nVidia Class Action Fairness Hearing is Tomorrow - Almost time to make a claim!

My point about this - made earlier in the thread - was never that we were legally or even ethically "entitled" to an improved replacement, but that a feeble replacement does little to win back the thousands (tens of? hundreds of?) dissatisfied customers, and perhaps even exacerbates our annoyance by opening up an old wound with the hope of just remuneration to then only pour the salt of a currently substandard machine into it.

Are they obligated to give us a replacement substantially or even marginally better than our original? Of course not, certainly not legally. Is it idiotic to cultivate an army of vehemently anti HP consumers by insulting them? Absolutely!

My point has always been that it's really in the best interest of HP to quell this with a replacement that's at least less of an insult. To not do so is false economy. Perhaps they simply have the numbers that suggest losing us all as customers -however many tens or hundreds of thousands of us there may be - will have minimal effect on the company, even if we become hostile against the brand. In which case, they have no problem screwing us, because we don't effect the bottom line. These are things we don't know.

Also I tend to think that "entitlement" has a pretty strong negative connotation, and that people are reacting to it just as emotionally as we are to the notion that were being screwed. These days it suggests that you expect something that's unearned; I don't think any of us expect a free ride, we'd just like to get what's fair, particularly when we're starting to feel like we were tricked into accepting something that's unfair.

Hell, before we were just financially screwed, now it feels like we're being legally screwed.:laugh: ...wait...I mean

 

honestly, i can wait. my laptop works, albeit slow and with problems. i use it for burning dvds. i use it for playing games. i use it for watching movies. surfing the web is what i have my desktop for now that the wireless no longer works in my laptop. i can do none of these things on a netbook and i would rather wait for a proper exchange than downgrade so far.

hell, it took 3 years as it was. whats a little more of a wait gonna do? =/

 

All I am saying is this; if they are unable to provide me with a replacement that is VERY similar to my notebook, then give me something better, not lesser. That's it. I would love to elaborate, (I will do that later tonight) but I'm gonna watch some football LOL!

 

I , think many things come into play here. Some of you guys have tablets some like me have large desktop replacements. I would expect at least the same size screen and resolution. I think the specs are being overplayed here as technology has passed our former machines by. Inherently Imho these would have to be minimally upgraded. I don't think the one size fits all for replacements will work. We all bought our machines for specific purposes, That won't most probably be addressed by the settlement. This is where I am willing to give some leeway (as if I had a Choice). But to offer one single machine to all is a mistake that I hope they realize at this point. I think Nvidia and HP should have stepped up to the plate earlier and not denied there was a defect.

To the Settlement administrators:
replacement should go like this.... imho

Tablet = Tablet
15" notebook = 15" notebook
17" media center =17" media center
or give me 60% of the original cost in cash and I can buy what I want.

 

I still see postings stating that HP should do this or that. I want to remind you all that NVIDIA and the plantiffs are the only parties in the settlement. From the Class Notice:
NVIDIA is providing these benefits to members of the class, and is funding the settlement. Dell, HP and Apple are not parties to this lawsuit.

Just trying to eliminate some of the confusion!

 

Thanks for mentioning this, radioage. Folks have gone down that bunny path several times on this thread.

 

The TX1000 that I am currently handling all the claims process for my sister, was used exactly as you mentioned such as email, web surfing. I told her what she would get in the settlement, and she just wanted a new laptop to replace the tx1000 and not care as long as it was under 13in be reliable and how the asus she was fine with it.

Ideally something like an AMD neo x2 hp ultra portable would have been a prefect replacement (the tablet portion was never used on her tx1000), I am guessing NVIDIA wouldnt want to buy the new HP's out as they have AMD/ATI on them and thats buying a competitors stuff. But a dual core intel atom with nvidia ion would have been better and its still using nvidia gpu, like the EEE 1215N.

