Class action lawsuit filed against doubleclick

[CTho9305]

linky

Filed for the banners that look like windows messages / alerts.

 

[Bleep]

Well I would have to say that it is a very decptive pop up, but it would seem to me that after the 2nd time a person clicked on it they would learn that it is not anything they wanted to see and cancel it out.
Bleep

 

[NikPreviousAcct]

I don't see why they should be nailed in court for this. If I make the mistake of not looking where I'm clicking or falling for something that untelligent, why should the company that made the add have to pay for my mistake? Now... all their spam and crap... THAT is what they should be nailed for.

 

[phatj]

I think the average joe web-surfer is easily deceived, though. My girlfriend saw one of those things that said "Your computer is broadcasting an internet IP address! Click here to blah blah.." and asked her father to "fix the problem with the IP address". I'm glad they're being sued.

 

[tk149]

I had someone I work with almost fall for one of those *#&$*# things. "Would you like to install Internet Washer now?" (or some crap like that). Doubleclick and all the others who do crap like that deserve to get nailed for it.

 

[XZeroII]

'bout time. Those are annoying. I can see many people falling for stuff like that.

 

[UglyCasanova]

One of my friends fell for those. He said check this out, this program is supposed to find all of the pr0n on my computer and delete it (he was going home that week and wanted his computer cleaned out).

 

[yakko]

They should not be sued because users are too stupid to read and understand before they click.

 

[ElFenix]

Originally posted by: yakko
They should not be sued because users are too stupid to read and understand before they click.

 

[jagr10]

None of us on anandtech can relate to the rest of the "below average" computer users out there. Obviously we won't fall for any of those, but a whole bunch of people must be, for those ads to be displayed for several years. I think it is deceptive marketing.

 

Originally posted by: yakko
They should not be sued because users are too stupid to read and understand before they click.

It's not like that though. Imagine, like a comment on Slashdot stated, that you're on the highway and you see an official-looking orange road sign that says "Road Closed - Exit on Right Ahead." You'll exit on the right if you know what's good for you, right?

But, after you get off the highway, you realize that the sign was really a fake, and you're now practically being assaulted by a used car dealer touting his company's "Exit on the Right" sale, with AMAZING DEALS THAT COULD SAVE YOU THOUSANDS!!!O@O#@!#

We at AT might not understand the computer angle of this lawsuit, but if it happened in another industry (in this case, road signs), there would be a lawsuit in 10 seconds flat.

Bottom line - the advertisements are deceptive, and that's not right. Many of us haven't fallen for them, but they're misleading and illegal just the same.

 

[yakko]

Originally posted by: jumpr

Originally posted by: yakko
They should not be sued because users are too stupid to read and understand before they click.

It's not like that though. Imagine, like a comment on Slashdot stated, that you're on the highway and you see an official-looking orange road sign that says "Road Closed - Exit on Right Ahead." You'll exit on the right if you know what's good for you, right?

But, after you get off the highway, you realize that the sign was really a fake, and you're now practically being assaulted by a used car dealer touting his company's "Exit on the Right" sale, with AMAZING DEALS THAT COULD SAVE YOU THOUSANDS!!!O@O#@!#

We at AT might not understand the computer angle of this lawsuit, but if it happened in another industry (in this case, road signs), there would be a lawsuit in 10 seconds flat.

Bottom line - the advertisements are deceptive, and that's not right. Many of us haven't fallen for them, but they're misleading and illegal just the same.

That is a poor analgoy because no matter how much you pay attention an official looking road closed sign will always be deceptive wereas the ads are not if you pay attention and understand before you click.

 

Originally posted by: yakko

Originally posted by: jumpr

Originally posted by: yakko
They should not be sued because users are too stupid to read and understand before they click.

It's not like that though. Imagine, like a comment on Slashdot stated, that you're on the highway and you see an official-looking orange road sign that says "Road Closed - Exit on Right Ahead." You'll exit on the right if you know what's good for you, right?

But, after you get off the highway, you realize that the sign was really a fake, and you're now practically being assaulted by a used car dealer touting his company's "Exit on the Right" sale, with AMAZING DEALS THAT COULD SAVE YOU THOUSANDS!!!O@O#@!#

We at AT might not understand the computer angle of this lawsuit, but if it happened in another industry (in this case, road signs), there would be a lawsuit in 10 seconds flat.

Bottom line - the advertisements are deceptive, and that's not right. Many of us haven't fallen for them, but they're misleading and illegal just the same.

That is a poor analgoy because no matter how much you pay attention an official looking road closed sign will always be deceptive wereas the ads are not if you pay attention and understand before you click.

But all it takes is one click on a DoubleClick ad to be part of the class. Recognizing they're fake doesn't matter, as it only takes one click for DC to have done something illegal.

 

[dmcowen674]

Originally posted by: CTho9305
linky

Filed for the banners that look like windows messages / alerts.

About time they get nailed for the deception and fraud. I have nothing against legimate advertising but they were clearly preying on those that do not know the difference from a real system message than from a deceptive Pop Up Ad.

 

[OutHouse]

Good about time somebody did something to doubleclick. My dad called me about a couple of those false computer error popups, he even said "are you sure it looks real"...

 

[Harvey]

I hope they nail them. Doubleclick and the rest of those popup assholes can rot in hell. :disgust: I'm really glad the popup blocker in NS 7.1 works so well.

 

[MacBaine]

I don't see why people are arguing FOR the spammers... every day there is another thread, "These spammers suck... blah blah", but now you all want to have sex with them! What a country...

 

[yakko]

Originally posted by: MacBaine
I don't see why people are arguing FOR the spammers... every day there is another thread, "These spammers suck... blah blah", but now you all want to have sex with them! What a country...

I am not arguing for them because I want them to stay around, I am arguing against punishing them because of someone else's stupidity.

 

[Maetryx]

I think the roadsign analogy holds up, as long as the disclosure is on the road sign but is in a smaller font and at the bottom of the sign... the part a fast traveler/slow reader/new driver won't have time to read before taking the exit.

They'd still get sued, even with the disclosure, if a significant amount of drivers were reacting to the sign, believing it to be official. I think the deception was intended, which is likely the basis of the suit.

 

[yukichigai]

I think if I ever have a site that lets me post banners I am going to specifically include one of those fake system messages. The only difference is that mine will say "You are vulnerable to advertisements disguised as system messages! Click OK to stop them." and the link will send them an installer that supertricks their system against every damn doubleclick server out there. (and some other annoying adservers too. ar.atwola.com springs to mind)


P.S. The den of the enemy