Judge voices concern over settlement in Apple anti-poaching suit, may not approve agreement

13»

Comments

  • Reply 41 of 50
    john.bjohn.b Posts: 2,720member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by boredumb View Post

     
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by John.B View Post



    Typical legal shenanigans. Michael Devine filed a lawsuit, the lawyers co-opted it into a class action and effectively took all the proceeds for themselves, leaving the actual plaintiffs with empty pockets (or useless "vouchers").



    I wish more class actions were subject to a smell test vs. simply being rubberstamped.

    I was wondering if you could back up that dismissive statement with specific fact, rather than the typical lawyer slur.

    I'm not saying it isn't so, but I think your comment should be subjected to that 'smell test' as well.


     

    Sorry to have offended your Victorian legal sensibilities...

     

    The max value of the original suit per plaintiff was $500,000, the lawyers offered to "settle" on "behalf of the class" for what is being projected at $4000 per plaintiff -- after the lawyers take their "fees" projected at $85 million.   So about 1% of the original amount to the plaintiffs, give or take, for not trying what amounts to a slam-dunk case.  Clearly this is acceptable the bizzaroworld that is the US legal system, but outside that rarefied air it doesn't pass the smell test.  No wonder Apple, Google, Intel, and Adobe are so willing to settle.

     

    (Source: http://money.cnn.com/2014/05/12/technology/silicon-valley-poaching/index.html)

  • Reply 42 of 50
    elrothelroth Posts: 1,201member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Maestro64 View Post

     

    I still stand on the fact of those 74K individual how many really think they had rats chance in hell to get a job at any one of those companies... I bet if we all saw the list of names there would be a common thread in the list. There are a group of people who are job jumpers all they do is jump from one job to another in hopes to pump up their title and pay, these people think they are worth more than than they really are. They will immediate jump from one company to another for a title change or a little bit more money.


    Wow - way to slam everybody. Why so bitter?

     

    The fact is, tech workers were screwed by Apple, Google, etc. There's no doubt about that - some workers were screwed royally, particularly the ones Google was going after (until Jobs put a stop to it). The problem is, as you say, there's no way of knowing how many workers would have been recruited by the other companies, or which workers were in demand. So there's no way to come up with a fair settlement - in an ideal world, some (or most) workers would get nothing, and some would get large payouts for years of lost wages; but there's no way to figure that out. So the focus has to be on how much the companies should pay.

     

    I'm very pro-Apple, and I hope the proposed settlement is approved. But Apple and the other companies are very wrong here, and should pay a real price (I applaud Facebook for not going along with this scheme). I hate to see the lawyers suck up so much of the settlement, and hopefully that could be changed.

  • Reply 43 of 50
    maestro64 wrote: »
    I still stand on the fact of those 74K individual how many really think they had rats chance in hell to get a job at any one of those companies... I bet if we all saw the list of names there would be a common thread in the list. There are a group of people who are job jumpers all they do is jump from one job to another in hopes to pump up their title and pay, these people think they are worth more than than they really are. They will immediate jump from one company to another for a title change or a little bit more money.

    Indeed. Loyalty is intrinsically good and should be rewarded.
  • Reply 44 of 50
    maestro64 wrote: »
     
    There are a group of people who are job jumpers all they do is jump from one job to another in hopes to pump up their title and pay, these people think they are worth more than than they really are. They will immediate jump from one company to another for a title change or a little bit more money.
    Excuse me, but if someone is hired at a higher rate of pay, then they are by definition worth that higher pay. Don't criticize them for selling their skills to the highest bidder. That's what people should do.

    Indeed. And Steve Jobs was worth $1 a year.

    And if you work for free for a charity, your work is worthless.

    Or if you are not the pushy type, but enjoy and are good at your work, you may settle for a lower wage than your colleagues. You are also worth less.
  • Reply 45 of 50
    sdw2001sdw2001 Posts: 17,038member

    "Fair to the class?"  That's not your decision, judge.  The plaintiffs' counsel agreed to the settlement.  Obviously they feel it's fair.  Anyone who doesn't can opt out and pursue his own litigation.  

