Vizio settles for $3M after saying 60 Hz TVs had 120 Hz “effective refresh rate” | Vizio claimed backlight scanning made refresh rates seem twice as high.::Vizio claimed backlight scanning made refresh rates seem twice as high.

  • draughtcyclist@programming.dev
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    36
    ·
    6 months ago

    Hell, I bought a 4k 60 hz TV from them and inputs are limited to 30 hz. I’ll never buy a Vizio anything again, sounds like this is their business as usual.

          • MetricIsRight@lemmy.ca
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            4
            ·
            6 months ago

            Not sure where you live but around here Sony isn’t an option for TV’s not financially anyway, 30-40% more than the competition for no damned reason.

            • Vqhm@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              5
              ·
              edit-2
              6 months ago

              There is a reason it’s slightly more expensive tho. They don’t even bother to force or nag you to connect to Wi-Fi / Internet so the manufacturer can start selling data on what you watch… Sony charges a little more because the TV is for profit, instead of your data being the profit product.

              They aren’t all that much more expensive at Costco anyway. Also it’s not like I’m buying a TV ever few years.

              Shit my Sony Trinitron CRT still works. That really is buy it for life. Less can be said about Walmart specials.

              • Fishytricks@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                6 months ago

                I’ve always thought they were slightly more expensive because they used LG/Samsung panels for their TV.

                I avoided Samsung and it was a no brainer for me to get LG. My LG has been treating me well and doesn’t prompt me to get on the internet. And I got them for discounted prices as well, a 65”GX and 42?” C3.

      • huquad@lemmy.ml
        cake
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        6 months ago

        Bought a Vizio cause it was cheap. Ended up seeing vertical lines just outside of the warranty window.

        You get what you pay for. Now I have a Sony, and no looking back

  • dtc@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    28
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    6 months ago

    Who gets the 3m? I’m gonna go out on a limb and say it isn’t the people who were deceived/lied to.

    • GenderNeutralBro@lemmy.sdf.org
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      40
      ·
      6 months ago

      Under the settlement terms [PDF] spotted by The Verge, people who bought a Vizio TV in California after April 30, 2014, can file a claim. They’ll receive $17 or up to $50 if the fund allows it. The individual payout may also be under $17 if the claims exceed the $3 million fund. Vizio will also pay attorney fees. People have until March 30 to submit their claims. The final approval hearing is scheduled for June 20.

      These class-actions are always peanuts in the end.

      • Nommer@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        19
        ·
        6 months ago

        Companies should not only pay out much more for a class action but also replace the product sold. It’s insane how they can just constantly steal from us and just get a tiny fine.

      • dtc@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        18
        ·
        6 months ago

        Yes for real, something tells me they pocketed more than $17 per victim.

      • QuadratureSurfer@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        6 months ago

        The only one that’s been amazing (that I can think of) so far was the class action settled against Toyota for a few years worth of the Prius.

        They now have to cover the inverter under warranty for 20 years from the date that the car was first used. If your car fails because of the inverter they also pay for the tow, the car rental, and all of the repairs.

    • currycourier@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      6 months ago

      3M also seems like a pittance? From a quick look their revenue is like $1.7B. Granted their margins are small but still

  • AutoTL;DR@lemmings.worldB
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    6 months ago

    This is the best summary I could come up with:


    Vizio has agreed to pay $3 million to settle a class-action lawsuit that alleged the company misled customers about the refresh rates of its TVs.

    Vizio was referring to the backlight scanning (or black frame insertion) ability, which it claimed made the TVs look like they were operating at a refresh rate that was twice as fast as they are capable of.

    Under the settlement terms [PDF] spotted by The Verge, people who bought a Vizio TV in California after April 30, 2014, can file a claim.

    Vizio also agreed to stop advertising their TVs with 120 and 240 Hz “effective” refresh rates but “will not be obligated to recall or modify labeling for any Vizio-branded television model that has already been sold or distributed to a third party,” according to the agreement.

    The settlement comes as tactics for fighting motion blur, like backlight scanning and frame interpolation (known for causing the “soap opera effect”), have been maligned for often making the viewing experience worse.

    Class-action cases like Vizio’s that end up having a negative cost for OEMs provide further incentive for them to at least stop using the ability as a way to superficially boost spec sheets.


    The original article contains 539 words, the summary contains 198 words. Saved 63%. I’m a bot and I’m open source!