 

I do not feel entitled to anything greater than my TX1000, but I do feel I paid $1200 for specific features, and I should get the same, or at least as close to the same specs in return. Giving me a lesser computer in return now is no different than opening a $1200 box 3 years ago to find a netbook worth less than $500 (maybe worth $800 back then) inside. The "fair" thing to do is give a computer of the closest specs possible compared to the original. As we all know, that will be next to impossible, so in the case of the same not being available, it should be the next available option, not the lesser option. I do not go to a store only to find they are out of stock on a 55" tv and walk out with a 46" for the same price do I? I would expect to either pay less for the 46", or pay more for a 60". At best, the store would match the 55" price on the 60" because of being out of stock, but I would not expect that. If they tried to give me the 46" when I paid for a $55, I would not shop at that store any longer....

Why not give us the lowest spec'd TM2 as a replacement? They would be an upgrade to some degree, but they are of the "same kind". And since they don't have a DVD drive built in anymore, I would take the upgrade in processing power with the downgrade of the DVD since I can get an external. At least it would be comparable, and HP's price is $799 right now, and I am sure nvida's cost would be much less. Even a refurbished TX2000 would be an option (as long as any overheating issues were resolved ahead of time). A netbook is not what I purchase, nor would have purchased at the time.

 

I heard the tx2000 has very similar issues to the tx1000 despite being ati, I just remember a friend of mine having the same issues on his tx2000 that my sisters tx1000 experienced.

 

I just got off the phone with the settlement administrator and Milburg

The admin told me they cannot access the website due to updating but cannot
provide details

Milburg told me the web site is being updated to allow for easier entry of model #s and ease of use. Other changes are coming but she would not elaborate and asked my patience. The website should be updated in a couple of days. Whether it will contain any other options other than the asus or cq50
who knows guess will have to wait and see.

 

I feel pretty fortunate that the dv9410 we bought in '07 only had the wireless failure, which I fixed by moving it to a location with a wire.

I replaced that with a desktop recently, but not because the graphics or anything (other than the wifi) was dying--just because the technology was getting decrepit.

Think of your computer like a car, except that it depreciates even faster--basically worthless after 3 yrs. It's gravy if you can get 5 yrs+ life out of it, but plan on replacing every 3 yrs. (Especially laptops: How long do you expect your battery to last? Do you keep it at about 40-80% charge? Do you put it in the fridge when you're not using it?)

So, do I intend to take advantage of the settlement? Heck, yes, as the dv9410 is an eligible machine (nvidia graphics, wireless failure, model number covered). But I still think lawyers are unprintable unpostable stuff.

 

I submitted my claim on the 9th, but now it says the 13th was the first day. Is there any time frame on receiving the box to ship it to the class action suit so I know how long I should wait before I get any notification, or should I just call and check whats going on with my claim?

 

its going to be quite a while nike, as they are still finalizing the details. it could be soon, it could take weeks.

 

I just called the number and according to the rep, my claim has been received and will be processed shortly. I mailed mine in on 1/18/2011 so they probably received it sometime this past week. He said they will notify us by postal mail when a decision has been made with our claims.

 

From the various websites I've seen it appears the lawyers at milberg are stalling in respect to a decent replacement. I don't want a lousy cq50 replacing my dv9000. If that's what they send me I will take them to the local small claims court saying they violated the agreement handed down. It they don't show up they will automatically lose. If they send someone it will cost them a lot more than a decent replacement they should have sent me in the first place.

Maybe if everyone does the same thing they will burn through the $13 million and wish they had done the right thing in the first place. This shouldn't even be a something that we need to discuss.

 

Paula,
I know, it stinks! I am not sending them my DV9420US unless them come up with an exact same for same or better replacement! In fact, I ordered a new motherboard for mine and as soon as it gets here, I am hoping I am back in business for a couple years! You can get a new motherboard for approx. $125 and replace it yourself. Then put in a repair claim for your cost. No guarantee it will work for very long but a small enough bet to make as I see it.

 

Unless you officially excluded yourself from the class action, you cannot take legal action against NVIDIA.

 

As far as I know no classmember has heard back any instructions or info (regarding replacement etc..)after filing claim, via email or snail mail. We have to be patient and see who gets info first, trust me they will post and you will know about it- either that or they update the NVIDIAsettlement.com site soon. No need to alter your computer before you know what's actually gonna happen right?

 

While I agree with you in principal I believe there will be two specific ways to object/opt out. First we were duped into agreeing to the class action without a specific remedy IE: specific replacements but were told
like kind and value. As it stands now this is not the case. if it stays this way
you can argue/opt out on the fact that the specific remedy of like kind and value was not met. This is just my opinion and I am not a lawyer however looking at what I see I could be a good one.....

