Match.com Accused in Lawsuit of Misleading Consumer...Who is next ?

[jay23]

So doesn't all the adult dating sites do the same ?


************************



Match.com Accused in Lawsuit of Misleading Consumers (Update3)


By Sophia Pearson

June 9 (Bloomberg) -- Match.com LLC was sued by a New York resident over claims the online-dating Web site owned by IAC/InterActiveCorp misleads consumers about potential matches with inactive members.

Match.com lumps together profiles of current subscribers and canceled members and displays them as if they are the same, according to the complaint filed today by Sean McGinn in federal court in Manhattan. Most of the profiles are for people who canceled their memberships or never subscribed, McGinn said.

?Match defrauds the consumer of his/her time and personal investment every time a person pays Match?s subscription fee and writes to a member who won?t have the ability to read what they wrote or see their profile,? lawyers for McGinn said in the filing.

The complaint is without merit and Match.com plans to defend it, spokesman John Walls said in an e-mailed statement.

?Match.com is the first and one of the largest global online communities for singles looking to start a meaningful relationship,? Walls said. ?We stand behind our product 100 percent.?

Match.com, started in April 1995, has members in 24 countries and territories, the Dallas-based company said on its Web site. The site claims to give subscribers the ?tools they need to help take the lottery out of love.? Instead, the company ?intentionally? conceals the fact that it doesn?t deliver e-mails from current subscribers to a canceled member, according to the complaint.

Class Action Sought

?When a subscriber cancels their subscription, their profile continues to appear to be that of an active subscriber,? according to the complaint. ?Nothing indicates to the viewer their limited access to read e-mails or respond to them.?

McGinn is seeking class-action, or group, status to represent all Match.com members and asking for at least $5 million in damages. Match has had more than 100 million members since 2000 and 15 million current members, the company said on its Web site. Subscription rates range from $34.99 for a one-month subscription to $16.99 a month for six months.

?Sean McGinn is the perfect example of the person who is really attractive, extremely eligible and gainfully employed,? McGinn?s attorney Norah Hart, with Treuhaft & Zakarin LLP in New York, said today in a phone interview. ?He?s writing to people and hears nothing back from them. Is that because they?re not interested? That?s highly unlikely.?

Match.com should tell subscribers their e-mails aren?t being delivered, Hart said. The company should also tell members it?s using their e-mails to ?induce other people to subscribe,? Hart said.

IAC, the New York-based Web-site owner led by Chairman and Chief Executive Officer Barry Diller, rose 31 cents to $16.52 at 3:23 p.m. New York time in Nasdaq Stock Market trading. The shares have gained 5 percent this year.

The case is Sean McGinn v. Match.com LLP, 09-5328, U.S. District Court, Southern District of New York (Manhattan)

To contact the reporter on this story: Sophia Pearson in Wilmington, Delaware, at [email protected]
Last Updated: June 9, 2009 15:27 EDT

[JFK]

Just the tip of the iceberg ?

[InternetIsForPorn]

Finally!

[Sly]

At any point does match.com claim that every picture represents an actual active member?

Even if this does go through and she wins, which I don't really think will happen, this can fairly easily be gotten around if it becomes some sort of law or precedent. You don't join myspace or FaceBook and expect everyone you contact to reply back... you can't even do that with e-mail.

[Si]

I hope someone decides to do this with AFF.

[Yen_HerbalRevenue]

I am very interested to see how this is going turn out. They must have seen this coming and have themselves covered somehow.

[96ukssob]

Originally Posted by mobilefun1987

I hope someone decides to do this with AFF.

Im sure they will be next, followed by fling.

Everyone that I talked to that joins AFF or Fling complains about how almost all the profiles are fake. I got a free account with them years ago and while playing around all I got was spam mail in response to join their cam sites. i guess you just circle jerk people around and get them to empty their wallets

[TheSenator]

People get laid using AFF.

I have a buddy who lives in Hoboken that finds fat Puerto Rican girls to fuck all the time.

[GatorB]

Originally Posted by Sly

At any point does match.com claim that every picture represents an actual active member?

Even if this does go through and she wins, which I don't really think will happen, this can fairly easily be gotten around if it becomes some sort of law or precedent. You don't join myspace or FaceBook and expect everyone you contact to reply back... you can't even do that with e-mail.

A) myspace and facebook are not dating sites

B) they don't charge you a fee.

