Connect with us

Business

Napoleon vs Amazon: How To Join Amazon Class Action Lawsuit?

Published

on

Napoleon vs Amazon: How To Join Amazon Class Action Lawsuit?

If you have fallen victim to unfair terms when you have used Amazon’s service in any form, you can also join the Amazon Prime Video Class action lawsuit.

Amazon hit with class action lawsuit over Prime Video ad fees

Amazon is facing several lawsuits and on Friday, February 09, 2024, it was slapped with another $5 million lawsuit by a plaintiff, Wilbert Napoleon, residing in California. The lawsuit pertains to the showing of ads on Prime Video and this action has been challenged. The misleading advertisements on Prime Video contravene the Consumer Protection Act.

The lawsuit whose PDF copy has been obtained by Unique News Online, has been slapped a week after Amazon started showing limited ads to its U.S. subscribers. If the viewers want an ad-free experience, they will have to pay an extra fee of $2.99.

Advertisement

The complainant has asked the court to consider it as a class action and representing those subscribers who have taken an Amazon Prime membership before December 28, 2023. The lawsuit asks the court to offer relief which includes protection from the company’s deceptive behavior, provide damages, and also a jury trial.

The lawsuit further stated that subscribers had taken the annual subscription of Amazon Prime in the belief that it would be an ad-free experience. Subscribers are entitled to view the movies and TV shows uninterrupted and without any nagging ads in between. The running of ads on Amazon Prime has misled and hurt the subscribers and deprived them of the services for which they had paid.

When the consumers had signed for the annual subscription they were led into the belief that the TV shows and movies will be ad-free.

Advertisement

Amazon had first talked about bringing limited ads to Prime Video content in late September 2023. The reason for this action was to invest in compelling content and to continue augmenting this investment in the future. Amazon had also stated that it would be sending e-mails to the Prime members several weeks before the start of the ads and also detailed how the subscribers can get ad-free options.

However, it had stated that the price of Prime membership would remain flat.

Most big OTT Platforms like Disney, Netflix, and Max all offer ad-based subscriptions as a low-cost option for subscribers. However, in the case of Amazon, it started to include the ads in its base subscription models and then started charging a premium from its subscribers for an ad-free experience.

Advertisement

As per Alexys Coronel, head of U.S. entertainment and telecommunications for Amazon Ads, the ads will be reaching 115 million unique viewers in the U.S., with even more seeing them globally.

How To Join Amazon Class Action Lawsuit?

Assess Eligibility: Determine if you qualify to join the lawsuit based on factors such as residency, membership, or involvement in the alleged issue.

Research the Lawsuit: Gather information about the lawsuit, including its nature, parties involved, and the legal basis for the claims.

Advertisement

Consult with Legal Counsel: Consider seeking advice from a qualified attorney who specializes in the relevant area of law. They can assess your eligibility and provide guidance on joining the lawsuit.

Identify Plaintiffs’ Counsel: Locate the attorneys representing the plaintiffs in the lawsuit. This information may be available through legal documents, online resources, or by contacting legal associations.

Contact Plaintiffs’ Counsel: Reach out to the plaintiffs’ counsel to express your interest in joining the lawsuit. Provide any relevant information or documentation they may require to assess your eligibility.

Advertisement

Complete Necessary Forms: Fill out any forms or paperwork provided by the plaintiffs’ counsel to formally join the lawsuit. This may include affidavits, declarations, or consent forms.

Submit Supporting Evidence: Provide any supporting evidence or documentation that strengthens your case and supports your claims in the lawsuit. This could include contracts, receipts, correspondence, or other relevant materials.

Stay Informed: Stay updated on the progress of the lawsuit by maintaining communication with the plaintiffs’ counsel or monitoring legal updates through official channels.

Advertisement

Attend Hearings or Depositions: If required, participate in legal proceedings related to the lawsuit, such as hearings, depositions, or settlement negotiations. Your attorney can advise you on your rights and obligations during these proceedings.

Follow Court Orders and Deadlines: Adhere to any court orders, deadlines, or requirements related to your participation in the lawsuit. Failure to comply could jeopardize your ability to participate or affect the outcome of the case.

Also Read: The New York Times’ Lawsuit Against OpenAI Explained

Advertisement

Manoj Nair: With a decade of news writing across various media platforms, Manoj is a seasoned professional. His dual role as an English teacher underscores his command over communication. He adeptly covers Politics, Technology, Crypto, and more, reflecting a broad and insightful perspective that engages and informs diverse audiences.