 

1. You can take anyone to small claims - if they don't show - they lose.
2. You can't promise something and then not deliver, i.e. you lose again.

If Nvidia/Milberg supply crappy cq50's as replacements you will see another class action lawsuit in a matter of days.

 

This is why you're not a lawyer.

From the settlement:

Unless you exclude yourself, you stay in the Class, and that means that you can’t sue, continue to sue, or be part of any other lawsuit against NVIDIA, Dell, Inc., HP, or Apple Inc. about the legal issues in this case."

So, while you are correct in that you can indeed take anyone to small claims court, you will have wasted your filing fees, because the case will immediately be thrown out due to this simple clause in the class-action terms. If you did not opt out, this statement applies.

The only way it doesn't apply is if there's an appeal to the decision. That's what we're waiting on.

 

thanks for the clarification zero.

 

I disagree. The previous poster would be excluded from suing NVIDIA under the settlement agreement, unless he/she opted out. If the previous poster joined the settlement, they give up their right to pursue NVIDIA independently. I think what they are saying, however, is that they would sue the class action attorneys (NOT NVIDIA) for not meeting the terms they had agreed to in the judgement (an assessment with which I personally agree). Whether or not such a claim would go anywhere is anyone's guess, but I don't think it's excluded by the class action agreement.

 

There was an update to Mr. Frank's blog earlier today. all in all, we are basically waiting. there is no need to get riled up over this whole situation quite yet. the attorneys are aware of our situation and are still negotiating the final settlement terms with nvidia. everyone needs to just cool off before we start talking about suing people and taking stuff to the media and whatnot.

as i have said before, these things take TIME, which it seems that some people are forgetting. Milberg has all ready advised us that the website details ARE NOT CURRENTLY FINAL . Mr. Frank has just confirmed this and Milberg is asking for more time for a settlement to be finalized. chances are we will not hear anything until later next week or the week after.

until we know what the final details are, what we are getting, and/or some one has a claim approved, sit tight and wait patiently.

 

+ 1 :yes:

I'm pretty easily outraged myself, but the powers that be seem to be plenty aware that few if any HP owners -not just those here- were contented by the initial lowball offerings. It's cool to let it be known that we're skeptical, but expressing too much aggression and ire before it's warranted could raise some heavy defenses.

Who knows, we could all still make out quite nicely.

 

Thanks to both Matt and Werdnerf I could not agree more. We all should just chill and see. Its obvious we have their attention and these things mooove real slow. We waited this long what's another few weeks?

 

Just became number 129 - Great site. Thanks for all the info. I own two HP dv9000 (dv9408nr).

Petition Site - Start free petitions

sign and post your comment about the unfair nvidia settlement!

 

Nothing has ever changed in the history of internet petitions due to people signing an internet petition. Keep focusing on things that really count -- write a letter and mail it to the judge in the case or the attorneys who "represented" us about your discontent. Don't email, put a piece of paper in the mailbox addressed to them.

 

again, they know about the problems. they know the unfairness. they are working to change the details in the settlement. we do not need to send needless letters to the people that are all ready working to change this.

also, the online petition is more of a place for people to sign and get up to date. i do occasionally update the page with information. it also really helps to show the higher ups how many people are against these settlement details. petitions HAVE made a change, do not ever think otherwise. of course writing letters is going to help. of course making your voice heard will help. a petition helps all the same. there is no single course of action that will indefinitely make a difference. the best we can do is make our voices heard in every possible way and gain the attention.

in fact, Mr. Frank heard about our complaints from this very forum. so do not ever say that doing something, even as simple as posting on a forum, will not gain the attention needed. you are terribly mistaken.

 

Matt-

In addition to what you are doing, I believe it is VERY BENEFICIAL for us to send out these letters.

I don't think they are needless because when more people speak up and express their displeasure, it just may change the direction of their discussions.

 

true. what i am saying is that they are clearly aware of this. i just dont want people to have the wrong impression that this is not all ready brought to their attention is all.

