If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Rate Thread | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
Loss of privacy: Google+ users entitled to small cash amount based on settlement
Dateline today... verbatim...
"people who had a Google+ account between January 1, 2015 and April 2, 2019 may be entitled to a portion of the $7.5 million class-action settlement reached in January. Back in 2018, Google admitted that up to 500,000 Google+ profiles were affected by a vulnerability, though it claimed to have found no evidence that any developer knew how to exploit the API bug." o Google+ users may be entitled to a whopping $12 cash settlement due to privacy issues https://www.androidpolice.com/2020/08/04/google-users-may-be-entitled-to-a-whopping-12-cash-settlement-due-to-privacy-issues/ "The deadline is October 8, 2020." http://googleplusdatalitigation.com/ Note: Google confirmed the address according to that article even as the "Cisco Umbrella" apparently calls it a phishing site (go figure). -- Two kinds of people on Usenet, only one of which consistently adds value. |
Ads |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
Loss of privacy: Google+ users entitled to small cash amountbased on settlement
On 8/4/20 11:59 PM, this is what Arlen Holder wrote:
Dateline today... verbatim... "people who had a Google+ account between January 1, 2015 and April 2, 2019 may be entitled to a portion of the $7.5 million class-action settlement reached in January. Back in 2018, Google admitted that up to 500,000 Google+ profiles were affected by a vulnerability, though it claimed to have found no evidence that any developer knew how to exploit the API bug." o Google+ users may be entitled to a whopping $12 cash settlement due to privacy issues https://www.androidpolice.com/2020/08/04/google-users-may-be-entitled-to-a-whopping-12-cash-settlement-due-to-privacy-issues/ "The deadline is October 8, 2020." http://googleplusdatalitigation.com/ Note: Google confirmed the address according to that article even as the "Cisco Umbrella" apparently calls it a phishing site (go figure). Wow, I get to go to McDonald's for lunch. $12 |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
Loss of privacy: Google+ users entitled to small cash amount based on settlement
On Wed, 5 Aug 2020 09:27:06 -0400, Big Al wrote:
Note: Google confirmed the address according to that article even as the "Cisco Umbrella" apparently calls it a phishing site (go figure). Wow, I get to go to McDonald's for lunch. $12 Just to be clear, as with the Apple settlement (and Apple's public admission of criminal guilt that Apple, on purpose, knowingly and intentionally shortened the life of iPhones), it's the principle that matters. Not the puny amount of money that any one individual might receive. -- The principle of the matter is what it's important they admit guilt. |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
Loss of privacy: Google+ users entitled to small cash amount based on settlement
On 8/5/2020 6:27 AM, Big Al wrote:
On 8/4/20 11:59 PM, this is what Arlen Holder wrote: Dateline today... verbatim... Â*Â* "people who had a Google+ account between January 1, 2015 and April 2, Â*Â*Â* 2019 may be entitled to a portion of the $7.5 million class-action Â*Â*Â* settlement reached in January. Back in 2018, Google admitted that up Â*Â*Â* to 500,000 Google+ profiles were affected by a vulnerability, though Â*Â*Â* it claimed to have found no evidence that any developer knew how to Â*Â*Â* exploit the API bug." o Google+ users may be entitled to a whopping $12 cash settlement due to privacy issues https://www.androidpolice.com/2020/08/04/google-users-may-be-entitled-to-a-whopping-12-cash-settlement-due-to-privacy-issues/ Â*Â* "The deadline is October 8, 2020." Â*Â*Â* http://googleplusdatalitigation.com/ Note: Google confirmed the address according to that article even as the "Cisco Umbrella" apparently calls it a phishing site (go figure). Wow, I get to go to McDonald's for lunch.Â*Â* $12 With $12 you could go to Five Guys, barely. |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
Loss of privacy: Google+ users entitled to small cash amountbased on settlement
Big Al wrote:
On 8/4/20 11:59 PM, this is what Arlen Holder wrote: Dateline today... verbatim... "people who had a Google+ account between January 1, 2015 and April 2, 2019 may be entitled to a portion of the $7.5 million class-action settlement reached in January. Back in 2018, Google admitted that up to 500,000 Google+ profiles were affected by a vulnerability, though it claimed to have found no evidence that any developer knew how to exploit the API bug." o Google+ users may be entitled to a whopping $12 cash settlement due to privacy issues https://www.androidpolice.com/2020/08/04/google-users-may-be-entitled-to-a-whopping-12-cash-settlement-due-to-privacy-issues/ "The deadline is October 8, 2020." http://googleplusdatalitigation.com/ Note: Google confirmed the address according to that article even as the "Cisco Umbrella" apparently calls it a phishing site (go figure). Wow, I get to go to McDonald's for lunch. $12 That's how the Judge works out the settlement in these cases. Using the Happy Meal chart. A really good settlement, comes with a small plastic animal. Paul |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
