In reference to this class action suite...I would be interested to know
if mention has been made concerning the forced use of an ISP to access
WEBTV. I am a webtv customer located in an area where direct dial access
without a toll call to webtv is not available. I must use an ISP in
order to use the WEBTV service. The cost to me by webtv is $14.95 per
month. This is a discount of $10.00 from the routine $24.95 per month to
direct dial customers. Well it doesn't end there! I also must pay my
local telephone company a monthly internet access charge of $19.00 per
month. So in total, I pay $33.95 per month to access the internet via
WEBTV. That is far more than a personal computer access to the internet
would cost. AOL charges $21.95 per month for full service in this area
and NO charge is made by the local telephone company due to a direct
dial up to AOL.
As a WEBTV user I am either forced to pay the $33.95 per month or
purchase a personal computer in order to get internet service. I am sure
this is the same with thousands of people with webtv. It seems that
WEBTV could give a toll free access number at $24.95 a month charge to
anyone with telephone service. I do not understand why we are forced to
use an ISP in order to reach WEBTV. I think this should also be an issue
with the class action suite toward WEBTV and false advertising. I
assumed when I bought my unit I would dial up WEBTV and pay them a
fee...not have to pay two fees to get one service. In addition the
access to the internet is as stated not even near that of a personal
computer in every aspect. Thank you for listening! I do not know how to
relay this information to the sources of the suite.
blueheart
I totally agree with you. I had no idea that I was going to have to sign
up for web tv from them to the tune of $24.00 per mon. Also, I do have a
hard time getting everything done on the web that it said an upgrade
would do. I do not think we should have to pay web tv. this amount per
month. For Seniors on disability (like myself) and on fixed incomes, we
should be able to choose a much cheaper service. Thank you for doing
this and I hope that you are successful!!
acd
l don't know about the Radtkes' issue but l have one of my own. l
didn't expect the downloading capabilities when l got webtv a year ago.
However l got what l thought was a premium box that would give me lots
of options and upgrade possibilities.
Then l meet another person on line with webtv. She has basic webtv and
l have webtv plus. She has access to instant messenger. l don't !!!!!
l'm finding that l don't have the options l expected by getting webtv
plus as compared to basic webtv. Thanks for the forum.
gingbaby
We read your information about the class action suits that are now
pending against Web TV and would like to know how to become part of the suit?
We enjoy reading your information pages and are always amazed at the
things you are able to come up with.
Keep up the good work!
hycee
You would need to contact the lawyer, Marie Weiner of Cotchett, Pitre & Simon, in Burlingame,
California. Net4TV is not a party to the suit, nor are we collecting any names for anyone.
Net4TV Voice Staff
Regarding the above article....
The plaintiffs, Susan and Jeff Radtke, filed suit in Santa Clara, California Superior Court March 21, 2001 on behalf of themselves and the entire WebTV membership, under a legal provision that allows a lawsuit to seek Class Action status on behalf of a specified group, all of whom are presumed to have suffered damages as a result of the defendant's actions.
I'm very happy with the service I receive from WebTV and think it's
rather presumptuous of the Radtke's for including "the entire WebTV
membership".
From seeing the unit demonstrated by another family member, I knew that
this was not a computer, nor would I have access to things that computer
users enjoyed. However, this was an affordable alternative at the time,
an alternative that still meets my needs.
jans wizard
I have to say that I'm surprised that there is a law-suit of this
kind. I first heard about WEBTV on an infomercial on tv. I knew that the
Webtv unit did not compare to a computer but it let me access the net
and send e-mail,etc. I don't remember anything being said about being
just like a computer with computer capacities. The price alone tell you
that.
Maybe I don't know what I'm talking about, but I find WEBTV to be the
most affordable way to surf the net. THANK-YOU
Smoogee
Want my 2 cents worth. Well what gives these people the right to file a
law suit on my behalf without letting me know first. And what if I
don't agree with the suit. I have no problems with webtv, I enjoy it,
what it can and cannot do, I don't appreciate what these people did and
I don't agree with them....
~Ed~
These jerks aren't speaking for my Husband & I ! We knew what webtv
could & couldn't do when we bought it. We don't need 2 dummies telling
us what to think about webtv.
Shirlene Burns
These suits are a bunch of malarkey.
mayagnes
What do you think we as webtv users will gain will gain from this law
suit. I think that's a fair question.
Irish Godfather
I am very glad that at least two class-action law suits are pending -
question? Since they specify CA and IL, will it mean anything to anyone
in any other state?? -
THANK YOU NANCY MCPOLAND!
acadeanna
California is specified probably because WebTV's Terms of Service requires any lawsuits against it to be filed in Santa Clara County. Illinois is there becasue that is the residence of the Radtkes. As for whether this applies to you, you would have to ask a lawyer. If they are granted class action status, it would reach further.
Dexter Davenport
It probably won't get into the courts and MS, with their big pockets
will get this dismissed.
I for one, hope the parties concerned get WTV and set a precedent for
all of us WTV customers.
d c
How do I get involved in this lawsuit. WebTV has deceived me to many
times both advertising and in promises over the phone. Everytime i call
they give me a new solution that promises to fix the many problem I
have.
aka Hope
You will need to contact the lawyers by yourself.
