approval from:
fAcEtIOUs 
| reply to Z80A
Re: Follow the money said by Z80A:Robb doesn't stand to make money either way. The bloodsucking lawyer does. I'd side with Robb. »law.freeadvice.com/litigation/cl···tiff.htm
»www.gotofirm.com/mediacenter-quoted-55.html
»www.multichannel.com/article/134···_Bid.php |
|
 Z80APremium
join:2009-11-23
 ·Cox HSI
4 edits | Uh, according to the settlement documents, Jon Hart is lead plaintiff. So after posting some links Robb still doesn't stand to make money either way.
Robb > bloodsucking lawyers just looking for their cut of $16M
»funchords.livejournal.com/432415.html
It is funny that you can easily file a claim online, but you can't opt out online. You must write a letter. How convenient for the bloodsuckers.
said by »p2pcongestionsettlement.com/Faqs.htm#5 :
Who is paying the costs associated with the Settlement?
Costs associated with the Notice and administration of this Settlement will be paid from the Settlement fund to be established by Comcast.
That is mighty nice of them. The subscribers who were supposedly wronged foot the bill.
said by What the bloodsuckers get :
What is the attorneys’ fee award to Class Counsel?
Class Counsel will request an award of attorneys’ fees and expenses from the Court up to $3,000,000. Comcast will pay all attorneys’ fees and expenses. This will not reduce the benefit available to Settlement Class Members.
So let's look at the score shall we?
Robb = $0
Bloodsucking lawyers = up to $3,000,000.00
Always follow the money. |
|
2 edits | said by Z80A:So let's look at the score shall we? Robb = $0 Bloodsucking lawyers = up to $3,000,000.00 Always follow the money. Don't forget, Robb got a nice Wash, DC job out of this whole Comcast throttling issue. »newamerica.net/user/233 |
|
 The LimitPremium
join:2007-09-25
Greensboro, NC
kudos:2 | And that means...? |
|
|
|
Z80APremium
join:2009-11-23 | reply to fAcEtIOUs
Yeah, because exposing Comcast as the liars they are was the only thing on his resume. |
|
jus10
join:2009-08-04
Sterling, VA Reviews:
·Comcast
| reply to fAcEtIOUs
You've clearly never lived in DC.
I sided with Robb. Yes, I know the chances of some windfall future settlement is unlikely but my principles are worth more than $16. |
|
| reply to Z80A
so if you are in court one day will you represent yourself or will you use one of them bloodsucking lawyers? |
|
Z80APremium
join:2009-11-23 Reviews:
·Cox HSI
| I don't abuse the court process. I don't extort subscriber money from providers. So no, I would not get a bloodsucking lawyer to extort $0.50 for subscribers and $3,000,000.00 for the bottom feeding waste of skin ambulance chasing lawyer.
All class actions should be opt in instead of opt out and bloodsucker fees should reflect the amount of WORK they actually did.
Unlike you, I think people should EARN what they make. |
|
| said by Z80A:I don't abuse the court process. I don't extort subscriber money from providers. So no, I would not get a bloodsucking lawyer to extort $0.50 for subscribers and $3,000,000.00 for the bottom feeding waste of skin ambulance chasing lawyer. All class actions should be opt in instead of opt out and bloodsucker fees should reflect the amount of WORK they actually did. Unlike you, I think people should EARN what they make. what?!
this is simply ludicrous, congratulations. and you still did not answer my question. were you to be in court (whatever the reason, criminal or civil, should be obvious I didn't mean class action specifically) would you or would you not represent yourself? certainly you would represent yourself instead of using a blood sucking lawyer right?
"and bloodsucker fees should reflect the amount of WORK they actually did."
so what fees (a number please) would you have them be paid? why should they not get paid what they are able to produce, like everybody else?? this almost sounds like a socialist argument you are making, "they make too much they should make less money, because damn it they're not really earning it!"
"Unlike you, I think people should EARN what they make."
so they didn't earn the money they just went in there and grabbed it out of the air or something?
you are making ludicrous and vaguely socialist sounding arguments.
this is capitalism here, and there are no exceptions. sorry that sometimes your blessed big biz takes some losses, but that's just tough!! |
|
Z80APremium
join:2009-11-23 Reviews:
·Cox HSI
3 edits | I've already explained it to you multiple times. Get hooked on phonics if you still can't follow the simple concept that THESE bloodsuckers didn't earn that money nor were they hired by everyone supposedly damaged.
That $3,000,000.00 comes from the subscribers genius. Surely someone so interested in capitalism realizes that Comcast doesn't print their own money. These are subscribers who weren't given a choice as to how much they wanted to pay for counsel. $3,000,000.00 is obscene by any measure and the result of a corrupt system; laws, written by lawyers, passed by lawyers, for lawyers.
But it doesn't matter how many times I will explain it. You will continue defending this corrupt system where supposed victims are victimized again for the benefit of a bunch of scum-sucking waste of skin ambulance chasers.
Congrats for choosing bloodsuckers over the subscribers. Enjoy your price increases. |
|
| you haven't explained anything. bloodsucker this and bloodsucker that and calling the system corrupt is no argument at all for why they didn't earn that money. it's just sour grapes is what it is!! and 3 million is not near obscene.
i could call a lot of things corrupt and say such and such didn't really earn their money but that doesn't make it so. |
|
 newviewEx .. Ex .. ExactlyPremium
join:2001-10-01
Parsonsburg, MD
kudos:1
 ·Vonage
 ·DIRECTV
| reply to Z80A
said by Z80A:Yeah, because exposing Comcast as the liars they are was the only thing on his resume. . . . and we've been saying that about Comcast on these Forums for years.
--
Ö¿Ö
The Rules of Spam | Maryland's Newest Anti-Spam Law
Where are we going? And what's with the hand basket? |
|
