9 replies to this topic

[Hum]

(Reuters) - Internet daters aren't likely to get a date in court with Match.com.

The online matchmaking service, a unit of IAC/Interactive Corp., won the dismissal on Friday of most of a lawsuit that contended the company duped consumers into believing it had millions of subscribers when more than half were inactive, fake or scammers.

U.S. District Judge Sam Lindsay in Dallas ruled that Match.com had not breached its user agreements, finding the pacts do not require it to remove dormant or inaccurate profiles.

The language of the agreements "in no way requires Match.com to police, vet, update the website content" or verify the accuracy of profiles on the site, the judge wrote.

Jeffrey Norton, a lawyer for the plaintiffs at the law firm Newman Ferrara, in an e-mail said, "we are reviewing the decision and considering our options."

A spokesman for Match.com said it was pleased with the ruling, adding that it had always maintained that the allegations were "unfounded."

The lawsuit, which had sought class-action status on behalf of Match.com subscribers, was filed in 2010 by several users of the site.

The judge dismissed the plaintiffs' claims of breach of contract, and asked the plaintiffs to explain why he should not also toss out claims of deceptive trade practices brought under Texas law. He gave them until August 27 to respond and said if they did not he would dismiss that claim as well.

more

[psionicinversion]

why are they sueing match.com, if they cant get a date thats there problem even if over half are inactive and theres millions then they surely should still be able find someone if not join a different site

[Colin McGregor]

People in my town should be able to sue then. I live in Windsor Ontario and pretty much all dating sites give you just people from Detroit since its only a semi small bridge away.

[Growled]

Quote

The online matchmaking service, a unit of IAC/Interactive Corp., won the dismissal on Friday of most of a lawsuit that contended the company duped consumers into believing it had millions of subscribers when more than half were inactive, fake or scammers

So it's okay to lie now?

[Simon-]

Only in America can they get away with this. Anywhere else in the world this would be considered misleading and deceptive advertising by leading consumers to believe something is true regardless of the fine print that weasels their way out of supporting the claim.

[jakem1]

Simon-, on 12 August 2012 - 01:24, said:

Only in America can they get away with this. Anywhere else in the world this would be considered misleading and deceptive advertising by leading consumers to believe something is true regardless of the fine print that weasels their way out of supporting the claim.

Like how ISPs around the world advertise unlimited internet access without actually offering it?

[Simon-]

jakem1, on 12 August 2012 - 02:10, said:

Like how ISPs around the world advertise unlimited internet access without actually offering it?

Like that, in Australia the goverment (ACCC) has come down hard on ISPs who have tried to sell "unlimited" internet with limits in the fine print.

[jakem1]

Simon-, on 12 August 2012 - 10:14, said:

Like that, in Australia the goverment (ACCC) has come down hard on ISPs who have tried to sell "unlimited" internet with limits in the fine print.

I think you'll find that the world is made up of more than just Australia and the US

[Simon-]

jakem1, on 12 August 2012 - 13:07, said:

I think you'll find that the world is made up of more than just Australia and the US

I comment from what I am most familiar with. I know other countries have regulation to deceptive advertising. It must take a truly unique country where a case makes it to court and the JUDGE throws it out based on the intentionally ambiguous statements being upheld as a legal means to avoid liability. That's what deception is. From what I have read online, this is a fairly common practice in the US, and as such US consumers take all advertising material with a grain of salt than expecting reasonable claims to be actually true. We are blessed in Australia to have a consumer rights department who actually do their job and have the balls to go after large companies (like Apple) when they make misleading claims.

[bjoswald]

If they told you who was truly interested, it would take all the fun out of searching! Go to Craigslist and pick up a slut; same amount of effort with twice the satisfaction!