U.S. Consumer Bureau Loses Fight to Allow More Class-Action Suits
1–10 of 249 posts
Re: U.S. Consumer Bureau Loses Fight to Allow More Class-Action Suits
#2“Tonight’s vote is a giant setback for every consumer in this country,” Richard Cordray, the director of the consumer bureau, said in a statement. “As a result, companies like Wells Fargo and Equifax remain free to break the law without fear of legal blowback from their customers.”
Re: U.S. Consumer Bureau Loses Fight to Allow More Class-Action Suits
#3Like they say in the article it looks like Equifax was only stopping clients from joining a class action against TrustedID. It also doesn't say anything about people suing individually. I suppose we can expect to see every company now put this into their terms and conditions, which is certainly a step back in consumer rights.
Re: U.S. Consumer Bureau Loses Fight to Allow More Class-Action Suits
#4Pure speculation ahead:
Suppose for a moment that the Equifax hack was carried out by a nation-state (like, say, North Korea). This is not an issue of consumer trust and safety. It is an issue of national (US) security and safety.
To give another analogy, imagine that in 1920, the Canadian military marched over the border and robbed some banks. Does it make sense for the patrons of that bank to be able to sue the bank? Maybe. It seems like that's less of an issue than the fact that Canada has seized assets that belong to US citizens.
My point is not that Equifax is innocent, or that the situation is being handled appropriately, but rather that this whole thing looks weird enough that there it's probably a lot worse (and more complicated) than we think it is.
Re: U.S. Consumer Bureau Loses Fight to Allow More Class-Action Suits
#5What are some arguments for money in politics; lobbying?
Re: U.S. Consumer Bureau Loses Fight to Allow More Class-Action Suits
#6Pure speculation ahead: Suppose for a moment that the Equifax hack was carried out by a nation-state (like, say, North Korea). This is not an issue of consumer trust and safety. It is an issue of national (US) security and safety. To give another analogy, imagine that in 1920, the Canadian military marched over the border and robbed some banks. Does it make sense for the patrons of that bank to be able to sue the ban…
What looks weird about it?
Most Fortune 500 companies do not have bug bounties and have poor security. One was exploited using a disclosed vulnerability.
This is on the polar opposite side of the spectrum of things that would give you the idea of nation state, before ruling everything else out.
Re: U.S. Consumer Bureau Loses Fight to Allow More Class-Action Suits
#7Like they say in the article it looks like Equifax was only stopping clients from joining a class action against TrustedID. It also doesn't say anything about people suing individually. I suppose we can expect to see every company now put this into their terms and conditions, which is certainly a step back in consumer rights.
Don't they already with arbitration clauses?
Re: U.S. Consumer Bureau Loses Fight to Allow More Class-Action Suits
#8Pure speculation ahead: Suppose for a moment that the Equifax hack was carried out by a nation-state (like, say, North Korea). This is not an issue of consumer trust and safety. It is an issue of national (US) security and safety. To give another analogy, imagine that in 1920, the Canadian military marched over the border and robbed some banks. Does it make sense for the patrons of that bank to be able to sue the ban…
If the banks left all their customers money protected by a wind screen door that was accessible in the alley, I think suing could be justified.
Re: U.S. Consumer Bureau Loses Fight to Allow More Class-Action Suits
#9Pure speculation ahead: Suppose for a moment that the Equifax hack was carried out by a nation-state (like, say, North Korea). This is not an issue of consumer trust and safety. It is an issue of national (US) security and safety. To give another analogy, imagine that in 1920, the Canadian military marched over the border and robbed some banks. Does it make sense for the patrons of that bank to be able to sue the ban…
What looks weird about it? Most Fortune 500 companies do not have bug bounties and have poor security. One was exploited using a disclosed vulnerability. This is on the polar opposite side of the spectrum of things that would give you the idea of nation state, before ruling everything else out.
However, it would make some sense that politically connected individuals/companies would stand benefit from any claims of national security related to such incidences in order to protect them from liability, even if the exposure to severity of such incidences were preventable to some degree.
When national security claims protect your six, rational actors eventually will seek to exploit such…
Re: U.S. Consumer Bureau Loses Fight to Allow More Class-Action Suits
#10Pure speculation ahead: Suppose for a moment that the Equifax hack was carried out by a nation-state (like, say, North Korea). This is not an issue of consumer trust and safety. It is an issue of national (US) security and safety. To give another analogy, imagine that in 1920, the Canadian military marched over the border and robbed some banks. Does it make sense for the patrons of that bank to be able to sue the ban…
Couldn't that be left to a judge to decide?