Vizio To Pay $3 Million Settlement for Misleading Advertised TV Refresh Rates (theverge.com) 22
Vizio has agreed to $3 million settlement over allegations it misled consumers on TV refresh rates. The TV maker denies wrongdoing but will cease advertising on "effective" refresh rates. Eligible buyers have until March 2024 to file claims and submit proof of purchase. Settlement includes enhanced one-year warranties. The Verge adds: TV makers often use marketing terms like "effective refresh rate" to refer to motion smoothing features, often called the "soap opera effect," that are intended to reduce motion blur on modern TVs. Motion smoothing is already controversial enough on its own, but companies like Vizio can be frustratingly casual with refresh rate terminology in their marketing.
And water is wet (Score:3)
This is just another in an endless list of examples of corporations lying in the name of profit and getting away with it. Three million dollars? Please. Even if Vizio didn't include that as a specific line item in their budget, they don't care any more than any of us cares about having dropped a penny down a sewer grate.
It seems to me that lawsuits like this waste a lot more money than they ever retrieve for the plaintiffs. If I was Vizio I'd be asking "with enemies like this, who needs friends?".
Good (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
They get to pay $3 million ? That does not even equate to pennies dropped on the ground. Until companies like Verizon pay 10% or more of their total revenue, that is before all deductions, nothing will change. And I suppose Verizon gets to deduct the 3 million as an expense, thus lowering their tax bill. (assuming they even pay tax).
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Thank god that slashdot doesn't have one of those fucking new-fangled "grace edit period" features, amirite?
You know, like where you could edit your post for ~1 minute before it becomes uneditable? In other words, like every other message board on the entire planet.
Thank god we aren't burdened with fancy shit like that around here.
Re: (Score:1)
That's why you hold yourself to a higher standard, and check what you've written after you hit the "Preview" button. You're not supposed to bang out dozens of half-formed thoughts a day on Slashdot, take the time to make a proper contribution.
Re: (Score:1)
Glad to see them having to pay a fine for a misleading âoefeatureâ that should never be turned on by default.
It takes me a good half hour every time I get a new TV to turn off all that image "enhancing" stuff. It is likely done to make the TV stand out in a showroom, but it ruins real video and doesn't work at all with a computer. I had one TV that zoomed slightly in by default cutting off the edge if the image!
Re: Good (Score:2)
Vizio has agreed to $3 million settlement over allegations it misled consumers on TV refresh rates.
And
Settlement includes enhanced one-year warranties.
They aren't paying $3 million, they are giving buyers an extended warranty, which have a value of $3 million
California only (Score:1)
Nvidia and AMD do it... (Score:1)
Corrected Headline (Score:3)
Corrected Headline: "Vizio To Pay Insignificant Fine for Crimes That Made Them Hundreds Of Millions"
"Something something crime doesn't pay" Says who? Not Vizio! Looks like that shit paid pretty fuckin' well if you ask me.
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Fines like this are a joke. They barely amount to a rounding error in a day's receipts for Vizio, not much of a deterrent.
For us the equivalent is that we can rob a bank, steal half a million, and if we're caught (and ONLY if we're caught!) we have to pay back a few hundred dollars with no jail time?
Sign me up!
Soapy (Score:3)
>"TV makers often use marketing terms like "effective refresh rate" to refer to motion smoothing features, often called the "soap opera effect,"
Yep, soap opera. Or "home video." Or just plain fake-looking.
>"Motion smoothing is already controversial enough on its own,"
Certainly is to me. I *HATE* it. Absolutely detest it to the point I can't even watch anything on a TV that has that setting turned on (or turned on "enough" to notice, on those TVs where it is variable, like it is on my Samsung). And, of course, it seems to be defaulted to "on" on every TV. Since most people can't tell the difference with it on or off, those who hate it will be subjected to it all over the place. A solid second place is the defaulted "vibrant" mode that every TV has set on where it is way too bright and colors are insanely exaggerated. Sigh.
Back on topic, most consumers of Viso products probably don't even know what a refresh rate is or how it looks.
Re: (Score:2)
Yep, soap opera. Or "home video." Or just plain fake-looking.
Maybe TVs should have an opposite feature, so you can turn a video into a slideshow. Drop every second frame, etc.
I like high framerate video (be it 50p or 50i deinterlaced with frame doubling), as long as the video was recorded at that framerate. I dislike motion smoothing, because it does not work right some of the time, but i I have a 50i video source, of course I am turning it into 50fps and not 25fps.
Re: (Score:2)
>"I like high framerate video (be it 50p or 50i deinterlaced with frame doubling), as long as the video was recorded at that framerate. I dislike motion smoothing"
I have had many decades of viewing 24fps and it seems to have become part of the "suspend disbelief" needed for me to enjoy the media. Doesn't matter if it is originally recorded that way, or "invented" later with interpolation. Case in point- hated the native 48fps of The Hobbit movies (but loved the 3D).
I am sure much younger people probabl
Re: (Score:2)
I have not watched that many movies in a cinema growing up, but watched quite a few TV shows and those that were not cartoons, were probably video, not film sources.
At some later time, I mostly watched TV on my PC with a TV tuner card and the software used to deinterlace the source to 25fps. I don't think I noticed that, but at some point I got a different program that had the frame doubler deinterlace function, turned it on and - "wow, this looks amazing, a bit weird, it's like everything moves faster, but
Re: (Score:2)
>"For each his own, I guess, that's why this should be a setting."
Agreed. Choice is a good thing.
>"Do you play video games?"
Nah, I lost interest in them decades ago. Now I just play some casual crap on tablet or phone- word games, tower defense, and whatnot. Nothing real-time/FPS. If I were playing games, I think a high framerate would be fine, since that would be something I would be interacting with. But I am not sure.
The last FPS game I owned/played (under Linux, of course), was RTCW. I loved
Re: (Score:2)
I also prefer the slower stuff, puzzles etc. The only multiplayer games I play are some co-op ones I play with friends.
I guess, if you were watching a video on a PC connected to a TV, you could set the refresh rate to 25Hz or whatever and it would work to turn a "video" source into a "film" source.
Re: (Score:2)
>"I guess, if you were watching a video on a PC connected to a TV, you could set the refresh rate to 25Hz or whatever and it would work to turn a "video" source into a "film" source."
Hmm. Well, most of my TV source is from TiVo. However, my Linux desktop is also connected to it. When I watch with VLC or whatnot, it looks "normal/fine" to me, but the source materials are pretty much all 24fps and the TV is absolutely set to not interpolate. Looks the same as on my monitor.
Why can't there be a law that says that if a (Score:2)
And what's this crap about an "enhanced one-year warranty" going to the buyers as a penalty?
We need better rules about settlements, too.
A Tool for Thee, is Enabled. (Score:2)
business commits fraud that yields $X in income, then the minimum penalty is at least $X? Seems like a no-brainer, otherwise what's the point of having any rules at all.
If you were a member of The Donor Class wielding the power of lawmaker manipulation, would you write laws in favor of fairness and ethics, or write them in favor of greed and yourself? Seems like a no-brainer, otherwise what's the point of throwing all that personal and corporate political money down a tax-deducting loophole you created with the rules you wrote for yourself.
And what's this crap about an "enhanced one-year warranty" going to the buyers as a penalty? We need better rules about settlements, too.
Care to share all those stories where class action suits resulted in the public walking away with an actual win? We needed better rul