GTX 970 cash back?

T

trick0502

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Apr 17, 2006
Messages
5,563
NVIDIA settles class-action lawsuit over GeForce GTX 970 controversy | VideoCardz.com

The overall settlement amount was not publicly disclosed within court papers, however Nvidia agreed to pay all consumers who purchased the GTX 970 graphics card and indicated there would not be a cap on the total amount it would pay consumers.

“The settlement is fair and reasonable and falls within the range of possible approval,” attorneys for the proposed Class said in the filing. “It is the product of extended arms-length negotiations between experienced attorneys familiar with the legal and factual issues of this case and all settlement class members are treated fairly under the terms of the settlement.”
 
As usual the owners get pennies while the attorneys get millions...:confused::confused:
 
It would be nice if they went through retailers and automatically credited everyone $30.
Instead, 970 owners will have to manually file claims... Something 99% of owners won't do because they'll never even know the lawsuit happened.

I hope between payouts and lawyer fees it puts a significant dent in Nvidia's profits. They could have avoided all of this by simply selling the GTX 970 as a 3.5 GB card w/ the correct specs listed.
 
Hopefully I can find my old card's serial numbers somewhere with the receipt.
 
Stoly said:
As usual the owners get pennies while the attorneys get millions...:confused::confused:
Click to expand...
Class action lawsuits are about righting a wrong and making sure it never happens again, not getting large payouts. Why do you think corporations put binding arbitration clauses in their license agreements? They would rather settle an individual claim and go on doing what they were doing to cause that grievance than have to spend resources changing their action(s).

On cost:
If there were 2 million GTX 970s sold and 1/3 that volume files claims, that is $20,000,000 that gets paid out (666,667 * $30). That is a lot more than the $1,300,000 in attorney fees quoted in the article. Even 10% of that volume filing claims would cost NVIDIA $6,000,000.
 
Armenius said:
If there were 2 million GTX 970s sold and 1/3 that volume files claims, that is $20,000,000 that gets paid out (666,667 * $30). That is a lot more than the $1,300,000 in attorney fees quoted in the article. Even 10% of that volume filing claims would cost NVIDIA $6,000,000.
Click to expand...
Some poor engineer probably got fired over this even though it was a marketing issue.
 
TaintedSquirrel said:
It would be nice if they went through retailers and automatically credited everyone $30.
Instead, 970 owners will have to manually file claims... Something 99% of owners won't do because they'll never even know the lawsuit happened.

I hope between payouts and lawyer fees it puts a significant dent in Nvidia's profits. They could have avoided all of this by simply selling the GTX 970 as a 3.5 GB card w/ the correct specs listed.
Click to expand...

Well, the card does have 4gb of ram, so technically the specs are correct.
 
$30 is a ridiculous sum for a class-action suit. Typically, consumers get a dollar or two.

I believe this when it gets finalized.
 
Armenius said:
Class action lawsuits are about righting a wrong and making sure it never happens again, not getting large payouts. Why do you think corporations put binding arbitration clauses in their license agreements? They would rather settle an individual claim and go on doing what they were doing to cause that grievance than have to spend resources changing their action(s).

On cost:
If there were 2 million GTX 970s sold and 1/3 that volume files claims, that is $20,000,000 that gets paid out (666,667 * $30). That is a lot more than the $1,300,000 in attorney fees quoted in the article. Even 10% of that volume filing claims would cost NVIDIA $6,000,000.
Click to expand...

But if only 1% files claims, then that amount would only be $600,000, or slightly less than half the attorney fees.

I really can't see the claim %age any higher than 5-10%, and I think it'll be much closer to 5% or less. Most 970 owners don't even know about the 3.5GB or the lawsuit, and most that do simply don't care. Of the ones that know AND care, probably only a small amount would bother going through with the filing process, especially if it involves a bit of work.

Personally I'll do it if it takes less than an hour, because my hourly rate is higher than the payout. :p
 
It's not the money, it's the principle. Customers were treated with contempt and the customers fought back i'm pleased to say.

I didn't buy one btw. I was about to just before all this broke. Planned purchase cancelled. I didn't buy any NVidia card I just stuck with what I had.
 
trick0502 said:
well a court of law says different.
Click to expand...
Actually the court had no say as its a settlement.

I don't know the terms of the settlement but I bet nvidia won't admint any wrong doing.

Quick search on the settlement above

"Without any admission of liability, Defendants have agreed to make a cash payment of $30 per GTX 970 unit to Settlement Class Members who submit valid claims, with no cap"
 
One of the primary misrepresentations at issue is that the GTX 970 does not operate with a full 4 gigabytes of RAM, but rather with a 3.5 GB pool of RAM
and a decoupled and less performant 0.5 GB spillover segment that operates at one-seventh the speed of the main pool

Accordingly,Settlement Class Members allege they were shortchanged on 0.5 GB of their 4 GB of RAM, or about 12.5%.
However, because the final [0.5 GB segment] runs at a materially slower rate than the first 3.5 GB, the GTX 970 devices
do not function as if they have a full 4 GB of memory, a material selling point and characteristic for these devices.
Click to expand...

All the lulz.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top