Class action lawsuit for false advertising?

Started Mar 3, 2014 | Discussions thread
Mel Snyder
Mel Snyder Veteran Member • Posts: 4,088
What a joke!
7

Heaven is for real wrote:

stevo23 wrote:

Heaven is for real wrote:

Weather-sealed is one of the reasons I bought this camera so I don't have to worry about rain or dust entering my A7 camera but now...

http://www.sonyalpharumors.com/sonys-a7-and-a7r-cameras-are-not-dust-and-moisture-resistant/

This is quite deceptive for Sony to do this. Removing the weathersealed description on their website without informing the consumers!

First off - this is on the "rumors" website. Second, it's been known for some time on the forums that there is very little if any weather proofing on this camera - I see no gaskets anywhere on mine. It could be that Sony only meant to say that it's components are very durable even if they get wet. Or it could be that they had intentions of producing this camera with gaskets but this feature didn't make it into the final production model.

But even more important, what about this makes us think the missing weather seal description wasn't just an oversight? I think we need to hear Sony's explanation first.

In other words, there are a lot of plausible explanations that make perfect sense before we go suing.

With all due respect, I read on the Sony store website when I purchased my Sony A7 and now, it has been deleted....

Clearly you're not an attorney. There is class action only when a class has been injured as a result of a product failure, and the company has not made a good faith attempt to make good, one party at a time. "False advertising" is not an injury. "False advertising" is managed by state attorneys general and the Federal Trade Commission - and that is a SLOW process. Sony might be ordered to change its advertising. In the absence of damaged cameras, that would be it. An A7 isn't a heart drug.

If your camera was damaged as a result of exposure to weather and if Sony refused to repair or replace it under warranty, THEN you'd have a personal claim.

And if there were thousands of A7/r owners in the same position, you might - might -have a case some class action attorney might take on. But I doubt it. The injury would be limited to the value of the camera. Say, 10,000 A7 owners were frustrated by Sony's refusal to repair. $20 million maximum. Five years from now, under the best of circumstances, you might collect 10-15% of what you paid for the camera (when the settlement is as small as $20 million, their clients collect next to nothing.

My guess is, there just wouldn't be enough people who'd been dissatisfied by a weather sealing failure to merit them taking on the case, on the off chance that 5 years from now, they'd collect $200. My guess is that if Sony felt there was any chance that your camera was damaged as a result of responsible use, they'd repair or replace it.

Frankly, I don't give a darn if my A7 is or isn't "weather sealed." I always purchase at least 2 years of
"accidental drop" extended insurance and cover it also with a floater policy.

So go ahead, vent your spleen. I never shower with my watch that's pressurized to 10 atmospheres. And I won't show with my A7, either,

 Mel Snyder's gear list:Mel Snyder's gear list
Sony Alpha NEX-6 Sony a7 Sony E 16mm F2.8 Pancake Leica Summicron-M 50mm f/2 Sony E 55-210mm F4.5-6.3 OSS +12 more
Post (hide subjects) Posted by
(unknown member)
(unknown member)
(unknown member)
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow