Guess what just froze over??
Carew29
Posts: 4,025 ✭✭
Carew29
Posts: 4,025 ✭✭
Carew29
Posts: 4,025 ✭✭
Comments
Good for those guys taking action. While I don't think it was an intentional misdoing on eBay's behalf, it is an error and and I am glad to see it spoken to.
My Auctions
http://sportsfansnews.com/author/andy-fischer/
<< <i>I just got a notice about it in My Messages, i guess they are looking for more victims. >>
They actually are not. It states that if you are part of the "Class," that you need to do nothing further. Only if you wish not to be part of the "Class" should you take any action.
My Auctions
http://sportsfansnews.com/author/andy-fischer/
Thx for spreading the word!
COUNTY OF SANTA CLARA
JOHN ROCKERS, MARK RAWLING and
BRIAN MORK , On Behalf of Themselves and for
the Benefit of All with the Common or General
Interest, Any Persons Injured, and All Others
Similarly Situated,
Plaintiff,
vs.
EBAY, INC., et al.,
Defendants.
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
Case No. 1:05-CV-035930
CLASS ACTION
NOTICE OF SETTLEMENT OF CLASS ACTION
DATE ACTION FILED: 02/17/05
THIS IS A LEGAL NOTICE. YOUR RIGHTS MAY BE AFFECTED.
PLEASE READ IT CAREFULLY.
To: All eBay users from February 16, 2001 to the present. If you claim to have been harmed by eBay raising the eBay bidder's existing bid where no higher competing bid had been made and where raising the bid was not necessary to meet a reserve minimum you are a Member of the "Class" and your rights may be affected by the proposed class action settlement of a lawsuit alleging that eBay would automatically increase in certain circumstances an existing bid where no competing bid had been made and where it was not necessary to meet a reserve minimum. eBay denies any and all of the contentions and allegations of wrongdoing relating to eBay's increasing an existing bid where no competing bid had been made and where it was not necessary to meet a reserve minimum, and denies that the Members of the Class have suffered any damage. This Notice summarizes the terms of the settlement, and explains your rights and options under the settlement.
I. THE LAWSUIT
On February 17, 2005, a complaint was filed by plaintiff Glenn Block in the Superior Court of the State of California County of Santa Clara ( the "Court") as a class action alleging that eBay's automatic increase in certain circumstances of an existing bid where no competing bid had been made and increasing the bid was not necessary to meet a minimum reserve was improper and artificially inflated the bids of eBay buyers, thus causing damage to eBay buyers (the "Action"). On April 17, 2006, an Amended Complaint which, among other things, substituted Plaintiffs John Rockers, Mark Rawling and Brian Mork for the original plaintiff was filed in the Court. The caption of the Action is Rockers v. eBay, Inc., et al., Case No. 1:05-CV-035930.
II. THE SETTLEMENT TERMS
The parties participated in mediation with the Honorable Read Ambler (Ret.) in an effort to resolve the Action. As a result of the mediation and in order to settle the allegations in the Action, eBay has agreed to cease the conduct alleged by making the following "curative disclosure" that is relative to the misrepresentations claimed by Plaintiffs:
In response to a system prompt, if a high bidder attempts to raise his maximum bid when such bidder is then between bid increments, eBay shall first disclose to such bidder the exact amount of any resulting bid increase that would otherwise occur by virtue of the bidder raising the maximum bid. By way of illustration only and using the facts set forth in paragraph 23 of the Complaint, upon raising the maximum bid once plaintiff had reached his existing bid maximum of $111.00, eBay would disclose whether raising the maximum bid level would result in the $111.00 bid being raised to the next bid increment over the last competitive bid of $110.00 and, if so, specify the exact amount to which the bid would be raised - that is, $112.50.
In addition, eBay has agreed to pay the sum of $2.1 million ("Settlement Fund"). The Settlement Fund will be distributed to one or more federally tax exempt charities chosen by Plaintiffs' Counsel and approved by the Court. None of the charities selected by Plaintiffs' Counsel and approved by the Court shall be directly or indirectly affiliated or associated with Plaintiffs or their counsel. Based on information provided by eBay to Plaintiffs' Counsel, the $2.1 million is estimated to be approximately 50% of the claimed damages and all other economic harm allegedly incurred by Members of the Class. Distribution of the Settlement Fund to charitable organizations is appropriate because any attempt to distribute the Settlement Fund to individual Members of the Class - whose average recovery would be less than $1.00 - would result in administrative costs that would consume any settlement proceeds.
