Overclock.net banner
Status
Not open for further replies.

[TCA] Nvidia Settles Graphic Card False Advertising Class Action Lawsuit

24K views 284 replies 136 participants last post by  Hequaqua 
#1 ·
https://topclassactions.com/lawsuit-settlements/lawsuit-news/340705-nvidia-settles-graphics-card-false-advertising-class-action/

I was plaintiff in the original case, so i felt that people should know that the case has been settled. Nvidia is paying all legal fees for those involved and is giving $30 per person for EACH gtx 970 card they purchased that is involved. There is no limit set on the "ceiling" of what Nvidia has to pay, so those who weren't involved in the case can contact Wiggins Childs Pantazis Fisher Goldfarb LLC law firm at http://www.wigginschilds.com/ to dicuss their involvement in the case.
Quote:
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.

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.
 
#2 ·
Ah if only they would have used those 30 bucks for that 0.5 GB of extra memory
rolleyes.gif


nGreedia.
lachen.gif
 
#7 ·
So where was I supposed to sign up?
 
#9 ·
Quote:
Originally Posted by Exeed Orbit View Post

If I recall correctly, NVidia sold quite a few 970s... so the damages can be quite stout.
I would imagine the minority of people would actually go through with the claim to get the 30 dollars. Not to mention I'm sure they had some very smart people think about what is the cheaper option. This is probably cheaper than them fighting it in the long run even if they won. I also feel like settling in a matter like this gives off the opinion that they are trying to work with their consumers.
 
#11 ·
Quote:
Originally Posted by b.walker36 View Post

I would imagine the minority of people would actually go through with the claim to get the 30 dollars. Not to mention I'm sure they had some very smart people think about what is the cheaper option. This is probably cheaper than them fighting it in the long run even if they won. I also feel like settling in a matter like this gives off the opinion that they are trying to work with their consumers.
This is like a $30 MIR(MIR claim rate is <50% I believe), only that less people know about it and people would have to go through more hoops just to get that $$. I'd imagine the max claim rate is somewhere in the 5-10% range.
 
#15 ·
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wildcard36qs View Post

So where was I supposed to sign up?
Unknown yet...

Code:

Code:
Instructions on how to file a claim for the Nvidia class action settlement were not immediately available.
I can claim a few of those $30 myself. More like 7 of them (bought a few for work PCs). Never had a memory issue and I would claim I am happy, but I will be happier with the $30
biggrin.gif
.

If my 1070 runs to issues, I hope I can get an even better rebate in a couple of years
tongue.gif
 
#19 ·
Quote:
Wiggins Childs Pantazis Fisher Goldfarb
I read your post with interest, but what struck me most is the name of your law firm. It's so impractical to read / say / remember / advertise - that it seems distractingly comical, lol? Do potential clients look on it in a positive light, maybe thinking that if theres so many named partners - there must be lots of important / senior people in the firm and thus must be a better/more established/broader firm as compared to a firm with only 2 named partners in its title - or something?
 
#20 ·
Quote:
Originally Posted by Exilon View Post

If they just sold it as a $300 card and left off the last .5 GB, I think they would've come out ahead in goodwill and profit.
In good will yes, in profit no.

They actually just borrowed $30 from each 970 buyer per card and only have to pay back to 5-10% of them $30 without interest after 2 years. You couldn't get loans with those terms anywhere.
 
#21 ·
Quote:
Originally Posted by sherlock View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by Exilon View Post

If they just sold it as a $300 card and left off the last .5 GB, I think they would've come out ahead in goodwill and profit.
In good will yes, in profit no.

They actually just borrowed $30 from each 970 buyer per card and only have to pay back to 5-10% of them $30 without interest after 2 years. You couldn't get loans with those terms anywhere.
Many places around the world have negative interest, so one could claim they did you a favor...
tongue.gif


Really tho, most accounts in the US have practically 0 interest...
 
#23 ·
Well I'm all for this. Yes it was a low blow that Nvidia did such a thing. Now its good that the consumer is armed with the software technology to prevent something like this from happening again...well hopefully... but anyway. I'll take my $30 and run with it for upgrades with my build log...
 
#25 ·
Quote:
Originally Posted by sherlock View Post

In good will yes, in profit no.

They actually just borrowed $30 from each 970 buyer per card and only have to pay back to 5-10% of them $30 without interest after 2 years. You couldn't get loans with those terms anywhere.
And on top of that it will be paid out by all the future Nvidia gpu purchasers. However much this costs them, it will just get tacked onto the cost of doing business and that cost will be passed on to customers. If they sell 10 million GPU's in 2016 then they would only need to tack on $5 for each GPU to make up $50 mil worth of 970 payouts, not exactly a tough obstacle for a company that was able to tack on $100 for the 1070 and 1080 and still do well.
 
#26 ·
Are these class actions only applicable to the United States? Or can anybody in the world who purchased the 970 get this?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
You have insufficient privileges to reply here.
Top