  • Reply 46 of 50
    gatorguygatorguy Posts: 20,752member
    gatorguy wrote: »
    While the Supreme Court only ruled specifically only on a somewhat narrow class of "software patents", the fact they declined to offer more explicit guidance on when software in general should be considered patentable will become problematic.

    Discretion is now put in the hands of Federal judges to interpret taking into account their understanding of this SCOTUS ruling. I'll be shocked if one or more judges over the next several months doesn't toss a plaintiffs computer method patent complaint using a fairly broad understanding of this 9-0 Supreme Court case as justification. In addition you can expect the USPTO to take notice and view methods patents with a much more critical eye.

    As expected the USPTO has issued new rules for patent examiners when dealing with software patents:
    http://patentlyo.com/media/2014/06/alice_pec_25jun2014.pdf
  • Reply 47 of 50
    lightknightlightknight Posts: 2,312member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Benjamin Frost View Post





    Indeed. And Steve Jobs was worth $1 a year.



    And if you work for free for a charity, your work is worthless.



    Or if you are not the pushy type, but enjoy and are good at your work, you may settle for a lower wage than your colleagues. You are also worth less.

     

    Equating pay and worthiness is NOT what he did. You're building a straw man and destroying it to prove... nothing. You must have really no case to make to feel forced to use such levels of dishonesty. Oh, wait. You COULD have made a case. You just chose not to. You are a free Internet Citizen, I guess.

     

     

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by SDW2001 View Post

     

    "Fair to the class?"  That's not your decision, judge. 


     

    Given the fact that you're not the judge, and she is, it would seem that it IS her decision. Harsh reality.

     

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by elroth View Post

     

    Wow - way to slam everybody. Why so bitter?

     

    The fact is, tech workers were screwed by Apple, Google, etc. There's no doubt about that - some workers were screwed royally, particularly the ones Google was going after (until Jobs put a stop to it). The problem is, as you say, there's no way of knowing how many workers would have been recruited by the other companies, or which workers were in demand. So there's no way to come up with a fair settlement - in an ideal world, some (or most) workers would get nothing, and some would get large payouts for years of lost wages; but there's no way to figure that out. So the focus has to be on how much the companies should pay.

     

    I'm very pro-Apple, and I hope the proposed settlement is approved. But Apple and the other companies are very wrong here, and should pay a real price (I applaud Facebook for not going along with this scheme). I hate to see the lawyers suck up so much of the settlement, and hopefully that could be changed.


    Fully agreed, especially the lawyer part. I understand the need for lawyers, but they tend to look like leeches waiting for some fat target, the target more often than not being "a class". Also, when everyone is a lawyer, who's going to do the real work? :p

  • Reply 48 of 50
    lightknightlightknight Posts: 2,312member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by malax View Post

     

    It doesn't.  But if the various authorities who could bring legal action believe that justice has been served, then it's appropriate that they wouldn't take any further action.


    That makes sense. It also means the US legal system is better than I thought, which is great, but that, to my opinion, the various authorities aren't doing their job properly, which isn't.

     

    Then again, what did I expect? The legal authorities did put some overseer to check competition at Apple (Bromwich and firm), because clearly Amazon was totally not the huge bully in the room. Should have ticked me off ;)

  • Reply 49 of 50
    gatorguygatorguy Posts: 20,752member
    Another employee case involving Apple was certified as a class action lawsuit today.
    http://techcrunch.com/2014/07/22/apple-faces-class-action-suit-affecting-20000-employees-over-pay-violations/
  • Reply 50 of 50
    SpamSandwichSpamSandwich Posts: 31,191member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Gatorguy View Post



    Another employee case involving Apple was certified as a class action lawsuit today.

    http://techcrunch.com/2014/07/22/apple-faces-class-action-suit-affecting-20000-employees-over-pay-violations/

     

    If an Apple employee chooses not to join this asinine class-action the numbers will be less. These lawsuits are a joke.

Sign In or Register to comment.