Business

Gerber and Perrigo Face New Lawsuit Over ‘Store-Brand’ Infant Formula Pricing; All Pending Toxic Baby Food Cases Consolidated into New Class Action MDL

Published

on

Infant formula makers Gerber and Perrigo have been hit with a class-action lawsuit, which accuses the companies of artificially creating a shortage and jacking up prices for “store-brand” formula sold at Walmart, Walgreens, and other retailers.

The lawsuit was filed on Monday in federal court in Alexandria, Virginia. It accuses Perrigo of violating antitrust laws by collaborating with Gerber to prevent competitors from entering the market for store-brand formula.

Perrigo, one of the nation’s largest suppliers of store-brand formula, sells its products under retail labels at prices lower than similar branded products. However, the lawsuit alleges that Gerber, by granting Perrigo the first right of refusal to Gerber’s excess formula supply, which could have been sold to other competitors, is engaging in practices that stifle competition.

Advertisement

The lawsuit claims that through this arrangement, Gerber agreed to keep its excess formula out of the store-brand market, thereby gaining a share of Perrigo’s profits. The lawsuit was filed by four residents of California, Illinois, Michigan, and Pennsylvania, who will represent millions of customers who have purchased store-brand baby formula. The lawsuit does not name formula retailers as defendants. It asks the court to intervene and end the anticompetitive deals between Perrigo and Gerber and seeks more than $5 million in monetary damages.

This lawsuit is similar to another case filed in Brooklyn federal court by a potential store-brand competitor, P&L Development. Gerber and Perrigo requested the dismissal of that case, which was denied by the judge in February. The companies involved in the lawsuit claimed they compete fairly with other infant formula manufacturers, including those of store-brand formulas. The lawsuit also cited the squeezing out of P&L Development from the store-brand market, which has led to higher prices.

Gerber is also facing numerous lawsuits accusing its brands of baby food of containing dangerously high levels of toxic heavy metals, such as lead, arsenic, and mercury. These heavy metals are extremely toxic, even for adults, and can have catastrophic consequences on developing children, leading to health complications and neurological damage. Conditions such as ADHD and autism may be linked to consuming these toxic baby foods.

Advertisement

On April 11, 2024, all the lawsuits pertaining to toxic baby foods, which had been filed at different times in various courts, were consolidated into a new class action MDL in the Northern District of California and assigned to Judge Jacqueline Scott Corley. Besides Gerber, other baby food manufacturers like Beech-Nut and Campbell Soup Co. have also been named as defendants.

Also Read: Leading Ethereum Blockchain Entity Files Lawsuit Against SEC, Requests Court Declaration That Token Is Not a Security

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Business

Leading Ethereum Blockchain Entity Files Lawsuit Against SEC, Requests Court Declaration That Token Is Not a Security

Published

on

Leading Ethereum Blockchain Entity Files Lawsuit Against SEC, Requests Court Declaration That Token Is Not a Security

The legal wrangling between the crypto sector and the SEC, or the Securities and Exchange Commission, is getting uglier, with ConsenSys, a major protagonist of the Ethereum Blockchain, filing a lawsuit against the regulatory body in a Texas federal court. This legal action seeks an intervention to ward off a looming SEC lawsuit against the company regarding features of its popular MetaMask wallet. The lawsuit also seeks the court’s help in deciding once and for all the vexed question of whether Ethereum’s digital token, Ether, is not a security. The legal uncertainty hangs heavily on the crypto sector and puts a question mark on its very existence.

In an exhaustive 34-page legal filing, ConsenSys states that the SEC’s endeavor to exert control over Ethereum is both illegal and a threat to blockchain technology.

The complaint states,

Advertisement

“The SEC’s unlawful seizure of authority over ETH would spell disaster for the Ethereum network, and for ConsenSys. Every holder of ETH, including ConsenSys, would fear violating the securities laws if he or she were to transfer ETH on the network. This would bring the use of the Ethereum blockchain in the United States to a halt, crippling one of the internet’s greatest innovations.”

The lawsuit also alleges that SEC Chairman Gary Gensler has embarked on an aggressive enforcement policy directed at the big players in the crypto sector like Coinbase and Uniswap. The lawsuit particularly points out a campaign that involved a deluge of subpoenas asking firms and developers for documents related to their dealings with the nonprofit Ethereum Foundation, which supports the blockchain’s development.

