Search the Community
Showing results for tags 'class action'.
mood posted a topic in Technology NewsLaw firm files PS5 DualSense drift class action against Sony Stick 'em-up. A US law firm has filed a class action against Sony over alleged PlayStation 5 DualSense drift. This week Chimicles Schwartz Kriner & Donaldson-Smith (CSK&D), the firm behind the ongoing class action against Nintendo over Joy-Con drift, asked affected customers to get in touch via an online form. Clearly, that call to action did the trick. The DualSense lawsuit has now been filed in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York on behalf of a plaintiff called Lmarc Turner, of Virginia, and other affected customers in the US against Sony Corporation of America and Sony Interactive Entertainment. The complaint, filed on 12th February and seen by Eurogamer, claims the DualSense is "defective". "Specifically, the DualSense controllers that are used to operate the PS5 contain a defect that results in characters or gameplay moving on the screen without user command or manual operation of the joystick. "This defect significantly interferes with gameplay and thus compromises the DualSense controller's core functionality." The complaint cites multiple online reports of DualSense drift on reddit and social media, including the tweet below that includes a clip of apparent drift while playing Rogue Company: The complaint goes on to accuse Sony of being aware of this alleged DualSense drift via online consumer complaints, claims the company equipped the DualSense with "virtually the same analog components" as the PlayStation 4's DualShock 4, which reportedly also suffered from drift, and that options for repair are "slim". The DualSense controller. "Customers are experiencing long wait times and having to deal with a maze of pre-recorded phone prompts before finally speaking with an agent concerning repairs for DualSense controller drift," reads the complaint, which points out customers must pay for shipping the controller to a Sony repair center even for in-warranty repairs. Turner is said to have bought a PS5 on 5th February 2021 and experienced DualSense drift on the same day. He contacted Sony customer service and was advised to reset his console, which didn't work. Turner ended up buying another DualSense controller priced $69.99 a few days later. "Had Plaintiff been aware of the drift defect prior to purchasing his PS5, he otherwise would not have purchased the PS5, or would have paid substantially less for it," reads the complaint. The complaint claims Turner agreed to Sony's PlayStation terms of service and user agreement upon setup of his PS5, but wrote to Sony expressing his intent to opt out of resolving any disputes with the company through individual arbitration. This is an important point in the context of CSK&D's ongoing case against Nintendo over Joy-Con drift. CSK&D filed a class action against Nintendo of America in the United States District Court for the Western District of Washington back in 2019 over Joy-Con drift after a similar call for affected customers to get in touch. The Court compelled the case to arbitration, although it declined to dismiss the case. CSK&D says it's currently working to pursue the case through the arbitration process. Clearly, it's hoping to avoid going down that route with the DualSense case. The complaint demands a jury trial, with the plaintiff seeking monetary relief "for damages suffered, declaratory relief, and public injunctive relief". Sony has yet to comment. Source: Law firm files PS5 DualSense drift class action against Sony
steven36 posted a topic in Security & Privacy News(Reuters) - A federal judge said up to 29 million Facebook Inc users whose personal information was stolen in a September 2018 data breach cannot sue as a group for damages, but can seek better security at the social media company after a series of privacy lapses. In a decision late Tuesday night, U.S. District Judge William Alsup in San Francisco said neither credit monitoring costs nor the reduced value of stolen personal information was a “cognizable injury” that supported a class action for damages. Alsup also said damages for time users spent to mitigate harm required individualized determinations rather than a single classwide assessment. Users were allowed to sue as a group to require Facebook to employ automated security monitoring, improve employee training, and educate people better about hacking threats. Alsup rejected Facebook’s claim that these were unnecessary because it had fixed the bug that caused the breach. “Facebook’s repetitive losses of users’ privacy supplies a long-term need for supervision,” at least at this stage of the litigation, Alsup wrote. Allowing a damages class action could have exposed Facebook to a higher total payout. Lawyers for the Facebook users did not immediately respond to requests for comment. Facebook did not immediately respond to similar requests. On Sept. 28, 2018, Facebook said that hackers had exploited software flaws to access 50 million users’ accounts, at the time considered the largest breach in the California-based company’s 14-year history. It scaled back the size two weeks later, saying 30 million users had their access tokens stolen, while 29 million had personal information such as gender, religion, email addresses, phone numbers and search histories taken. Facebook has faced many lawsuits over privacy, including for allowing British political consulting firm Cambridge Analytica access data for an estimated 87 million users. In September, U.S. District Judge Vince Chhabria in San Francisco said Facebook must face most of a damages lawsuit over access by third parties such as Cambridge, calling Facebook’s views about users’ privacy expectations “so wrong.” Facebook Chief Executive Mark Zuckerberg outlined his “privacy-focused vision” for social media in a March 6 blog post. “Privacy gives people the freedom to be themselves and connect more naturally, which is why we build social networks,” he wrote. The case is Adkins v Facebook Inc, U.S. District Court, Northern District of California, No. 18-05982. Source