 
rosco
Lumbergh
Premium
join:2003-11-10
Catskill, NY | Send mine to... I'd like mine in 20's and 100's please! | |
|
 | |
| nasadude
join:2001-10-05
Rockville, MD | I prefer direct deposit | |
|
| | banaa007
join:2007-09-09
Monsey, NY | Re: Send mine to... I wil take the cheque. | |
|
| nasadude
join:2001-10-05
Rockville, MD
 ·Comcast
| actually, since there's no way in hell consumers will see a dime, I would prefer that any telecom executives and lawyers that signed off on or agreed to do this for the government GO TO JAIL!
I don't know if the article talks about criminal penalties, but sending several top executive and top lawyers to jail would certainly provide a good lesson in civic responsibility. | |
|
| | FLATLINE
join:2007-02-27
Buffalo, NY | Re: Send mine to... Civic responsibility??? Oh Please theres none of that in this country. As long as theres a Government or a Corporate Boss the sheep in this country will do whatever they are told even if its wrong. Its a shame. | |
|
| |
| | TheWickerMan
join:2002-04-09
Enola, PA
| Re: Send mine to... said by Old_Grouch  :Actually, they will pay off in long distance cards that expire in two years... That certainly wouldn't surprise me.
My wife had to rent a car awhile back, and apparently the company was involved in a class-action lawsuit that was effective during the time she had rented the car. The company sent her a discount coupon for her next car rental, which expired a few months later. And since neither of us had any reason to rent a car, the coupon went unused.
Since most people don't rent cars on a regular basis, I doubt the company was out any significant amount of money. | |
|
| | | james1
join:2001-02-26
antarctica | Re: Send mine to... The class action lawyers are the ones who screwed you there. They're the ones who make the real money, the customers get a fraction of what they should. | |
|
| | joker5656
join:2006-06-23
Greenville, SC
·Charter Pipeline
| said by Old_Grouch :Actually, they will pay off in long distance cards that expire in two years... you mean a month after you get them cause it took so long for them to get them to you. | |
|
| |
mlundin
join:2001-03-27
Mishawaka, IN | I'm holding my breath... Should be here any time now.... | |
|
MrMoody
Beleaguered Middle Class
join:2002-09-03
Smithfield, NC | Class Action Lawyers Until the lawyers get done dealing and you get a coupon for one free month.
--
The public is a poor business manager. | |
|
| 
S_engineer
join:2007-05-16
Chicago, IL | Re: Class Action Lawyers But you'll have to send away for that coupon at your own expense! | |
|
| jc100
join:2002-04-10 | No you give too much credit to the process. If this does proceed, we'll get the netflix deal. One coupon for a free upgrade for a month and then you MUST cancel that upgrade if you don't want to be billed for it!! | |
|
Boricua65
Oye, chico
join:2002-01-26
Sacramento, CA | Ching, ching I could use a few extra coins in my pocket  . | |
|
newview
Ex .. Ex .. Exactly
Premium
join:2001-10-01
Parsonsburg, MD | I'll settle right now for half.
Just send me a check. | |
|
| 
MysticGogeta
The Robot Devil
Premium
join:2005-03-14
League City, TX
clubs: | Re: I'll settle right now Same here  | |
|
major marco
Res Firma Mitescere Nescit
Premium
join:2003-02-13
Mission Viejo, CA
clubs:
| Negligible Even if the Death Star were ever forced to payout, they could easily handle the financial ramifications of such a hypothetical settlement. $146k per claimant is chump change. They'd still easily have billions leftover. In fact, if they ever even had to defend against such a suit in court (which they never will) they'd most likely spend a hell of a lot more on legal counsel. | |
|
| 
TK Junk Mail
Go ahead, make my day
Premium
join:2002-03-03
Margate City, NJ
clubs:
·Comcast
| Re: Negligible said by major marco :Even if the Death Star were ever forced to payout, they could easily handle the financial ramifications of such a hypothetical settlement. $146k per claimant is chump change. They'd still easily have billions leftover. In fact, if they ever even had to defend against such a suit in court (which they never will) they'd most likely spend a hell of a lot more on legal counsel. Maybe you should go back to math camp.