The crypto sector is up in arms against Gensler’s tactics and has contended that the SEC has never provided clear rules meant for the distinct features of blockchain technology. However, Gensler negates this argument, saying that the existing securities laws are clear and sufficient, and that the crypto industry refuses to comply with them.

Gensler’s actions are full of contradictions since, in the past, the SEC had maintained that blockchain’s tokens, like Bitcoin, are not securities and hence beyond its purview. A senior official in 2018 had stated that Ethereum has reached a state where it is adequately decentralized, and further, the agency also gave the green signal for the launch of Ethereum futures trading—an implicit acknowledgement that Ether is a commodity. However, at present, Gensler is using a recent feature of Ethereum, known as staking, as grounds for the recent legal campaign.

Advertisement

The lawsuit was filed after the SEC issued a Wells Notice, which is akin to a formal letter warning that the agency intends to sue a firm and could lead to a settlement later. The SEC charged ConsenSys that MetaMask was operating as an unlicensed broker-dealer. MetaMask offered users a means to stake Ethereum on their behalf. Staking was a feature introduced in September 2022 on the Blockchain as a replacement for the energy-intensive mining process. The process involves a system of validators who pledge collateral to become trusted validators.

The SEC objects to the process of staking, which has changed Ethereum from a commodity into a security. ConsenSys founder Joe Lubin has called this account of the SEC “preposterous”.

Lubin said,

Advertisement

“The act of staking is really just posting a security bond so you can get paid to contribute labor and resources to help operate the Ethereum protocol. Now they’re trying to turn that into some sort of investment contract.”

Lubin also stated that the SEC’s actions will lead to a halt in the growth of the crypto sector and blockchain technology as a whole. Lubin feels that the SEC seeks to block pending applications by companies to launch spot ETFs for Ethereum, following the huge popularity of Bitcoin ETFs. The SEC is in fact trying to regulate a technology on its merits and it will only stifle innovation.

Also Read: New Class-Action Lawsuit Accuses Rivian of Making Materially False and Misleading Statements

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Net Worth

Caterina Fake Net Worth 2024: How Much is the American entrepreneur and businesswoman Worth?

Published

on

Caterina Fake Net Worth 2024: How Much is the American entrepreneur and businesswoman Worth?

Who is Caterina Fake?

Caterina Fake is a renowned American entrepreneur and co-founder of several groundbreaking ventures, including Flickr and Hunch. Born on June 13, 1969, in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, Fake has been a driving force in reshaping the digital landscape through her innovative ideas and entrepreneurial acumen.

Caterina Fake Career

From her early days in Pittsburgh to her rise in Silicon Valley, Caterina Fake’s career has been marked by a relentless pursuit of excellence. Co-founding platforms like Flickr and Hunch, she has revolutionized how we connect and share information online. Her visionary leadership and creative brilliance have cemented her status as a trailblazer in the tech industry.

Caterina Fake Net Worth

As of 2024, according to TheRichest, Caterina Fake’s net worth stands at an impressive $25 million. Her entrepreneurial ventures, including Flickr and Hunch, have contributed significantly to her financial success. With a keen eye for emerging trends and a knack for innovation, Fake continues to inspire aspiring entrepreneurs around the world.

Advertisement

Caterina Fake Age

Currently 54 years old, Caterina Fake was born on June 13, 1969. Despite her age, she remains a dynamic force in the business world, constantly pushing the boundaries of what’s possible in technology and entrepreneurship.

Caterina Fake Family: Husband and Children

Caterina Fake was previously married to Stewart Butterfield, with whom she co-founded Flickr. They tied the knot in 2001 but announced their split in 2007. They share one child, Mint Butterfield, who has recently been reported missing. Caterina Fake is currently in a relationship with Jaiku co-founder Jyri Engeström.

Caterina Fake Height and Weight

While specific details about Caterina Fake’s height and weight are not readily available, her stature in the tech industry is undeniable. Standing tall as a visionary leader and innovator, Fake’s impact transcends physical measurements, leaving an enduring legacy in the digital sphere.

Advertisement

Also Read: Ethan Payne Net Worth 2024: How Much is the English YouTuber, Streamer, and Internet Personality Worth?

Continue Reading

Trending

This will close in 5 seconds