Match.com charges you for matching you with POTENTIAL mates. Now if a member is inactive then there is no POTENTIAL of meeting that person. Pretty clear cut case.

[WiredGuy]

Suing the dating company because the dating profile was inactive? Looks frivalous and meritless to me.
WG

[Si]

Originally Posted by GatorB

A) myspace and facebook are not dating sites

B) they don't charge you a fee.

Match.com charges you for matching you with POTENTIAL mates. Now if a member is inactive then there is no POTENTIAL of meeting that person. Pretty clear cut case.

And match isn't the only one

[Tom_PM]

I doubt this will be something where the judge would say, "Well you dont SAY explicitly that pictures and profiles are all active". I think it will be something where a judge would find it to be inherently and correctly assumed that if they are displayed, they ARE in FACT active.

What if you go to a car lot with 100 cars in it and go to buy one and the dealer says "Oh, only those 7 cars over there are for sale. The others aren't for sale".

EDIT: oh and btw, all 100 cars all looked exactly identical in terms of it being for sale. Slight detail? Or glaring ommision?

[Si]

Originally Posted by bossku69

Im sure they will be next, followed by fling.

Everyone that I talked to that joins AFF or Fling complains about how almost all the profiles are fake. I got a free account with them years ago and while playing around all I got was spam mail in response to join their cam sites. i guess you just circle jerk people around and get them to empty their wallets

Fingers Crossed

I'm not sure about fling though, never bothered visiting or promoting that site.

If these companies deleted profiles that had been innactive for say over a year. then they wouldn't have the fucking problem.

For example:

naughtybitch9999 last visited 6 months ago. send an email to the registered email stating:

Dear Person,

Our records indicate that you have not been active on our site for 6 months.
To make sure your profile is not deleted, please visit: www. datingsite.com and log in to re-activate your account.

If you do not log-in by 00/00/09 your profile will be deleted from our database.

Thank you,

[EscortBiz]

match is a mainstream thing, who will walk in and say AFF a place thats says they will get laid tonight didnt work for them

[Sly]

Originally Posted by PR_Tom

I doubt this will be something where the judge would say, "Well you dont SAY explicitly that pictures and profiles are all active". I think it will be something where a judge would find it to be inherently and correctly assumed that if they are displayed, they ARE in FACT active.

What if you go to a car lot with 100 cars in it and go to buy one and the dealer says "Oh, only those 7 cars over there are for sale. The others aren't for sale".

EDIT: oh and btw, all 100 cars all looked exactly identical in terms of it being for sale. Slight detail? Or glaring ommision?

Your car lot example does not work. You can't go to a lot with 100 cars, "buy one", and then be told that you can only buy from a certain seven cars. What did you buy?

[who]

Interesting.

[woj]

I thought most dating site display "last active" date? And then people could search for matches "active" in the past 7 days?

[Agent 488]

not going to change anything.

[AsianDivaGirlsWebDude]

ADG

[Si]

Originally Posted by Sly

Your car lot example does not work. You can't go to a lot with 100 cars, "buy one", and then be told that you can only buy from a certain seven cars. What did you buy?

It would if he paid before looking for it.

[Tom_PM]

Originally Posted by Sly

Your car lot example does not work. You can't go to a lot with 100 cars, "buy one", and then be told that you can only buy from a certain seven cars. What did you buy?

Well, I said you "go to buy one". By which I meant you saw one you liked, walked into the showroom, and told the salesperson which of the 100 cars you'd like to purchase. The only difference now is that at least you have a salesperson to TELL you that one isn't for sale, whereas in the email issue with the dating site.. evidently you'd simply never hear from someone you were interested in chatting with. Perhaps they could generate an email reply to the effect that "this person is no longer active".

[Tom_PM]

I didnt get that the complaintant was upset that they'd paid, but rather that nobody was replying to them.

[Serge Litehead]

with 17 million active/subscribed members why would anyone want to display canceled members?!

[HandballJim]

I recommend Match.com, this how I met my wife.

How the fuck else would a crazy Italian guy from the Bronx meet a sweet Japanese girl studying in NY.

You can go out to a bar, but the internet is much easier to meet a lot of people very fast.

