Yet Another Class-action Suit Against VRSN
Date: Wednesday May 29 2002, @04:46AM
Topic: Verisign/NSI

A law firm, Weiss and Yourman, has filed suit against VeriSign, according to Reuters, "seeking class-action status ... over allegedly deceptive 'expiration' notices the company sent to the customers of rivals." VeriSign's woes on this front include BulkRegister's suit over the same "marketing techniques," which resulted (so far) in a preliminary injunction.

Weiss and Yourman's website bills the company as specializing in stockholder class actions and shareholder class and derivative actions. Though Reuters describes them as "an LA firm," they also have an office in New York.

Two notable points in the Reuters article:

First, "at least five lawsuits seeking class-action status were filed in May against VeriSign, VeriOusly accusing the company "of artificially inflating the price of its stock and and creating the false perception that revenue was grown from its core operations."

Second, a peek into VeriSign's curious inner worldview:

VeriSign has been forthcoming about its strategy to combat reduced pricing by competitors and a drop-off in domain name sales. Executives touted their aggressive marketing campaign at VeriSign analyst day on May 9 in Redwood City, Calif.

"We're becoming the attacker and not the prey," said John Donoghue, senior vice president of the mass markets division at Mountain View, Calif.-based VeriSign. "We're aggressively going after competitors' customers at the time of renewal."

VeriSign? Prey? Heh...

This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Yet Another Class-action Suit Against VRSN | Log in/Create an Account | Top | 5 comments | Search Discussion
Click this button to post a comment to this story
The options below will change how the comments display
Threshold:
Check box to change your default comment view
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
Sugarman case
by jamielove (james.love at cptech.org) on Wednesday May 29 2002, @05:15AM (#6544)
User #3323 Info | http://www.cptech.org/jamie
We have asked the FTC to investigate this isssue, based upon a
complaint from Alan Sugarman
.


The Verisign document is here:

http://www.cptech.org/ecom/icann/sugarmanexpiration.pdf


[ Reply to This | Parent ]
Re: Yet Another Class-action Suit Against VRSN
by ANNODOMINI2000 (reversethis-{KU.OC.OOHAY} {ta} {D0002DA}) on Wednesday May 29 2002, @12:39PM (#6545)
User #3359 Info | http://www.ad2000d.co.uk/
If John Donoghue, senior vice president of the mass markets division at Mountain View, Calif.-based VeriSign, really said, "We're aggressively going after competitors' customers at the time of renewal", then two word come to mind for VeriSign...

Nail. Coffin.

[ Reply to This | Parent ]
Re: Yet Another Class-action Suit Against VRSN
by fnord (groy2kNO@SPAMyahoo.com) on Wednesday May 29 2002, @04:26PM (#6561)
User #2810 Info
The teflon seems to be wearing off. From CNET, some of the VeriSign stockholder class actions here and here and here, and VeriSign orders employees to take paid holidays, no doubt in an effort to improve customer service. -g
[ Reply to This | Parent ]




This article comes from ICANNWatch
http://www.icannwatch.org/

The URL for this story is:
http://www.icannwatch.org/article.pl?sid=02/05/29/084657