Nvidia Settles Graphics Card False Advertising Class Action

[A dot Ham]

https://topclassactions.com/lawsuit-...-class-action/

Graphics card manufacturer Nvidia agreed to a preliminary settlement that will resolve claims in a group of proposed class action lawsuits that center around allegations that the company misled consumers about the performance and storage capabilities of its product.

Nvidia says it will pay each buyer of the graphics card $30 and will pay an additional $1.3 million in attorneys’ fees, according to settlement documents.

The overall settlement amount was not publicly disclosed within court papers, however Nvidia agreed to pay all consumers who purchased the GTX 970 graphics card and indicated there would not be a cap on the total amount it would pay consumers.

“The settlement is fair and reasonable and falls within the range of possible approval,” attorneys for the proposed Class said in the filing. “It is the product of extended arms-length negotiations between experienced attorneys familiar with the legal and factual issues of this case and all settlement class members are treated fairly under the terms of the settlement.”

The initial proposed class action lawsuit in a series of lawsuits against Nvidia was filed in February 2015 and alleged that the company engaged in false advertising, deceptive business practice, unlawful is practices and violated California’s business law for unfair business practices.

The initial claim accused Nvidia of having a graphics card that operated on 3.5 GB but was advertised as operating with a full 4 GB of video access memory, plus another .5 GB that was separated from the rest of the memory.

Another proposed class action lawsuit in the series was filed the following month and also alleged similar claims about the gigabyte amounts and separation, saying the product was falsely advertised and negligently represented.

The recent settlement with Nvidia includes a total of 15 consumer class action lawsuits that were consolidated in Northern California as well is a pending action in San Diego, according to court documents.

In addition to the size of video access memory and its setup, the consumers also accused Nvidia of having 64 render output processors rather than the 56 that were advertised and of having smaller specialized memory cache than advertised.

The consumers claimed that overall, Nvidia omitted information that was important for buyers to understand as they made their purchases, causing potential Class Members to purchase products with lower functionality and capabilities than what was advertised.

Nvidia denied all allegations of wrongdoing, and both parties entered into the settlement and agreed upon the terms, believing them to be in the best interests of all parties involved.

Nvidia graphics cards cost approximately $350 and the anticipated $30 payout was calculated to represent a portion of the cost of the storage and performance capabilities the consumers thought they were obtaining in the purchase of the product, according to the proposed settlement.

Not sure what other options are available.

A class action lawsuit does not prevent an individual from suing directly. My thoughts are contact customer service, talk to someone with a brain and work out an equitable exchange. If they are unresponsive file a small claims case and recoup the full amount citing this settlement as evidence.

$30 seems like a slap in the face. Its not like I can that $30 and buy stuff to make up the performance difference.

[Droodid]

Not sure what other options are available.

A class action lawsuit does not prevent an individual from suing directly. My thoughts are contact customer service, talk to someone with a brain and work out an equitable exchange. If they are unresponsive file a small claims case and recoup the full amount citing this settlement as evidence.

Also, for those of us who have since sold our 970's and moved on to newer cards, we're pretty much out of luck for any compensation due to the information they're requiring to be included in the lawsuit. Which, I understand, but at the same time, doesn't really help out those who bought and upgraded.

[Lathais]

This is why class action lawsuits suck. The only people who win are the lawyers. The individuals get a pittance. Also, really, what are the damages? The card did actually have what was advertised, it's just the last .5GB was slower. This has been proven over and over again to not have really affected the performance of the card except in certain situations the card was not really designed for anyway. But, lawyers saw a chance to make money and did.

[Remilia]

Technically the false advertising part is the ROPs (56 not 64) and L2 cache, both of which affected that 0.5GB of VRAM.

[Caolela]

This is why class action lawsuits suck. The only people who win are the lawyers. The individuals get a pittance. Also, really, what are the damages? The card did actually have what was advertised, it's just the last .5GB was slower. This has been proven over and over again to not have really affected the performance of the card except in certain situations the card was not really designed for anyway. But, lawyers saw a chance to make money and did.

Yes, let's not sue lying, crooked companies and blame their malfeasance on "the lawyers".

There is a reason for tort law. Protecting shady business practices is not one of them.

[Lathais]

Yes, let's not sue lying, crooked companies and blame their malfeasance on "the lawyers".

There is a reason for tort law. Protecting shady business practices is not one of them.

I'm not saying nothing should be done, don't take it that way. But is a class action lawsuit is not really the way to go about it? How did it help ANYONE other than the lawyers? $30? Most people will not even bother. Should they be punished? Yes, of course. Should lawyers get rich off it? No.

[Caolela]

I'm not saying nothing should be done, don't take it that way. But is a class action lawsuit is not really the way to go about it? How did it help ANYONE other than the lawyers? $30? Most people will not even bother. Should they be punished? Yes, of course. Should lawyers get rich off it? No.

"According to the U.S. Supreme Court, the “principal purpose” of class actions is “the efficiency and economy of litigation.” [4]The Court has also noted other justifications for class actions, including:

the protection of the defendant from inconsistent obligations;
the protection of the interests of absentees;
the provision of a convenient and economical means of disposing of similar lawsuits; and
the facilitation of the spreading of litigation costs among numerous litigants with similar claims.[5]


In other words, people whose claims might be too insignificant to litigate alone can band together. The class action device can eliminate redundancy in the judicial system, streamline litigation, and in some cases, create significant institutional change."

https://apps.americanbar.org/litigat...-lawsuits.html

Class action is a way to punish the defendant(s) for wrongdoing, and put them on record for doing so. It actually makes a lot fewer lawyers "rich" than would otherwise be the case if every similar complaint had to be tried separately.

