more information.
The settlement will make vouchers available to class members that may be used to buy any manufacturer's desktop, laptop and tablet computers; any software available for sale to the general public and used with those computer products; and specified peripheral devices for use with computers. The total number of vouchers issued will depend on the number of class members who claim vouchers. Under the terms of the settlement agreement, Microsoft will provide half of the difference between $104.6 million and the value of vouchers issued to class members to Arizona's public school districts in the form of vouchers that may be used by the school districts to purchase a broad range of hardware products, Microsoft and non-Microsoft software, and professional development services. The vouchers will be made available to public school districts in which 50% or more of the students are eligible for reduced-fee or free meals under the National School Lunch Program. The action alleged that Microsoft maintained a monopoly in the Arizona market since the late 1980s or early 1990s, that the monopoly was achieved by anticompetitive conduct, and that Microsoft's anticompetitive conduct eliminated competition in the operating system software market, deprived purchasers of the benefits of a free market, and injured consumers by forcing them by pay artificially high prices. Microsoft, the world’s leading supplier of operating systems software for personal computers, also allegedly engaged in conduct that eliminated or retarded the development of new software products that could support or become alternative platforms to Microsoft’s operating systems. Because of these activities, the price that Arizona residents paid for their software was allegedly higher than it would have been in a normally competitive market. Although federal law bars of a become indirect purchaser causes of action, Arizona, like every other state, with the exception of Maine and Michigan— allows class actions for indirect purchasers seeking redress against companies for antitrust violations.
At Lawcash.com, it is our goal to keep you informed about important legal cases, class actions and settlements. Our lawyers offer free legal evaluations in tort cases, class actions, personal injury, and other lawsuits because we are dedicated to helping you resolve your legal complaints. Other Technology Cases of Interest If you've got one of the Palm Personal Assistant models lying around that had the problem where the internal battery didn't always work, and you'd lose your data if you went to replace the batteries, Palm will replace these models with a refurbished equal or newer model. On October 5, 2005, the parties reached a tenative settlement on claims for overtime compensation. My significant other works for Electronic Arts, and I'm what you might call a disgruntled spouse." So starts the blog entry of an unhappy wife. But the details are enough to make anyone wince: mandatory hours of 9 AM to 10 PM, seven days a week--that's right, a MANDATORY 90+ hour work week. With NO overtime, NO compensation time, and no additional sick or vacation leave. If that sounds illegal, guess what? It is. And publicity about the unfair working conditions at the game producer has now resulted in the filing of a class action lawsuit against the company. On November 17, 2004, the Court approved the proposed settlement in a class action that had been filed against the San Diego Association of Realtors, the North San Diego Association of Realtors, the Pacific Southwest Association of Realtors, Incorporated, the East San Diego County Association of Realtors, Incorporated, the Coronado Association of Realtors and Sandicor, Incorporated for charging smaller realtors higher fees to a multiple listing service (MLS) than larger firms from 1990 to the present. The parties have reached a $1.35 million settlement in an administrative proceeding filed by the SEC against certain former officers and directors of software company First Virtual Communications, Inc., (Nasdaq: FVCXE) on behalf of stockholders who purchased the company's common stock between January 28, 1999, and April 6, 1999. The action claimed that the defendants violated federal securities laws by issuing a series of material misrepresentations to the market over this time period, thereby artificially inflating the price of the company's securities. Claim forms must be postmarked on or before September 21, 2004, to be considered valid. Several class actions have been filed against technology company Mobility Electronics, Inc. (Nasdaq: MOBE) and certain of its officers and directors by stockholders who purchased the company's common stock between September 2, 2003, and January 5, 2004. The actions claim that the defendants violated federal securities laws by issuing a series of material misrepresentations to the market over this time period, thereby artificially inflating the price of the company's securities. Company advertising should not be done at consumers' expense. The parties have reached a tentative nationwide $1,930,500 settlement in a class action filed against Internet domain-registration service Register.com, Inc., and its parent, Forman Interactive Corporation, on behalf of persons who alleged that Register.com breached its contracts with them and violated deceptive trade practices laws between January 30, 1998, through March 6, 2001, when it failed to disclose to them that it used a "Coming Soon" page on newly-created domains that advertised Register.com services. |
IT'S FREE
|
© 2000 - 2008 Copyright. All rights reserved nola3, llc.
