DirectRevenue Settles Class Action Lawsuit |
 |
 |
|
|
Adware company DirectRevenue has settled the lawsuit filed last April as a class action in the state of Illinois. DirectRevenue has been under fire for its installation through exploits, making its software next to impossible to remove by usual methods, bundling adware/spyware, using deceptive business practices.
Terms of this settlement include:
1) DirectRevenue will destroy any personally identifiable information about computer users including Social Security Numbers, bank account information, email addresses, etc. and must no longer collect such information. 2) DirectRevenue will force users to affirmatively accept installation of their software and disclose information about the functionality of the software separate from the EULA. 3) DirectRevenue is prohibited from installing software by Active X, security exploits or any other method that does not require users' affirmative consent. 4)DirectRevenue will not distribute software at sights targeted to children. This settlement is unusual in that no cash settlement is included for class members, but it allows for individuals to file claims against DirectRevenue for damages.
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
The parties have reached a tentative settlement apparently valued at approximately $611,000 in action filed against Tengasco CEO M.E. Ratliff and Tengasco, Inc. (Amex:TGC) on behalf of stockholders who purchased the company's common stock between August 1, 2001, and April 22, 2002. Persons eligible to participate in the settlement must file a proof of claim postmarked no later than July 16, 2004. Several class action suits have been filed against Dell Inc., the world's largest purveyor of personal computers, and financial partner CIT Bank, claiming that they are systematically deceiving customers who buy Dell products. Several class actions have been filed against wireless carrier US Unwired, Inc. (OTC BB:UNWR.OB), and certain of its officers and directors by stockholders who purchased the company's common stock between May 23, 2000, and August 13, 2002. 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. Several class actions have been filed against technology company Lattice Semiconductor Corporation (Nasdaq:LSCC), and certain of its officers and directors by stockholders who purchased the company's common stock between April 22, 2003, and April 19, 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. Kahn Gauthier Swick is investigating possible legal actions against email marketers who send unsolicited email in violation of the newly-enacted federal Controlling the Assault of Non-Solicited Pornography and Marketing Act (CAN-SPAM Act). The act requires unsolicited commercial e-mail messages to be labeled and to include opt-out instructions and the sender's physical address. It prohibits the use of deceptive subject lines and false headers in such messages. Violators may get stiff civil fines and even get prison sentences as criminals. If you have received email that you think may be prohibited by the act and would like a consultation, please forward all information to Kahn Gauthier, including a copy of the spam email. If you ever receive unsolicited faxes, you should know that federal law may allow you to receive as much as $1500 per fax sent to you. Two related class actions have been filed against numerous companies that send unsolicited faxes on behalf of Californians who allege that the unsolicited junk faxes were sent in violation of the federal Telephone Consumer Protection Act.
|