Are Judges Cracking Down On Data Breach Corporate Victims?
Written by Fred J. AunOctober 28th, 2009
A second federal judge has, this week, pushed back against a settlement involving a major data breach, potentially signaling more dire times for retailers whose data gets snatched courtesy of inadequate security. Last month, it was a federal judge in Maine who started questioning whether Hannaford should get a walk just because zero-liability programs spared its consumers any out-of-pocket losses.
The new ruling comes from a federal judge in San Francisco, who rejected the class-action settlement proposal for TD Ameritrade on the grounds that it didn't help the consumer victims sufficiently.
In both cases, the judges reversed positions they'd previously taken.
This Story Is Only Available For Premium Subscribers. Click Or Login In Below To Read The Rest Of This Story.
Already a Subscriber? Login Here
2 Comments | Read Are Judges Cracking Down On Data Breach Corporate Victims?
Leave a Reply
Readers, specifically those who want to comment on a story:
Our Comment SPAM system is getting very aggressive these days and has been blocking legitimate comments. If you post a comment and don't see it appear within 2 hours or so, can you please send a heads-up to customer-service@storefrontbacktalk.com? Ideally, please include the time you posted the comment. That will allow us to try and hunt for it. Thanks! P.S. We're working on fixing the system, but we don't want to lose any valuable comments in the meantime.
Our Comment SPAM system is getting very aggressive these days and has been blocking legitimate comments. If you post a comment and don't see it appear within 2 hours or so, can you please send a heads-up to customer-service@storefrontbacktalk.com? Ideally, please include the time you posted the comment. That will allow us to try and hunt for it. Thanks! P.S. We're working on fixing the system, but we don't want to lose any valuable comments in the meantime.
-Christine
October 28th, 2009 at 11:01 pm
What all these articles about this case aren’t mentioning is that Ameritrade was irresponsible about how they dealt with the breach after it happened. They largely denied it occurred, and then when they finally were *forced* to acknowledge it, they were not forthcoming with details – to the detriment of the victims. One can blame them to a large extent for the initial breach. But it is their fault entirely for their behavior afterwards.
November 12th, 2009 at 1:29 pm
lala lolo: You’re right.
Fred, good article, except that you don’t mention that the big issue is how much identity fraud resulted from the compromised SS#s. You say “there’s rarely any consumer who is actually instructing the lawyer”. In this case there was such a consumer. But the lawyers (of KamberEdelson) simply refused to follow the instructions. My instructions. I hired ‘em. I told ‘em the settlement wasn’t acceptable. They slapped my signature on it and filed it anyway. In doing so, they committed perjury, AFAICT. Details on my blog (click my name).