Dexter Davenport
GO RADTKES
GREG
I would like to change back to 2.6 strength WebTV. I am now with the
3.0 and I HATE it. I hope you know what I mean.
You had this data two or three issues ago.
Yes yes I should have listened to your advise. But as it turned out and
you warned everyhting would get SLOWER it did. So if you could send me
the information to reverse this mess. It would be greatly appreciated.
Ronnie Lund
I guess I have found the real reason that my web TV stinks.
JOHNINSTRAFFORD
If they didn't like the
system they could have always taken it back to the store. Don't they do
any research or ask questions before they buy anything? If they wanted
a computer they should have bought a computer! I think the case should
be thrown out of court!
Flippzoid
I am outraged that Webtv has prohibited
me from using my web email or web page
from commericial use! I consider that a
seriuos restraint of trade and my right to
use my internet voice as free speech.
Also, as a handicapped person with some
very clear limitations in congnative ability,
it is impossible for me to use a regular
computer...which is what Webtv would
seem to be requireing of me.
I pay their [expletive deleted] $25 a month, that
is a normal fee for an ISP. So why does
Webtv limit my use to only personal?????
I find it insulting, unfair, unreasonable, and in my mind, probably
illegal....
Why are they getting away with such a
dictatorial policy???
JNorthstar
Dear Sirs:
I used to be able to play interactive Wheel of Fortune and Jeopardy, as
advertised. This service was discontinued without notice and I only
found out by going to the site after not getting the "go interactive"
signal for a couple of days.
The last upgrade did not improve my useage, but hindered it. A lot of
sites became inaccessible, and the speed of surfing was slowed even more
than usual.
When you find the people who initiated the suit I want to join them.
Please inform them.
Sylvia Copley
If that is your interest, you should contact them yourself. Net4TV Voice is not a party to the suit and is taking no sides.
Dexter Davenport
I have no "information"....but I sure do have an opinion....
I...personally...me alone...not in conjunction with _any_body
else....think that this is a frivalous lawsuit. Nobody in their right
mind could seriously believe that WebTV is "comparable to a computer"!
That is just plain silly!
That's my 2˘ worth!
Goldie
Great News!!!!
Web TV by Microsoft is the biggest rip-off ever.
They make us pay 21.95 or 24.95 PER mo for their rotten service.. My pc
friends don't have to pay this amt and get so much more. I don't happen
to want a pc, just my web to e=mail my kids, get in some discussion
grps, in other words company....some times I am not a lady cussing at
this thing. You can call, write to them and get nothing but BS back
Maybe it's time for Microsoft to get some competition, knock them down a
peg or two.
L M
Jeff and Susan Radtke are trouble makers and this legal action is
BS..
visitor
I have had a Webtv-plus for almost 2 years. When I purchased it - I did
research first. I went to Best Buy and the sales person explained all
the Webtv-plus could do at that time. He was right on the money. Not a
computer but for $179 you would not expect to have one. My grown
children have computers and we keep in contact with Messenger, e-mail
and I have ordered all their Chirstmas presents on line with no problems
- in fact - no problems that I read about others having. (My children
have spent at least $1200 for each PC and complain constantly having to
purchase updating material. They all say - Mom, what a great deal you
have and I spend some time doing research for my grandchildren when they
cannot find the information on the expensive PC's. I saw ads in the
newspaper and on TV before purchasing - not one time did I see anything
claiming to be a PC. Thanks for letting me air my opinion........A
retired school counselor and satisfied great grandmother.
P.S e-scanner works great as does my hp printer!!!
Ginnie
i think it is time gates got his. There are 2 million web tvs out
there. If every purchaser were to give just ONE CENT,there would be a pot of TWENTY THOUSAND
DOLLARS. If 1 man can take out the president of the united states,1 man
can take out the head of any U.S. public company.this would send a
message throughout corporate america.... [expletive deleted] US AND WE WILL GET YOU. and the same should
apply to spammers.
Public Access
Just had to write to say ..this sounds like another frivolous lawsuit..I
never was under the impression that the webtv would do everything a
computer does..and I get the internet..email..and chat..what is this
person talking about?? does he have it plugged in?? geesh...so
ridiculous..of course there are other things that drive me crazy with
webtv..but deseptive advertising ..well I would not go along with that
one..
Ps..why dont they just bring the thing back? Must be hurting for some
big time money..hate people that do that..nothing better than to try to
make an easy buck..
+*+*GHOST*+*+
Now that I've upgraded to a Webtv Plus my chances of getting booted
before I get connected has increased 99%. I guess that's what the "Plus"
means!
In reference to this class action suite...I would be interested to know
if mention has been made concerning the forced use of an ISP to access
WEBTV. I am a webtv customer located in an area where direct dial access
without a toll call to webtv is not available. I must use an ISP in
order to use the WEBTV service. The cost to me by webtv is $14.95 per
month. This is a discount of $10.00 from the routine $24.95 per month to
direct dial customers. Well it doesn't end there! I also must pay my
local telephone company a monthly internet access charge of $19.00 per
month. So in total, I pay $33.95 per month to access the internet via
WEBTV. That is far more than a personal computer access to the internet
would cost. AOL charges $21.95 per month for full service in this area
and NO charge is made by the local telephone company due to a direct
dial up to AOL.