 

I'm still standing by my case on this one. If anyone can present to me a time where an internet petition accomplished anything of any significance at all, I'd genuinely love to see it. I'm open to having my mind changed on this and I'd love for it to be true. But it's too easy to sign an internet petition, and people know that. When your moral or ethical crusade is so important that people can join with the click of a mouse, it loses some of its luster. You can post this petition on Facebook and Twitter and you'll get a thousand hits from people who don't even own the models but who "sympathize" or "want to help". On the other hand, actually writing and mailing a letter shows effort. That's why a complaint email to a company will get you a form letter replied back while a written letter will more often than not get a personalized response.

Anyway, I'm not here to argue the point, I'm here to do whatever I can in our quest to get what we should be getting. Carry on.

 

Honestly I don't think signing an online petition can hurt. Like Matt said, it's a good way to show the higher ups that people care enough to go out of their way to sign something they care about.

 

I think it depends if it makes it to the public eye vs a email that gets passed around but never makes it to the company or made public.

 

I have an HP dv9500 that I got in 2008 p-n RL653AV end is dead after using two yers NVIDIA GPU failure and the warranty is out .My but my notebook is NOT covered with Nvidia Replacement Claim what to do?

 

Sounds like you need to sell it for parts on eBay and buy something else. No sense in fixing it, as the replacement parts (if available) are no good just like the original parts.

 

Hey NVIDIA, I'd gladly settle for this, or even this as a replacement for my wife's defective hp dv6449us! Let me know. I'll be waiting. And waiting. And waiting.

 

And for replacement of my DV9000 I would recommend: Walmart.com: ASUS 17.3" K72F-B1 Laptop PC with Intel i3-370M Processor, Windows 7 Home Premium: ComputersCost's half as much as mine new with similar screen etc...

 

not bad but i also like the red Asus linked on that page.

 

With no further descriptive definition provided for general terms used in legal documents, the “Ordinary Man” concept of law normally applies. In this case, the two vague terms that are especially troublesome are “Like Kind” and “Value”. In the case of HP notebooks, I think from an “Ordinary Man” point of view (not geeks) the following are reasonable:

“Like or Similar Kind”… :
Compaq and G series notebooks are, by HP marketing definition, economy or everyday computing notebooks while DV or TX series notebooks are/were generally categorized and marketed as ultra portable or high performance. Given an “Ordinary Man” point of view, and if available, a DV series notebook should be replaced with a “Like-Kind” DV series notebook, not something different. Screen size should equal screen size. Comparable equipment should equal comparable equipment (i.e. Dual-Core, Bluetooth, DVD/CD, 12 Battery etc.).

… and Equal or Similar Value :
This aspect of the decision is clearly the most debated, but with no clear definition, and again from an “Ordinary Man” point of view (still not geek), “value” equals “money” at the time of purchase not equivalent specs today. A computer replacement should equal the actual paid value of the computer.

Some argue though that the problem with this point of view is that the technologies incorporated in notebooks generally improve over time as prices generally decrease, thus decreasing the “value” of a defective notebook. While this is definitely true, it is to the consumer’s advantage and from the "Ordinary Man" perspective does not in any way equate to the sum of money (value) that was deducted from the consumers bank account for defective equipment whether 1,2,3,or 4 year ago.

Further, HP has by example, demonstrated that its interpretation is generally in line with the “Ordinary Man” concept and an expectation of “Value” as money. Please take a look at my specs below. When the 2 ½ year old HP Special Edition L2000 notebook had repeated problems, it was voluntarily replaced through extended warranty by HP with a DV2000tv. When we went through the process with HP, they offered a Special Edition for a Special Edition; 14” for 14”, 3 grade-level up processor for a 3 grade-level up processor, a 12 Cell battery for 12 Cell battery and so on and so on. HP did this because the DV2000t was a notebook of “similar kind and value” though improved by 2 ½ years of technological evolution. Any additional standard features (WebCam & Mics) were just icing on the cake. HP generally said you get a $1000.00 “Value” for a $1000.00 “Value” and this has been repeated for a number of users here at NBR. What HP did not say however was, ….well… you can only select a 3 year old, poorly equipped, bottom line, single core economy Compaq replacement because the pace of technology has devalued your defective unit.

