Do Mobile Fidelity Vinyl Re-issues Have a Digital Step in the Process?

[Rt66indierock]

Not sure what this is in reference to. I provided no material to any firms and/or litigants.

Let me refresh your memory.

“As a matter of course, I have been in direct contact with not only respective legal representatives, but plaintiffs as well in the cases filed. Also, I am NOT an attorney, have NOT been to law school, BUT I do have renowned class-action legal firms at my disposal to review and explain filings. Some of them would appear to be far more interested in this whole predicament than a good number of audiophiles.”

 

[davidavdavid]

Let me refresh your memory.

“As a matter of course, I have been in direct contact with not only respective legal representatives, but plaintiffs as well in the cases filed. Also, I am NOT an attorney, have NOT been to law school, BUT I do have renowned class-action legal firms at my disposal to review and explain filings. Some of them would appear to be far more interested in this whole predicament than a good number of audiophiles.”

Yes, I had conversations with litigants and law firms involved in this action. Still, no prima facie material was offered up to any of them, which would lead to a legal determination. With a number of them, I discussed the history of Mobile Fidelity and a detailed timeline of historical events. They had done their own due diligence, as that's what they're paid for.

All I do know is that a number of the firms were taken aback by the judge's finding that there was no collusion, nor a reverse auction and that the deal that was struck with the first law firm (the one of record) was fair. However, in the scheme of things, the MoFi case was/is so small in comparison to others that it was not worth contesting them.

I do believe that a number of the firms reckoned the $$$ at stake would be far greater than they were in actuality. it is all moot now as apparently far fewer consumers/purchasers pursued claims against MoFi.

And in the last sentence you quoted of mine, the firms really thought there was a bigger pot of gold at the end of the rainbow.

 

[Another Johnson]

it is all moot now as apparently far fewer consumers/purchasers pursued claims against MoFi.

And in the last sentence you quoted of mine, the firms really thought there was a bigger pot of gold at the end of the rainbow.

The result was actually rational.
I’m not a fan of MoFi (except for their archival sleeves). But the idea that they bamboozled people by misrepresenting their process, tickles me. If you bought their product and didn’t like the sound, you certainly shouldn’t have bought more. People who have 20 or more of the bad product must have liked the first ones well enough to buy the rest. People who did not like the bad product probably only bought one or two and that’s hardly motivation to participate in a class action suit.

No harm … no foul.

 

[davidavdavid]

The result was actually rational.
I’m not a fan of MoFi (except for their archival sleeves). But the idea that they bamboozled people by misrepresenting their process, tickles me. If you bought their product and didn’t like the sound, you certainly shouldn’t have bought more. People who have 20 or more of the bad product must have liked the first ones well enough to buy the rest. People who did not like the bad product probably only bought one or two and that’s hardly motivation to participate in a class action suit.

No harm … no foul.

Lesson learned from the law firms and the settlement figure, Audiophiles taken as a whole in relative terms are but a fraction

 

[Rt66indierock]

Yes, I had conversations with litigants and law firms involved in this action. Still, no prima facie material was offered up to any of them, which would lead to a legal determination. With a number of them, I discussed the history of Mobile Fidelity and a detailed timeline of historical events. They had done their own due diligence, as that's what they're paid for.

All I do know is that a number of the firms were taken aback by the judge's finding that there was no collusion, nor a reverse auction and that the deal that was struck with the first law firm (the one of record) was fair. However, in the scheme of things, the MoFi case was/is so small in comparison to others that it was not worth contesting them.

I do believe that a number of the firms reckoned the $$$ at stake would be far greater than they were in actuality. it is all moot now as apparently far fewer consumers/purchasers pursued claims against MoFi.

And in the last sentence you quoted of mine, the firms really thought there was a bigger pot of gold at the end of the rainbow.

David,

Your information may have caused settlement talks to begin almost immediately. Tuttle was filed August 2, 2022. The plaintiff’s attorneys reviewed information from you August 11, 2022. Their billing records show settlement talks started August 22, 2022.

Both parties’ attorneys had compelling reasons to settle as quickly as possible. Economic factors on both sides and the difficulty of proving damages. They both could safely assume the first to file rule would apply and there would be other lawsuits.

Using the first to file rule to your advantage is not collusion nor are early settlement talks.

Since no offers to settle were presented to any other plaintiffs there was no reverse auction. The Mobile Fidelity attorneys strung along the Chicago plaintiffs and blew off the others until a settlement was agreed on. A sound legal strategy.

Was the settlement fair? The Seattle law firm has a good track record with class action lawsuits and Mobile Fidelity has experienced counsel. The settlement was negotiated at arm’s length and meets the applicable requirements. So yes, I think it was fair.

The Mobile Fidelity class action lawsuit is not something welcomed by class action law firms. The legal fees are too small based on the potential damages in their eyes.

I have a problem with the law firms you talked to. After I read the Tuttle complaint, I looked up the company in Zoom Info and Kona equity. I question their analysis because how can a retail company the size of Audiophile Music Direct have the resources to pay millions in legal fees?

I’ll leave you with this courtesy of Andrew Pincus, Bolch Judicial Institute Duke Law School.

“(1) if class members are not motivated to participate in the class action, was the case worth bringing in the first place; and (2) should the lawyers who pressed the lawsuit receive substantial compensation when as many as 90 — and sometimes greater than 99 — percent of class members received nothing?”

