Class action settlement for MGM widescreen DVDs

Discussion in 'DVD Video' started by Tarkus, Jan 29, 2005.

  1. Tarkus

    Tarkus Guest

    Tarkus, Jan 29, 2005
    1. Advertisements

  2. Tarkus

    JMK Guest

    Thanks for the heads up. Somehow I hadn't heard of this. I'm no major
    collector, but a cursory glance at their eligible list shows I have almost
    40 of their titles. A couple of things confuse me--they have films from
    the 40s on the list (e.g., the Sabu "Thief of Bagdad") that were never
    released in widescreen to begin with (obviously). And they have more recent
    features that I don't think were ever released in widescreen on DVD (e.g.,
    All Dogs Go To Heaven). Can anybody give me more info on this? TIA.
    JMK, Jan 29, 2005
    1. Advertisements

  3. Tarkus

    docdude316 Guest

    If I understand the lawsuit correctly it has nothing to do with the
    actual discs themselves but the packaging. The wording on the packaging
    is false or misleading in some way.

    docdude316, Jan 30, 2005
  4. Tarkus

    FAQmeister Guest

    The packaging indicated that their widescreen DVDs showed more image
    width than their "standard screen" DVDs. A couple of lawyers decided
    they could cash in by making accusations of fraud on what was little
    more than an unfortunate choice of wording, and MGM calculated that a
    settlement of minimal value was cheaper than putting up a fight.
    FAQmeister, Jan 30, 2005
  5. Tarkus

    Mike Kohary Guest

    The lawsuit is based on semantics, though MGM could have used better
    wording. There is nothing wrong with the discs - the lawsuit was based
    entirely on the packaging.

    Mike Kohary mike at kohary dot com

    Karma Photography:
    Seahawks Historical Database:
    Mike Kohary, Feb 1, 2005
  6. Tarkus

    Biz Guest

    SO a win for the plaintiff should just mean they need to fix their
    packaging, correct? These class action lawsuits over BS things needs to
    stop...there are too many MJ's out there that need to be in court much
    Biz, Feb 1, 2005
  7. Tarkus

    Mike Kohary Guest

    Well, MGM decided to settle (note it's only proposed at this point, the
    plaintiff hasn't accepted), probably because that was the cheapest route.
    It certainly wasn't a "win" for the plaintiff, and MGM admits no wrongdoing.
    But yeah, it was all about what they put on their packaging, combined with
    the ignorance of the plaintiffs as to the widescreen process. The DVDs
    themselves are perfectly fine, and nobody has been ripped off:

    Mike Kohary mike at kohary dot com

    Karma Photography:
    Seahawks Historical Database:
    Mike Kohary, Feb 1, 2005
    1. Advertisements

Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.