“That was HP” you say, and Nvidia has the legal burden here and HP has nothing to do with the class action suit. I hear you…. but HP is involved, because through documented agreement they are providing the replacement computers for their own defective units. Through negotiation, I’m guessing that the charge for the notebooks provided as replacement is nowhere near retail or even wholesale pricing. A $1000.00 retail computer probably actually cost less than $500.00 to produce, perhaps substantially less. So is it realistic to expect a dollar for dollar retail replacement provided through a non-retail distribution? Yes it is, and I believe this practice is supported by prior precedent, actual manufacturer cost, and a reasonable definition of “fair” defined by the judge in this case as “Like or Similar Kind and Equal or Similar Value”. I also do not believe that any afflicted consumer should expect less.

To close, I hope that each of you will consider that it is always much easier to influence a decision than to change one. For those of you that support waiting on “supposed” meetings and “possible” changes, I respectfully disagree with the strategy. If Milberg voluntarily coordinates and makes the supposed changes with minimal influence…then great. Once the final decision is made however, for all practical purposes the discussion will be over, they will dig in, and you (we) will all be left barking at the moon if the decision is generally not in line with expectations. It’s a crap deal for all afflicted consumers, a big money saver for Nvidia, a money maker for HP... and (of course) the lawyers!!

JMO, Best of Luck to All,
Dave

PS
It does not change the argument, but I forgot to mention that the specs for the DV2700tv have been upgraded since it was provided by HP as a replacement. Specs as delivered were:

DV2700tv (Verve), Vista 32, 3 Year ADP
T8100 2.1GHz, 2GB RAM, Nvidia 8400GS, 160GB HD, Intel 4965 BGN+BT, LS, 12 Cell

 

Hey, Major Dave! You have summed things up rather eloquently. I've been indirectly involved in lots of civil litigation in my career and have to agree with you.

+1 rep... if I could give +2 for your comments, I would.

 

Yup, the red Asus is pretty sweet looking and in the same price range. It caught me eye, too. I did not provide a link to that one because it looks way too pretty for any of us claimants. :rolleyes2: Those I linked to were very purposefully nondescript and ordinary looking.

Some people are holding out for equitable replacement systems, and I am not optimistic that all the complaining and resistance is doing anything except for providing an excuse for delaying the claim process.

The links were posted more for humorous sarcasm than a true wish list. It would be ludicrous to believe that anyone involved in the class action settlement would be looking to this forum, or elsewhere, for direction on how to handle anything at this point. It's time to cut our losses and move on in my view of the situation.

To many, a sub-$500 Acer or eMachine replacing one pitched to the public by HP as being a high quality "entertainment system" is either laughable or deplorable.

But, being that I own (and still use) Acer and eMachine laptops that are older than both of my anemic HP laptops, there is a great degree of irony in what I would honestly consider a "very good" trade.

 

Hey All,

Just got off the phone With Milburg in NY. No updates at all, none in the foreseeable future. Supposedly the negotiations continue. I suggested that
they Issue a formal statement to that effect on the NVsettlement site as we have not had one official word from them since the settlement was announced.
I Further suggested that they put a comment box on the settlement web site to allow class members some input to the whole process.

 

Exactly. Let our voice be heard. I have already been working on this all day today, trying to wrangle out the details. I have already been in contact with the settlement administrators twice. The first time I was informed that the choice of the CQ50 was allegedly for the "pro-rating of the value" of the original laptop in question due to age and wear and tear. This is still unacceptable because the settlement did not call for this. My second call was to check on the status of my claim. It turns out that the first claimants still haven't had their claims reviewed or approved yet.

As far as letter writing goes, I scoured the legal documents posted to the settlement website and compiled this list: (all of this information is publicly available via posted documents and firm websites)

Class Council:

Millberg LLP
One Pennsylvania Plaza
49th Floor
New York, New York 10119
1-877-692-1965

• JEFF S. WESTERMAN (SBN 94559) [email protected]
• SABRINA S. KIM (SBN 186242) [email protected]
• NICOLE M. DUCKETT (SBN 198168) [email protected]
• PETER SAFIRSTEIN [email protected]
• JENNIFER S. CZEISLER [email protected]
• ROLAND W. RIGGS [email protected]
• [email protected]

