←back to thread

293 points giuliomagnifico | 1 comments | | HN request time: 0s | source
Show context
shayway ◴[] No.45108426[source]
> Amazon argued that the class was too large to be manageable

Sorry, we've wronged too many people to be held accountable! What a wild argument.

replies(9): >>45108604 #>>45108647 #>>45109746 #>>45110618 #>>45111025 #>>45111655 #>>45111976 #>>45112486 #>>45125926 #
gruez ◴[] No.45108604[source]
Looking at Amazon's filings, the argument they made is the following:

>Given the unprecedented size of the proposed class consisting of 288 million members, the individualized issues on which their claims depend, and the overwhelming evidence that the challenged conduct resulted in lower prices in Amazon’s store, Plaintiffs have not—and cannot demonstrate that a class action would be manageable.

The "individualized issues" references arguments presented earlier in the filing. They also cite prior cases where class lawsuits have been denied certification because the class was too big to be manageable. You might disagree with Amazon's lawyers here, but it's unfair to characterize it as "we've wronged too many people to be held accountable". It's an "wild" argument because it's a strawman.

https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.wawd.29...

replies(6): >>45108967 #>>45109449 #>>45110275 #>>45112711 #>>45119708 #>>45121144 #
1. Zigurd ◴[] No.45119708[source]
To say it's "unfair" is a non sequitur. Other classes may have been denied certification because they are large. But being "unmanageable" is both vague and in no way equivalent to being unfair, as you put it. Computers are fast and capacious. You can manage a few hundred million things on your phone.