digg

Facebook Connect Join Digg About

Judge halts Ameritrade's lawyer-friendly data-breach deal

networkworld.com — Big reason: Plaintiff's lawyers would get almost $2 million while the class-action plaintiffs, among 6.2 million individuals whose personal info was exposed by TD Ameritrade's carelessness, would get a year's worth of free (after rebate) antispam service. Even by class-action standards, the judge is finding this one hard to swallow.

Who dugg this? Made popular Jun 18, 2008

Digg DudeWhat is Digg?

Digg is a place for people to discover and share content from anywhere on the web. Digg surfaces the best stuff as submitted and voted on by the community. Take the Tour to learn more.

44 Comments

show profanity settings
expand all
  • domfosnz, on 06/17/2008, -0/+14A years worth of free spam blocking?? great! Just switch to gmail.
  • ohnoerino, on 06/17/2008, -0/+12I would have definitely dropped Ameritrade like a ton of bricks.
  • stienster, on 06/17/2008, -0/+11considering what COULD have happened with the client information security breach, the settlement isn't even a wrist-slap. They didn't care enough to rectify the problem, which was brought to light before the breach. Their clients should have enough sense to pull and run. I know I surely would.
  • inactive, on 06/18/2008, -0/+10Here's a court room sketch of Ameritrade's lawyers...
    http://members.chello.nl/m.jong9/map15/lawyers.gif
  • Barackalypse, on 06/18/2008, -0/+10Want to bet you need a credit card to sign up for that free service, and at the end of the year Ameritrade gets a cut of whatever automatic service renewals occur?
  • inactive, on 06/18/2008, -0/+8The judge should rule that the lawyer and his firm get the free service and the people get to divide the cash settlement :P
  • inactive, on 06/17/2008, -2/+9What? A judge vs. lawyer?? Hmmmmmm, interesting. This would be a great story to cough, you know, share, cough.
  • inactive, on 06/17/2008, -0/+7A year of free (after rebate) antispam service? Count me in!
  • Spanca, on 06/18/2008, -0/+6Less than 30 cents per plaintiff in fees? Outrageous! *rolls eyes*

    The fees aren't outrageous, the settlement was pathetic. Call it like it is.
  • nojingoist, on 06/18/2008, -0/+6Ameritrade should have their license suspended by the various exchanges. That will damn sure motivate other brokers to keep better security.
  • Barackalypse, on 06/18/2008, -0/+6Fantastic, I'm sick of class action lawsuits being settled in a way that actually ends up helping only the lawyers or the company. Like that Sprint settlement a while ago, you'd get $5 a month credit for renewing your service for 2 years, or a $10 calling card or something equally stupid.
  • audieattar, on 06/17/2008, -0/+5Outlandish!
  • bxblox, on 06/18/2008, -0/+5"a year's worth of free (after rebate) antispam service"
    really? that was the best they could do?
  • bjornski, on 06/18/2008, -0/+4"Wah! I didn't like it, you shouldn't read it either!"