eBay has also agreed to separately pay Plaintiffs' Counsel $800,000 for past and anticipated future attorneys' fees and expenses regarding the Action, subject to Court approval ("Attorney Fees"). This amount was negotiated and agreed to after the substantive provisions of the settlement were reached and after the memorandum setting forth the material terms of the settlement was executed. Plaintiffs' Counsel, subject to Court approval, intend to pay up to $104,300.00 and $150,000.00 to Glenn Block (or Glenn Block, P.C.) and Daniel Block (or DSB Consulting, Inc.), respectively, for their expert services in this Action from the Attorney Fees. Glenn Block was the original plaintiff in the Action and provided technical assistance to Plaintiffs' Counsel regarding eBay's auction practices, the allegations in the Action, the calculation of damages and economic harm, and due diligence. Daniel Block is Glenn Block's son and provided computer, programming and data mining expertise that was otherwise unavailable to Plaintiffs in a timely and efficient manner. Their expertise was unique and necessary for the successful prosecution of the Action.
eBay shall also separately pay, subject to Court approval, the three Plaintiffs named in the Amended Complaint, $1,000 to reimburse them for their time, costs and efforts in representing the Class.
III. CONSEQUENCES OF THE SETTLEMENT
If the Court approves the settlement, a judgment will be entered dismissing the lawsuit with prejudice against eBay and all of its past and present officers, directors, shareholders, employees, insures, agents, representatives, partners, joint-ventures, parents, subsidiaries, affiliates, and attorneys (the "Released Persons"). This means that Members of the Class will be barred from bringing their own lawsuit against any of the Released Persons relating to eBay's alleged practice of raising an eBay bidder's existing bid where no higher competing bid had been made, and where raising the bid was not necessary to meet a reserve minimum. If you do not want to be barred from bring your own lawsuit on such claims, you must validly and timely request exclusion from the Class, as set forth below.
IV. YOUR OPTIONS
If you are a Class Member, you have the following options:
(A) Participate in the settlement. To participate in the settlement, you do not need to do anything. If the Court approves the settlement and the judgment is not successfully appealed, the terms of the settlement will be implemented.
(B) Request exclusion from the Class and settlement. If you wish to be excluded from the Class and the settlement, you must send a written request for exclusion by regular or express mail, so that it is postmarked no later than January 30, 2007. Your exclusion request must include (1) your name, address, and telephone number; and (2) a statement that you wish to be excluded from the Class and settlement in Rockers v. eBay, Inc., et al., Case No. 1:05-CV-035930. If you submit a valid and timely exclusion request, you will not participate in the settlement. You will not be bound by the judgment dismissing the lawsuit with prejudice as to Released Persons, and your claims will not be released.
(C) Comment on the settlement. If you remain in the Class, you may comment in support of or in opposition to the settlement. To do so, you must, no later than January 30, 2007, file your comment or objection with the Court and send copies by regular or express mail to Plaintiffs' Counsel at the addresses below:
The Court:
Clerk of the Court
SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
COUNTY OF SANTA CLARA
Civil Division
191 North First Street
San Jose, CA 95113
Plaintiffs' Counsel:
Jeffrey D. Light
LERACH COUGHLIN STOIA GELLER
RUDMAN & ROBBINS LLP
655 West Broadway, Suite 1900
San Diego, CA 92101-3301
Your written comment or objection must include (1) your name, address, and telephone number; (2) information sufficient to establish your membership in the Class; (3) a statement of your views; (4) any supporting documentation you wish to submit; and (5) a reference to Rockers v. eBay, Inc., et al., Case No. 1:05-CV-035930. If you wish to appear and present your objection orally at the fairness hearing described in Part V below, your written objection must contain a notice that you intend to appear and be heard, a statement of the positions you intend to present at the hearing, and any supporting arguments. You may, but need not, appear in the lawsuit through your own attorney. If you do so, you will be responsible for your own attorney's fees and expenses.
V. FAIRNESS HEARING
A hearing will be held on February 13, 2007, at 9:00 a.m. before the Honorable Jack Komar, Superior Court Judge, in Department 17C at the Santa Clara Superior Old Courthouse, 161 North First Street, San Jose, California 95113. The purpose of the hearing will be to determine (a) whether the proposed settlement including the attorneys' fees and expenses and service awards that eBay has separately agreed to pay should be approved as fair, reasonable and adequate and should be granted; and (b) whether the Action and the claims of the Members of the Class should be dismissed with prejudice pursuant to the settlement. This hearing may be rescheduled without further notice to the Class. You may attend the hearing if you wish, but are not required to do so to participate in the settlement.