40,000,000 AT&T customers * $146,000 =approx
$5.8 trillion dollars. DUH!! I don't think they can pay that.
--
My BLOG .. .. Internet News .. .. My Web Page | |
|
| | backness
join:2005-07-08
K2P OW2 | Re: Negligible So, for the record, do you support AT&T and VZ doing such massive monetary damage to the American People? | |
|
| | | openbox9
join:2004-01-26
Navarre, FL | Re: Negligible What massive monetary damage to the American people? | |
|
| | | | backness
join:2005-07-08
K2P OW2
edit:
February 21st, @11:18AM
| Re: Negligible 5.8 trillion in damages and it looks like the figure could be 10 trillion...
edit: speelin and mixed my billions with trillions | |
|
| | | | | openbox9
join:2004-01-26
Navarre, FL | Re: Negligible That damage would be to AT&T, not the American people...unless you're assuming AT&T will be found liable and the govt will bail them out at the expense of the American people's tax dollars. | |
|
| | | | | | backness
join:2005-07-08
K2P OW2
·Rogers Hi-Speed
 ·TekSavvy Solutions..
| Re: Negligible uh... the damages are in compensation for the violation of FISA law.
My implication was that, since TK is a strong supporter of civil damages (i.e. RIAA), he should have no moral bias towards the imposition of these types of fines towards a business entity which clearly violated the law and as such should be held accountable (as we have heard ad nauseum)
Thanks for taking all the fun out of it | |
|
| | | | | | | openbox9
join:2004-01-26
Navarre, FL | Re: Negligible Umm, ok. Sorry to ruin your fun I guess  | |
|
| | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | ross
join:2000-08-16
·Digizip
| Re: Negligible said by amigo_boy :said by backness :a business entity which clearly violated the law What do we do about 18 U.S.C. 2511(2)(a)(ii)(B) which grants immunity merely if the AG certifies that a warrant isn't necessary? Or, U.S.C. 2702(a)(3) & (c) was amended in 2006 to reduce "reasonable belief" of "imminent danger" to merely "good faith belief" of "danger" (not imminent)? Mark Maybe Robespierre had the right idea... | |
|
| | | | | | | | 
bear73
Metnav... Fly The Unfriendly Skies
Premium
join:2001-06-09
Grand Forks Afb, ND | Repeal Patriot Act and similar fear-monger laws? | |
|
| | | | | | | | | amigo_boy
join:2005-07-22
Tempe, AZ
·Cox HSI
 ·magicjack.com
·EarthLink
| Re: Negligible said by bear73 :Repeal Patriot Act and similar fear-monger laws? I'm ok with that. But, until then, it seems like fear mongering itself to say AT&T "clearly violated the law" when there are laws that clearly would cover the activity.
It's this kind of mentality which causes me to understand AT&T's desire for immunity.
Mark | |
|
| | | | | | | | | 
RangerTX
Premium
join:2006-05-17
Los Angeles, CA
| Re: Negligible said by amigo_boy :said by bear73 :Repeal Patriot Act and similar fear-monger laws? I'm ok with that. But, until then, it seems like fear mongering itself to say AT&T "clearly violated the law" when there are laws that clearly would cover the activity. It's this kind of mentality which causes me to understand AT&T's desire for immunity. Mark Please tell me which law protects at&t when they violated the law? | |
|
| | | | | | | | | 
vaxvms
ferroequine fan
Premium
join:2005-03-01
Worcester, MA
·Charter Pipeline
| Re: Negligible said by RangerTX :Please tell me which law protects at&t when they violated the law? AT&T hasn't been proven guilty of violating any law. Not yet.
--
Don't believe everything you think. | |
|
| | | | | | | | | 
GuiltIsImplied
@frontiernet.net
| Re: Negligible Of course they haven't been proven guilty. But use common sense here! They know they're guilty as hell or they wouldn't be screaming bloody murder for not getting retro immunity. If they did nothing wrong what immunity would they need? Is this really that hard to understand??? Why isn't THIS FACT part of the discussion? Everyone talks about whether or not they should get. When the real question is WHY DO THEY FEEL THEY NEED IT?????? | |
|
| | | | | | | | | |
| | 
Karl Bode
News Guy
join:2000-03-02 | As of the BellSouth merger they had 70 million landline customers...I assume they've lost a few million off of that total, but I'm not sure it's 30 million?