 

[Ron Resnick]

No harm … no foul.

Each of us is entitled to our own opinion.

But practitioners in each of the fields of law, ethics, psychology and philosophy easily could find knowing misrepresentation, without more, to be a "harm."

 

[Another Johnson]

Each of us is entitled to our own opinion.

But practitioners in each of the fields of law, ethics, psychology and philosophy easily could find knowing misrepresentation, without more, to be a "harm."

Interesting that you would lump law, ethics, psychology and philosophy together in a bundled attempt to suggest that you operate on higher moral ground.

I wonder what serious ethicists, psychologists, and philosophers would conclude if they studied this incredibly self indulgent, obsessive compulsive hobby?

I suspect that MoFi’s sins wouldn’t have interested Dante.

I also suspect that if audiophiles had existed in his day, at a relatively high level of Hell he might have forced a few to listen to MoFi releases over and over again as punishment for wasting their lives.

 

[Ron Resnick]

I wonder what serious ethicists, psychologists, and philosophers would conclude if they studied this incredibly self indulgent, obsessive compulsive hobby?

As professionals in their respective fields I would hope they would not assume their own conclusions.

 

[Rt66indierock]

Each of us is entitled to our own opinion.

But practitioners in each of the fields of law, ethics, psychology and philosophy easily could find knowing misrepresentation, without more, to be a "harm."

What would your ethics folks say about your failure to file a claim?

 

[Ron Resnick]

What would your ethics folks say about your failure to file a claim?

I don't think my failure to file a claim is an ethics issue; it's a stupidity issue and a carelessness issue.

 

[Another Johnson]

I don't think my failure to file a claim is an ethics issue; it's a stupidity issue and a carelessness issue.

It’s an issue that says you didn’t think it was too important either.

 

[Rt66indierock]

I don't think my failure to file a claim is an ethics issue; it's a stupidity issue and a carelessness issue.

It is failure to protect your rights when had chance, moral responsibility.

 

[Another Johnson]

As professionals in their respective fields I would hope they would not assume their own conclusions.

Have you ever worked with these professions? It would take three meetings to figure out what they think you mean.

 

[Another Johnson]

You have a lower regard for yourself than I have for you. You attribute ignoring the deadline to stupidity and carelessness, yet you do not appear to be either stupid or careless to me. So assuming away here, I assume that you are neither.

It is far more likely that you didn’t pursue it because it was not important enough for you to make it a priority. The harm that you perceived to have been done to you was not enough to worry about.

There are many examples in this hobby where sheep happily line up to be sheered. But that is true in most high dollar hobbies.

I line up occasionally myself, and count it as tuition after the lesson.

 

[Another Johnson]

I really have no desire to argue with anyone about MoFi’s ethics. I don’t buy their products because, with the exception of the sleeves, I stopped liking them in the mid 80’s when it became clear to me that they weren’t worth their cost TO ME. I have never cared if others made a different choice.

Regarding this class action lawsuit, the result and punishment fit the crime in my opinion. The settlement was a token. This would NEVER have made it as a set of mass tort cases. It was marginal as a class action. I suspect that the lawyers were hoping for more, but sanity prevailed.

 

[Ron Resnick]

Less than 2%.

I still think the entire controversy, class action, and settlement was a worthwhile process for our industry. No matter the claim rate of class action members the fact of the controversy and the certification of the class should provide an in terrorem value to dissuade future potential hucksters in our industry from making knowing misrepresentations.

 

[Rt66indierock]

I still think the entire controversy, class action, and settlement was a worthwhile process for our industry. No matter the claim rate of class action members the fact of the controversy and the certification of the class should provide an in terrorem value to dissuade future potential hucksters in our industry from making knowing misrepresentations.

No Ron, the Mobile Fidelity class action lawsuit will make things worse.

• The cost of getting caught is low.
• The mainstream audiophile press will cover for you or ignore your hucksterism.
• The bloggers and YouTubers are too easily co-opted.
• The high-end community will believe anybody who sounds authoritative.

 

[Another Johnson]

No Ron, the Mobile Fidelity class action lawsuit will make things worse.

• The cost of getting caught is low.
• The mainstream audiophile press will cover for you or ignore your hucksterism.
• The bloggers and YouTubers are too easily co-opted.
• The high-end community will believe anybody who sounds authoritative.

I agree that the settlement supports continuing the status quo. I don’t see how it will be worse though.

The cost of getting caught is low because so much of this hobby is subjective and there is always controversy and argument.

The main stream audio press are part of the problem, symptomatic but not causal.

The bloggers are a bigger part of the problem. There is no editor on the internet. Forums are better than bloggers, but not by a large amount.

A percentage of the high end community may be gullible, but there are many informed skeptics among us. If you are honestly guided by your own ears, who is to say that you’re not right?

 

[Rt66indierock]

Now the fun begins. The judge just asked for an estimate of the monetary value of 2,643 records class members opted to return. And an estimate of the value 1,913 claims for a 5% refund.

 

[Another Johnson]

Now the fun begins. The judge just asked for an estimate of the monetary value of 2,643 records class members opted to return. And an estimate of the value 1,913 claims for a 5% refund.

That’s barely a speed bump.