VI. HOW TO GET MORE INFORMATION
You can get more information by contacting Plaintiffs' Counsel at the address listed in Part IV (C). Complete copies of the settlement agreement and all other pleadings and papers filed in the lawsuit are available for inspection and copying, during regular business hours, at the Office of the Clerk of the Court, Superior Court of the State of California, County of Santa Clara, Civil Division, 161 North First Street, San Jose, CA 95113.
PLEASE DO NOT CONTACT THE COURT REGARDING THIS NOTICE.
DATED: November 8, 2006
BY ORDER OF THE COURT
SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF
CALIFORNIA, COUNTY OF SANTA CLARA
My Auctions
They should not up your current bid if you are only upping your max bid and are the current leader.
My Auctions
<< <i>No. Say you bid $112.61, and are currently the bid leader at $101. Then someone else bids $112.50. You would still be the leading bidder at $112.61. If you then went in and upped your highest bid to say, $125.00, then the way eBay works now is that it would up your existing bid to $115.00 because that is the next highest bid increment. If no one else bid, eBay would have made you pay $2.39 too much just because you upped your max bid.
They should not up your current bid if you are only upping your max bid and are the current leader. >>
That is the way I read this as well. Should be interesting to see how this plays out.
Collecting Tony Perez PSA and Rookie Baseball PSA
<< <i>No. Say you bid $112.61, and are currently the bid leader at $101. Then someone else bids $112.50. You would still be the leading bidder at $112.61. If you then went in and upped your highest bid to say, $125.00, then the way eBay works now is that it would up your existing bid to $115.00 because that is the next highest bid increment. If no one else bid, eBay would have made you pay $2.39 too much just because you upped your max bid.
They should not up your current bid if you are only upping your max bid and are the current leader. >>
Got it. Thanks for the clarification, Jordan.
Collecting Tony Perez PSA and Rookie Baseball PSA
Every one of the thousands and thousands of bidders who was affected - gets NOTHING.
Feel well represented?
Nick
Reap the whirlwind.
Need to buy something for the wife or girlfriend? Check out Vintage Designer Clothing.
As is usually the case...clever lawyers find their ways of extorting money from corporations through the legal system. Lawyers get filthy rich, one or a few plantiffs hit the court lottery, while the consumers foots the bills with higher prices. There is an interesting article about this in this month's Readers Digest which I read while waiting in the grocery store checkout line.
I didn't read the legalities of the settlement, but having been in the business world a longtime, most businesses can basically do whatever they want in regards to their pricing structure. I can charge one customer $50 for a product and another customer $25 depending on the circumstances. McDonalds might charge a buck for a burger at one location, and it's a buck and a quarter at another location.
I don't like what Ebay did as well as the next person, but it's their business and they should be able to operate their auctions however they wish. Seems to me that Ebay probably figured it was cheaper to settle it for 2.1 million which is peanuts to them, rather than dragging this out with their own legal fees and of course the negative publicity. Good job by these attorneys extorting more money through the legal system so that we can all pay higher and many times much higher prices for products, insurance, medical bills, etc.
Steve
PS: just can't wait for the one or two card collecting lawyers on here to bash this post in some way with their lawyer speak propaganda - of course now that I mentioned this...they probably won't - LOL.
-
<< <i>eBay pays money - to one or more charities (selected by plaintiff's lawyers) and to the lawyers for the named plaintiffs (William Lerach's firm, for those people familiar with shareholder derivative suits). The three named plaintiffs get $1,000 each. The original named plaintiff and his son get approximately a quarter million dollars for their technical and expert advice on the lawsuit.
Every one of the thousands and thousands of bidders who was affected - gets NOTHING.
Feel well represented?
Nick >>
Heck yea, anytime I only pay 800,000 AND win I feel good
QUOTE"eBay has also agreed to separately pay Plaintiffs' Counsel $800,000 for past and anticipated future attorneys' fees and expenses regarding the Action"
<< <i>Guess what just froze over?? >>
Dang. I saw the title and I just had to check. Lions are still 2-13, not in the Super Bowl as the title of this thread suggests.