Loss of privacy: Google+ users entitled to small cash amount based on settlement
On Wed, 05 Aug 2020 10:48:14 -0400, Paul wrote:
That's how the Judge works out the settlement in these cases. Using the Happy Meal chart. A really good settlement, comes with a small plastic animal. While I understand why people humorously belittle the amount to individual consumers, for me, the important issue is the principle of the matter. For Apple to openly and publicly admit they secretly but purposefully intentionally shortened the life of iPhones and for Google to agree to the terms of the settlement, means that even with the best lawyers on the planet, the _best_ they can get with those high-priced lawyers, are these settlements. It's yet another important win for the consumer, on principle alone, IMHO. -- What matters in class action suits, IMHO, are affirmation of consumers. |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
Loss of privacy: Google+ users entitled to small cash amountbased on settlement
On 2020-08-05 6:35 a.m., Arlen Holder wrote:
On Wed, 5 Aug 2020 09:27:06 -0400, Big Al wrote: Note: Google confirmed the address according to that article even as the "Cisco Umbrella" apparently calls it a phishing site (go figure). Wow, I get to go to McDonald's for lunch. $12 Just to be clear, as with the Apple settlement (and Apple's public admission of criminal guilt that Apple, on purpose, knowingly and intentionally shortened the life of iPhones), it's the principle that matters. There was no such admission, Liar. |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
Loss of privacy: Google+ users entitled to small cash amount based on settlement
On Wed, 5 Aug 2020 07:03:31 -0700, sms wrote:
Wow, I get to go to McDonald's for lunch.** $12 With $12 you could go to Five Guys, barely. *Google users only get $12 but Apple iPhone owners get _double_ that!* o How to submit your claim in Apple's half a billion dollar secret throtting settlement https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/misc.phone.mobile.iphone/wm-8YUKl5M0 *Some countries are asking for more than double that even!* o Five countries want Apple to pay consumers more money to settle secret throttling of iPhone CPUs to purposefully shorten device life https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/misc.phone.mobile.iphone/YKId-GJCdec *Android owners won't get much as Google doesn't pull those Apple tricks:* o Do any Android phone manufacturers throttle (CPUs, PD Charging, Modems) like Apple consistently does? https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/misc.phone.mobile.iphone/ZTmmGoAndyM In France, the prosecutors office also received $27M USD in criminal files from Apple forcing Apple to publicly admit the committed the crime of secretly and intentionally knowingly shortening the life of iPhones: o Apple agrees to pay 25 million euros fine as Apple admits "Apple committed the crime of deceptive commercial practice by omission" https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/misc.phone.mobile.iphone/l6gAjvW6aqQ REFERENCES: o BBC: *Apple fined for slowing down old iPhones* https://www.bbc.com/news/technology-51413724 o *France Fines Apple $27 Million for Slowing Down Old iPhones* https://www.breitbart.com/tech/2020/02/11/france-fines-apple-41-million-for-slowing-down-old-iphones/ o *Apple Fined 25 Million Euros in France for Slowing Down Older iPhones With iOS Update* https://www.macrumors.com/2020/02/07/apple-fined-25m-euros-france-slowing-down-iphones/ o *Apple fined $41 million for secretly slowing old iPhones* https://www.smh.com.au/technology/apple-fined-41-million-for-secretly-slowing-old-iphones-20200210-p53z9n.html And, given Apologists brazenly deny what Apple openly admits, here are screenshots from those sites backing up the facts: o https://i.postimg.cc/BQZ9hZg1/crime00.jpg o https://i.postimg.cc/d11sJLYJ/crime02.jpg o https://i.postimg.cc/HnL1QKxH/crime03.jpg o https://i.postimg.cc/jjkFp5dV/crime04.jpg o https://i.postimg.cc/rszF8z5S/crime05.jpg What the apologists do is play silly semantic games trying to claim that a criminal offense and a criminal fine to the criminal system is "not" a crime, simply by creative use of their personal translation of French law. Why do apologist deny what even Apple publicly admitted? o And why do apologists always blame Google/Microsoft for what Apple does? I don't know why, but I suspect they brazenly deny facts simply because... o Apologists hate that Apple isn't what MARKETING highly sold them it was. -- Facts don't, won't & can't fit into apologists' imaginary belief systems. o What is wrong with Apologists that they deny even what Apple admitted? https://groups.google.com/d/msg/misc.phone.mobile.iphone/fyL1cQUVCp0/e5J-nW0hBAAJ Apologists seem to hate what Apple is, so much they deny what Apple does. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | Rate This Thread |
|
|