Then you have to ask how much richer would a company have gotten if there were no torts system and lawyers to sue them. Not to mention other harm that is done to plaintiffs.

The redress (compensation) for the plaintiffs is there; whether they avail themselves of it is their concern.

[Cows For Life]

https://topclassactions.com/lawsuit-...-class-action/



Not sure what other options are available.

A class action lawsuit does not prevent an individual from suing directly. My thoughts are contact customer service, talk to someone with a brain and work out an equitable exchange. If they are unresponsive file a small claims case and recoup the full amount citing this settlement as evidence.

$30 seems like a slap in the face. Its not like I can that $30 and buy stuff to make up the performance difference.

Isn't this news like months old?

[Lathais]

"According to the U.S. Supreme Court, the “principal purpose” of class actions is “the efficiency and economy of litigation.” [4]The Court has also noted other justifications for class actions, including:

the protection of the defendant from inconsistent obligations;
the protection of the interests of absentees;
the provision of a convenient and economical means of disposing of similar lawsuits; and
the facilitation of the spreading of litigation costs among numerous litigants with similar claims.[5]


In other words, people whose claims might be too insignificant to litigate alone can band together. The class action device can eliminate redundancy in the judicial system, streamline litigation, and in some cases, create significant institutional change."

https://apps.americanbar.org/litigat...-lawsuits.html

Class action is a way to punish the defendant(s) for wrongdoing, and put them on record for doing so. It actually makes a lot fewer lawyers "rich" than would otherwise be the case if every similar complaint had to be tried separately.

Then you have to ask how much richer would a company have gotten if there were no torts system and lawyers to sue them. Not to mention other harm that is done to plaintiffs.

The redress (compensation) for the plaintiffs is there; whether they avail themselves of it is their concern.

Yeah, so instead of this class action BS where just the lawyers make money, the company should just be fined for breaking the law. Have the money go to something useful instead of to lawyers. That's my point. Again, i am not saying they should not be punished. It should simply be a fine set by the FTC. Why have the vast majority of the money go to lawyers? That's just plain stupid.

Think of it this way, it's against the law to advertise falsely. It's against the law to use drugs. If I use drugs, I am fined and go to jail. If a company advertises falsely and profits from it, they should be fined and possibly the people who knowingly advertised falsely should be suffer criminal charges. In this particular case, how do you think this really hurt nvidia? It did not. The amount they paid out is a drop in the bucket to them.

[daigotsurezan]

Yeah, so instead of this class action BS where just the lawyers make money, the company should just be fined for breaking the law. Have the money go to something useful instead of to lawyers. That's my point. Again, i am not saying they should not be punished. It should simply be a fine set by the FTC. Why have the vast majority of the money go to lawyers? That's just plain stupid.

Legal professional (not a lawyer, but work in a law firm) here. I can guarantee that the attorneys in this case spent hundreds of hours over the course of this lawsuit, which began in 2015. And remember, this attorney's fee payout covers multiple class action suits, so dozens of attorneys at multiple firms are involved. Once you break that down between the various attorneys, then you have to look at how much the attorneys have to pay to the various support staff (secretaries, paralegals, experts, vendors, and so on), because attorneys have to delegate work in order to actually get anything done.

You'd probably be surprised at how little of that money ends up in each attorney's hands as the result of this case.

[Caolela]

Yeah, so instead of this class action BS where just the lawyers make money, the company should just be fined for breaking the law. Have the money go to something useful instead of to lawyers. That's my point. Again, i am not saying they should not be punished. It should simply be a fine set by the FTC. Why have the vast majority of the money go to lawyers? That's just plain stupid.

Think of it this way, it's against the law to advertise falsely. It's against the law to use drugs. If I use drugs, I am fined and go to jail. If a company advertises falsely and profits from it, they should be fined and possibly the people who knowingly advertised falsely should be suffer criminal charges. In this particular case, how do you think this really hurt nvidia? It did not. The amount they paid out is a drop in the bucket to them.

If the government took Nvidia to court, then that may well be what would have happened (a direct fine, etc.). Also depends on if it were criminal or civil; in this case it's a class action civil case, and that's how the courts have decided to compensate plaintiffs if they win.

If those GPUs caused a danger, or ruined some other part in your PC, or burned out prematurely, or any number of things could have been the issue...then the lawsuit and the judgment would have been different.

[Wikko]

I'm not saying nothing should be done, don't take it that way. But is a class action lawsuit is not really the way to go about it? How did it help ANYONE other than the lawyers? $30? Most people will not even bother. Should they be punished? Yes, of course. Should lawyers get rich off it? No.

Why exactly dont you want to pay lawyers for their hard work? Case like this has taken hundreds of hours of work and you dont think they deserve to be paid for that? If a doctor did the same amount of hours would you still think the same?

[Triggered Fridgekin]

30$ is about how much extra you pay for cards with double the memory so that much for .5GB is really a pretty swell deal.

I mean, in theory. MSRP is a bitch.

[Lathais]

Why exactly dont you want to pay lawyers for their hard work? Case like this has taken hundreds of hours of work and you dont think they deserve to be paid for that? If a doctor did the same amount of hours would you still think the same?

They shouldn't have been the ones to do the work to begin with is my point. They did it, so yeah, they should get paid. It shouldn't have come to that though. For something like this particular class action lawsuit, the false advertisement claim should have been reported to the proper agency and they should have done something about it. Lawyers should not have even gotten involved.