Counsel for Plaintiff Lance Waidzunas and Plaintiffs’ Co-Counsel:

SHALOV STONE BONNER & ROCCO LLP
485 Seventh Avenue
Suite 1000
New York, New York 10018
Telephone: (212) 239-4340
Facsimile: (212) 239-4310

• RALPH M. STONE [email protected]
• THOMAS G. CIARLONE, JR. [email protected]

Counsel for Plaintiff Nathan DeBockler and Plaintiffs’ Co-Counsel:

HORWITZ HORWITZ & PARADIS:
405 Lexington Avenue, 61st Floor
New York, NY 10174
Telephone: (212) 986-4500
Facsimile: (212) 986-4501

• PAUL O. PARADIS [email protected]
• MICHAEL A. SCHWARTZ [email protected]
• GINA M. TUFARO [email protected]

Counsel for Plaintiff John Russo and Plaintiffs’ Co-Counsel:

DOYLE LOWTHER LLP
9466 Black Mountain Road, Suite 210
San Diego, CA 92126
Telephone: (619) 573-1700
Facsimile: (619) 573-1701

• WILLIAM J. DOYLE, II: [email protected]
• JOHN A. LOWTHER, IV: [email protected]

Orrick Herrington & Sutcliffe LLP, Counsel for Nvidia:

Media Relations and PR Team: [email protected]

Counsel for Nvidia:

• Justin M. Lichterman: [email protected]
• James N. Kramer: [email protected]
• Robert P. Varian: [email protected]

I hope this helps everyone. This should help everyone avoid having to scour the docs themselves and avoid missing anyone. I don't yet have a mailing address for Orrick yet, if/when I find it I'll post it too.

I haven't yet myself put pen to paper, IRL or email, I wanted to get this list out tonight. I will let everyone know how that turns out as well. I refuse to let Nvidia throw me under the bus twice.

 

Office Address
Orrick Herrington & Sutcliffe LLP, Counsel for Nvidia
The Orrick Building
405 Howard Street
San Francisco, CA 94105-2669
United States
tel+1 415-773-5700
fax +1 415-773-5759

The lawyers involved are in San Francisco

 

Thanks, shasta. that was the one address that I could not find during my search.

Still haven't penned my letter(s), although I have written an article about this for SlashDot. My fingers are crossed that It gets picked up.

Now that I have a little bit a more time, I can share a little bit more of what I have heard. I have called the settlement administrators twice. The first time was about this CQ50 nonsense. It turns out that the CQ50 is a family, not a singular model. The woman I spoke with claimed that all HP laptops are going to be pro-rated based on age and model and then the "appropriate" model would be selected from the family.

Full CQ50 list here.

She directed me to that list while also claiming that there were some 47 different models that were in that family that were going to be issued as replacements. If you check the list, you will see that there is a problem. Only five of them are US models. I could be mistaken but I think that those other models fall into one of two categories. Manufactured for export ONLY, or manufactured overseas for sale overseas ONLY.

I will be calling the administrators again tomorrow to clarify this. What really ticks me off is that I tried getting in contact with Milberg last fall about this very same issue. Back then it was only a concern, but apparently me fears were justified. They never returned my call and the gentleman on the phone gave me a bad email address.

 

There are 5 models with the US suffix, but HP has used more than just the US suffix on models sold in the USA. I know that at least the NR suffixed models were sold here as well, and there may be others. Unfortunately, that little tidbit only serves to complicate the details.

A lot of this aggravating speculation could be averted if they would stop being so intentionally vague. Right now they're treating us like mushrooms (I can elaborate if you're not familiar with that particular metaphor ).

 

So in the mean, we wait, and wait, and wait as time passes and that pro-rated value continues to drop until they decide to inform us of what they think we deserve?

Not only was pro-rating never mentioned when we all decided not to opt-out, but it's only fair if it's based on the pro-rated value of our units when the problem was discovered, not when it was settled. Oh but that's right, admitting when the problem was discovered would be an admission of guilt.

I know all this is hearsay and speculation until it's legally documented as fact but still, is anyone else beginning to think Shakespeare had the right idea?

 

What's the NR suffix stand for?

I'm not familiar with the mushroom metaphor.