[Jimbo66]

Most dating sites including ours have somewhere in the profile the last time the member was online. Pretty obvious if a member has not been online in the last 3 months they have canceled or don't really care about actually meeting someone on the site. It has been a few years since I have logged into Match.com but I am sure they have the same function within their site.

Seems like a frivolous lawsuit to me.

[mynameisjim]

Isn't match dot com owned by the same guy who owned sex.com a while back?

A while back they were also charged with sending match.com employees out on phony dates with members. Employees also sent out phony emails to string along members so they would keep paying.

[Snake Doctor]

We live in a very litigious society

[GatorB]

Originally Posted by PR_Tom

I doubt this will be something where the judge would say, "Well you dont SAY explicitly that pictures and profiles are all active". I think it will be something where a judge would find it to be inherently and correctly assumed that if they are displayed, they ARE in FACT active.

What if you go to a car lot with 100 cars in it and go to buy one and the dealer says "Oh, only those 7 cars over there are for sale. The others aren't for sale".

EDIT: oh and btw, all 100 cars all looked exactly identical in terms of it being for sale. Slight detail? Or glaring ommision?

From their own website

"With the click of a mouse, members can instantly see photos and read about potential matches in their area."

As I already said if the profile isn't active there isn't any POTENTIAL.

That's not any diffferent than McDonald's having a game and saying you could "potentially" win $1 million but there isn't actually a $1 million prize. Well then no you can't "potentialy" win $1 million.

[d-null]

if this is worth $5mil, then fake geoip ad marketing should be worth $500mil in a class action suit

[FightThisPatent]

Originally Posted by WiredGuy

Suing the dating company because the dating profile was inactive? Looks frivalous and meritless to me.
WG

you must not have read the part where the CANCELLED members where still being shown on the site as if they were active members... thus padding the search results to make it seem like there is more people than there really is.

its the same tactic as using fake profiles.... both cases achieve the objective of seeming to have enough inventory to warrant continued membership, or the incentive to join, because the "free" search showed potential matches.

This case will be a wake up call for the online dating scene, because deceptive marketing practices are burning consumers and with that comes lawsuits like this one and FTC review.

match.com should have put the same disclaimer in tiny print, that AFF does on their marketing when you see hot looking chicks that show up in your area:

*Persons appearing in photographs may not be actual members. Other data for illustrative purposes only.





Fight the hot 24,311 profiles in your area that want to meet you!

[FightThisPatent]

Originally Posted by mynameisjim

Isn't match dot com owned by the same guy who owned sex.com a while back?

gary started match.com then sold it long ago.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gary_Kremen


Fight the wiki wiki wiki!

[D Ghost]

niiiiiiiiiiiiice

[Easton]

it's about time someone in the public realized the pics in dating profiles are fake LOL

[ShellyCrash]

Originally Posted by jay23

?Sean McGinn is the perfect example of the person who is really attractive, extremely eligible and gainfully employed,? McGinn?s attorney Norah Hart, with Treuhaft & Zakarin LLP in New York, said today in a phone interview. ?He?s writing to people and hears nothing back from them. Is that because they?re not interested? That?s highly unlikely.?

Sounds like an ego problem to me.

Truth be told most dating sites allow members to post profiles for free. If a member emails a free member the mail is delivered to their onsite mailbox and a notification is sent to their personal email. Different sites handle the mail different ways, but the mail has been delivered and it is up to the member on the other end if they want to upgrade their service / purchase credits or what have you to read and / or respond.

I don't think this is a deceptive practice at all. Free profiles stay up until the member asks for their profile to be removed, which most sites do. Many members choose to upgrade their accounts based on the activity they receive before they pay.

Also it should be said that alot of dating sites give free upgrades to women. I always had the impression Match had a decent female to male ratio, but who really knows if that is the case.

I've worked for and with a hanful of online dating sites and alot of the user experience comes down to the interraction choices of the user themselves. User complaints of this nature usually come from guys who spend their time emailing the most in demand women with oneliners like, "Hey, you look yummy, let's meet up" or "Nice shoes, wanna fuck?"

Just my

[jay23]

They are trying to make this into a class action lawsuite...when that happens only lawyers make money.

[Tom_PM]

IMHO they should have to notify a person if they try to contact a cancelled member. I cant imagine why anyone would think otherwise.

If Willy Wonka never let you know if any golden tickets were found, you'd still be buying chocolate bars looking for one.

[DaddyHalbucks]

Fraud is fraud.