    Not everyone has your limited intelligence. Just go find another Xbox article.
  • DavidThaGnome, on 06/18/2008, -1/+5Oh man, just wait till someone bust's into our governments illegal wire/internet/phone tapped treasure trove of citizen data. There will of course be so much I don't know what you could do with it, but I'm sure some clever Chinese teenager will figure it out. That or we will all be in prison camps after a forensic computer analyst at the airport screening area finds the remnants of a single non DRM encoded sample track for Spin Doctor's Two Princes or something equally ridiculous.
  • saigumi, on 06/18/2008, -0/+4Alright, but I get to choose my own Anti-Spam provider.
    Hey, this "Saigumi Spam-Blocka Service" sounds awesome, and reasonably priced at $126 million. Where is my refund?
  • breadfred, on 06/18/2008, -0/+4I am re-reading bjornski's reply over and over again, but cannot find any threat in there. You just sound like a spoiled teenager with an attention span of a goldfish.
  • yujie, on 06/18/2008, -0/+3Anyone notice the TD Ameritrade ad on the side?
  • fotbr, on 06/18/2008, -0/+2until you need one
  • bjornski, on 06/18/2008, -0/+2If ignorance is bliss, you must be one happy moron.
  • VitriolAndAngst, on 06/18/2008, -0/+2I'm going to have to close my Ameritrade account.
  • inactive, on 06/18/2008, -4/+6Nah he missed it, there weren't any sirens to chase.
  • soinie, on 06/18/2008, -3/+4It's official: lawyers are scum.
  • breadfred, on 06/18/2008, -0/+1Why don't you submit a story with that link instead of dumping it in an unrelated comment?
  • thedarkwolf, on 06/18/2008, -0/+1Its sad. AT needs to be hit with a serious penalty, some really tough damages in order to deter companies from leaving there systems vulnerable. There are too many companies out there that leave personal information vulnerable to attack even after being warned by the people in IT. I know, I do web security and its ridiculously hard to convince a boss that its worth spending the time and money to properly secure the system. Hit AT with a real lawsuit with real damages and send a message that it is always worth the effort to protect the customers private records
  • thedarkwolf, on 06/18/2008, -0/+1agreed. I have no problem with the lawyers taking 2 million away, as long as the plaintiffs get something too. But all they got was some spam service that they have to get a rebate on before its free.

    The cost is hardly worth the lawsuit, AT gets off really light. For that type of breach in privacy, plus the fact that they were warned in advance and did nothing, AT should have to shell out 10s of millions of dollars if not more split among the plaintiffs. Screw that anti-spam, give them the cash.
  • Laiden, on 06/19/2008, -0/+1/sarcasm >.
  • Andrwmorph, on 06/18/2008, -0/+1/sarcasm or /stupid?
  • TTURabble, on 06/18/2008, -0/+1I read the article as well as the wired blog post that is linked in the middle ( http://blog.wired.com/27bstroke6/2008/06/judge-wei ... ) that has comments from Matthew Elvey.

    It sounds like the money going to his lawyers is an Ameritrade "payoff" for such a light settlement. IANAL, but if this is the truth then its a major ethics violation and might get someone disbarred. I only hope that Matt finds better representation for the class if his lawyer is really a hack.
  • yodaj007, on 06/18/2008, -0/+1What are you talking about, Mr Troll?
  • blatantninja, on 06/18/2008, -0/+1This is what disgusts me about most, not all, lawyers. Most take an expenses plus 50% of the settlement (pre-expenses) route. If I charged my clients that much, my securities license would be revoked and I'd be in jail.
  • inactive, on 06/18/2008, -2/+1The only thing lower than a lawyer is a right wing republican.
  • DavidThaGnome, on 06/18/2008, -2/+0lol oops i copied your ending on accident
  • GiggleStick, on 06/18/2008, -3/+1Who told you to put on a balm? Do you even know what a balm is?
  • DangerMouse9, on 06/18/2008, -3/+0Yes, they should drag the people responsible for the breach out into the street and hang them.

    Their deaths will teach other companies not to ***** around with people's personal data.
  • patpl22391, on 06/18/2008, -11/+8Wouldn't surprise me if John Edwards was one of the lawyers.
  • Sagags, on 06/18/2008, -5/+1is that a threat
  • Laiden, on 06/18/2008, -12/+2I only get a years worth with Gmail? What a joke. Hotmail4Life.
  • Sagags, on 06/18/2008, -12/+2this is a stupid and boring article, please do not read it or waste your time.

    BORRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRING

  • Add a Comment

    Login or register to comment!
    Or, sign-in super fast with your Facebook account ...

© Digg Inc. 2009 — Content created and posted by Digg users is dedicated to the public domain | Terms of Use Updated | Privacy Policy
DIGG, DIGG IT, DUGG, DIGG THIS, Digg graphics, logos, designs, page headers, button icons, scripts, and other service names are the trademarks of Digg Inc.