Still, yeah, with 70 million x $140,000 = $10 trillion? | |
|
| | | tkdslr
join:2004-04-24
Pompano Beach, FL
·Speakeasy
| Re: Negligible said by Karl Bode :As of the BellSouth merger they had 70 million landline customers...I assume they've lost a few million off of that total, but I'm not sure it's 30 million? Still, yeah, with 70 million x $140,000 = $10 trillion? I'm fairly sure BS merger occured after the lawsuits were filed, and the FISA court oversight was re-established.
Howevere the BS/AT&T merger adds additional assets to the pot to be distributed to plantiffs. | |
|
| | 
pnh102
Reptiles Are Cuddly And Pretty
Premium
join:2002-05-02
Mount Airy, MD
| said by TK Junk Mail :Maybe you should go back to math camp. This one time, at math camp...
--
This isn't fair! I was only supposed to hate just ONE presidential candidate! | |
|
| | | 
DrewCapu
Giant Diehard
join:2001-12-19
California
clubs: | Re: Negligible Protractor?
Compass?
Yardstick? | |
|
| | | | |
| | SilverSurfer
join:2007-08-19
edit:
February 21st, @11:49AM
| said by TK Junk Mail :Maybe you should go back to math camp. 40,000,000 AT&T customers * $146,000 =approx $5.8 trillion dollars. DUH!! I don't think they can pay that. Before you jump on someone else pretending you know everything, perhaps you should go to law school - $146k is at best a very generous, above all, educated guess based on what the blogger at Legality believes a jury would award. If At&t were ever forced to settle, rest assured, the amount would be significantly less.  | |
|
| |
RangerTX
Premium
join:2006-05-17
Los Angeles, CA
| said by TK Junk Mail :said by major marco :Even if the Death Star were ever forced to payout, they could easily handle the financial ramifications of such a hypothetical settlement. $146k per claimant is chump change. They'd still easily have billions leftover. In fact, if they ever even had to defend against such a suit in court (which they never will) they'd most likely spend a hell of a lot more on legal counsel. Maybe you should go back to math camp. 40,000,000 AT&T customers * $146,000 =approx $5.8 trillion dollars. DUH!! I don't think they can pay that. Sure they can. They can sell off all of their asset etc...i am sure that will bring 5.8 trilian when everything is said and done. | |
|
| | |
See 6 replies to this post |
|
| | |
Mr Matt
join:2008-01-29
Eustis, FL | The best government money can buy. Don't hold your breath for any form of compensation. The telcos will probably receive immunity because they have the best government money can buy. | |
|
| |
| 
RainWind
join:2000-10-20
Van Wert, OH
| said by Mr Matt :Don't hold your breath for any form of compensation. The telcos will probably receive immunity because they have the best government money can buy. Seriously. Who needs laywers when the government can just re-write the laws for you.
Laws were in place against this sort of thing with punishment already laid out. If they get immunity its further proof that the government is corrupt. Not that we need more proof, but its just another example of how big businesses can break the law and avoid the consequences. | |
|
| | old_wiz_60
join:2005-06-03
Bedford, MA | Re: The best government money can buy. Exactly the point. Speculation on getting money from the telcos for what the government told them to do is a waste of time. Big business has always been forgiven for helping the government. | |
|
| | |
lest we forget
@frontiernet.net
| Re: The best government money can buy. AND PUNISHED FOR NOT HELPING. Former QWEST CEO Joseph Nacchio is in prison for not cooperating under the guise of insider trading. To an extent it was accurate...Qwest was supposed to earn BIG CONTRACTS from the govt for spying. Then he decided...you know what, this is illegal so we can't participate. He knew the contracts were not going to materialize so he pulled out some stock before the value went down.
