sprockets The Snowman is coming! Realistic head model by Dan Skelton Vintage character and mo-cap animation by Joe Williamsen Character animation exercise by Steve Shelton an Animated Puppet Parody by Mark R. Largent Sprite Explosion Effect with PRJ included from johnL3D New Radiosity render of 2004 animation with PRJ. Will Sutton's TAR knocks some heads!
sprockets
Recent Posts | Unread Content
Jump to content
Hash, Inc. - Animation:Master

Class action suit against DRAM makers


Roger

Recommended Posts

  • *A:M User*

You guys may want to check this out if you bought any kind of computer gear between 1998 and 2002:

 

http://dramclaims.com/

 

I filed a claim and probably lowballed my claim, as I doubt I have receipts for all this stuff but I do still have most of the original hardware if they decide to be dicks about it.

I think the minimum claim is $10 and the max is $1k, but I doubt you would see $1k unless you were a small business buying tons of gear.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 years later...
  • Replies 11
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

  • *A:M User*

So I actually got a check in the mail from this, I just about popped my monocle when I saw it was for roughly $180. First time I ever was involved in one of these where the payout was worth it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So you get your $10 or what ever if you can muster up a receipt or some form of proof of purchase back then and your next system will cost $20 more. Companies like that never take losses, just pass the costs on to the consumers.

 

Now if it came out of the pocket of the board members then it would be worth to pursue right?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...
  • *A:M User*

Hey all I know is I'm $180 richer. I was not required to submit a receipt.

 

Maybe they will pass the costs onto the consumer, but they tried the "sneaky Pete" route once and got sued. Can I afford to quit working? No. But I've got enough to pay a bill or two or buy a new hard disk or something. I imagine the lawyers made out like bandits, though.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Hash Fellow

It occurs to me that passing a new cost to the consumer should not really be possible in a market economy.

 

In a free market you are already selling your product for the price that gets the most money out of the buyers.

 

If you have some new cost like a legal penalty or a raw material cost increase... that's not going to change the appetite of the consumer such that they will start paying more. You pretty much have to swallow the added cost yourself.

 

What am I missing?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • *A:M User*

It occurs to me that passing a new cost to the consumer should not really be possible in a market economy.

 

In a free market you are already selling your product for the price that gets the most money out of the buyers.

 

If you have some new cost like a legal penalty or a raw material cost increase... that's not going to change the appetite of the consumer such that they will start paying more. You pretty much have to swallow the added cost yourself.

 

What am I missing?

 

I think what Pixelplucker is talking about is something along these lines:

 

If you look at your phone bill you will notice that it is broken down into itemized entries. For instance, Friends and Family Package: $40, Internet Service: $25, Taxes and fees: $5.99, Universal Service Fund: $9.98.

 

I haven't scrutinized my phone bill in a while since I have unlimited local and long distance, and an unlimited internet plan, but it has at least one or two taxes tacked on along with some sort of USF fee. The government, when they mandated this, meant for the utilities to pay for this infrastructure out of their pockets but they added that charge onto your bill and "passed it along to the consumer". I think that is the type of thing Pixelplucker is referring to.

 

Phone/internet service isn't really a free market since there are typically only a handful of providers, and costs/barriers to enter that market are high.

At least, this is my understanding of things, I could be wrong (regarding the additional charges on your phone bill).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • *A:M User*

But we were talking about DRAMS :rolleyes:

 

Well, yeah. But I couldn't think of a good example of "passing along costs" with that industry. Although there aren't a ton of DRAM makers, either. And it isn't readily apparent to the consumer what the breakdown is for their stick of RAM. I remember back in '92 or '93 there was a huge jump in RAM prices because of a fire at some plant that lead to an epoxy shortage, and prices stayed high for a while. Maybe this was an artificial way of inflating prices that had lowered too much due to oversupply? Which lead to this whole class action suit in the first place? Not saying there wasn't actually a factory fire, but the severity and duration of the shortage may have been exaggerated.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Congrats on the $180! I don't remember buying directly from any of the manufacturers for memory until recently and that was ecc mem that you can't always get online.

 

ATT and Verizon have been sued over erroneous charges on peoples phones. If you figure out how many customers and add a buck or even 20 cents per and not get caught they make huge amounts of money. Then the have the nads to settle out, write off the loss and do it all over again! Most of the consumer confusion and they way they burry the fake charges in is with the fees and taxes. The Gov should have a simple Flat tax / charge that they can then distribute back to the states, towns etc. This would eliminate the confusing list you see on your phone bill.

 

I've been doing battle with Comcast, they like to suddenly terminate or change a contract I have with them and when I call them out on it they make good buy this is a yearly battle.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • *A:M User*

Congrats on the $180! I don't remember buying directly from any of the manufacturers for memory until recently and that was ecc mem that you can't always get online.

 

ATT and Verizon have been sued over erroneous charges on peoples phones. If you figure out how many customers and add a buck or even 20 cents per and not get caught they make huge amounts of money. Then the have the nads to settle out, write off the loss and do it all over again! Most of the consumer confusion and they way they burry the fake charges in is with the fees and taxes. The Gov should have a simple Flat tax / charge that they can then distribute back to the states, towns etc. This would eliminate the confusing list you see on your phone bill.

 

I've been doing battle with Comcast, they like to suddenly terminate or change a contract I have with them and when I call them out on it they make good buy this is a yearly battle.

 

Well the beauty of this particular class action suit, was that it wasn't just for individual RAM sticks you may have bought ---- it was for any device that could conceivably have RAM in it. So: cell phones, laptops, mp3 players, etc. So I tallied up all the eligible items that I bought from 1998 to whenever the claim was announced and submitted that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...