»blog.wired.com/27bstroke6/2007/1···t-a.html | |
|
XBL2007
join:2001-01-03
Chicago, IL | Awesome! I need the money!!! | |
|
koma3504
Advocate
Premium
join:2004-06-22
North Richland Hills, TX |  Gold
| |
|
|
rosco
Lumbergh
Premium
join:2003-11-10
Catskill, NY | Re: Gold wouldn't $146,000 worth of gold be worth about $146,000?  | |
|
| |
koma3504
Advocate
Premium
join:2004-06-22
North Richland Hills, TX | Re: Gold Sure but its value keeps going up | |
|
| | | |
| | | |
koma3504
Advocate
Premium
join:2004-06-22
North Richland Hills, TX | Re: Gold yep | |
|
icp1
Premium
join:2000-10-13
Saint Louis, MO
clubs: | prove it First you have to prove you were tapped, which the gov't will say "state secret" and toss the case...
not going to happen... | |
|
| 
gaforces
United We Stand, Divided We Fall
join:2002-04-07
Santa Cruz, CA | Re: prove it The judge should be able to access the list of people who were tapped, keep it secret, and credit the damages accordingly.
--
~ Don't you ever give up, Don't ever give in. Were going to make it ~ Damian Marley | |
|
| | openbox9
join:2004-01-26
Navarre, FL | Re: prove it Not much of a secret if a bunch of people get checks for $146K. | |
|
| |
woody7
Premium
join:2000-10-13
Torrance, CA | pffttt.... Now you know why there is a such a great push for retroactive immunity. It is/always about the money. No one gives a rats a$$ about your rights..Peace
--
BlooMe | |
|
amungus
Premium
join:2004-11-26
America
clubs:
·Cox HSI
| what a shame It's such a shame.
It's not even all about the money.
Sure, they'll claim it is, and logically the numbers will be extremely huge because they're freaking "ma bell" (got the ill communication ).
It's more about being responsible. They ought to just go ahead and admit it. Everyone knows what's really going on anyway, and the whole "oooh, but our secrets can't get out.." excuse is beyond lame. Nobody cares so much about HOW they're doing what they're doing, it's the why.
Not many people disagree that yes, they should be able to tap some things for purposes of tracking down a person, as long as 1) they have a just cause 2) they'll keep their end of the bargain and get a warrant - even if it is 'after the fact' by their most generous time limits of, what is it, 90 days???
If the agents can't even get a warrant within that time frame, then doesn't it seem reasonable that maybe, just maybe, it wasn't worth it in the first place and they should move on to "bigger fish" or something that might be worthwhile?
The part(s) most people have problems with, is all this is the idiotic notion that everything must be tapped and that big brother must watch everything. Why? What good does it do to have extraneous information that's completely irrelevant?
It's not only wasteful, it's underhanded, pretentious, and apparently, it used to be illegal.
Not illegal anymore I guess. That must be nice to be able to just change the laws to suit your self.
Why not give retroactive immunity to non-violent small time criminals who are overcrowding prisons across this country? | |
|
MyDogHsFleas
Premium
join:2007-08-15
Austin, TX
 ·AT&T U-Verse
·AT&T Southwest
edit:
February 21st, @11:37AM
| This news item actually makes sense, sort of. quote:
While highly unlikely given AT&T's lobbying & legal prowess, these kind of numbers make it a little more clear why AT&T and Verizon have been spending millions in DC over the past few years in order to get legal immunity for their involvement in these programs.
Well, DUH. This is exactly what I've been saying in other news article comments as this story unfolds. This is not about "illegal wiretapping" or "breaking the law". This is about a company trying to stay out of class action lawsuit hell.
My comment is: why shouldn't AT&T spend money on lobbying this issue? First, it's perfectly legal. Second, it's manifestly clear from a business point of view that it's in their interest to avoid being liable for billions or trillions of dollars in damages. If you owned stock in AT&T and they did not try to avoid these liabilities, you'd probably sue them for malfeasance.
quote:
Congress is currently on vacation, but when they return the House will be tasked with deciding whether or not to fight, or support, these companies' request for immunity as they move to renew FISA.
Jon, you've left out some important points.
(a) Congress left without renewing FISA at all! Your story completely glosses over that little detail.
Instead the Democrats decided to ram through procedurally loaded deals against the Justice Department over their hiring and firing practices. They've prioritized election-year partisan manuvering above working on national security.
(b) The immunity deal is a small part of FISA. You make it sound like that's the biggest issue. It's not. | |
|
AT&T Could Owe You $146,000
·