
LinkedIn's Add Connection settlement - illuminated
http://www.addconnectionssettlement.com/
======
1024core
So I get a list of "people you may know" on LinkedIn. Some of those are just
email addresses, no profile; but you won't see that unless you try to click on
it, only to find that it's not a link (but the "(+)" button to add still
works). The ones that aren't clickable are those of people who don't have LI
profiles. So this begs the question: why is LI showing me these suggestions?
If I add that person, will they now get an email from me, asking them to join
LI? And where did LI get these email addresses, since I most definitely did
not give them access?

LI's shady practices just never cease.

~~~
inopinatus
My experience of LinkedIn has descended from marginally diverting (2005-2009)
to a pointless recruiter circle-jerk (2010-2013) to an endless source of scam
sales-lead invites from profiles of dubious credibility (2014-2015).

I disabled all notifications long ago.

It is possible that this is the unavoidable fate of any professional-oriented
social networking service. Nonetheless the value of LinkedIn to me is now
effectively zero. I don't know anyone who respects their brand, and I'm left
wondering if there's a gap in the market; c.f. Facebook vs Myspace ca.2008.

~~~
username223
There is a very small gap. LinkedIn had a short run as an email address
harvesting operation. Now they cost me about a second a month, between the
time that one of their messages makes it through my spam filter and the time I
mark it as spam. Something not called LinkedIn could probably harvest a few
more addresses before becoming just as hated as LinkedIn.

(Side note: I just got an "invitation" "from" someone I met this year in a
completely non-job context. I'll ask the next time I see him, but I'm pretty
sure he did not explicitly ask me to whatever-the-heck in LinkedIn. More
likely, he made the mistake of uploading his address book.)

~~~
chias
It's always fun when this happens to someone who has production's on-call
address in their contacts list.

There really is nothing quite like having the "everything is on fire" pager
ring at 3:25 AM only to find that someone wants emergency_oncall@company.com
to join their linkedin network.

------
tonyztan
More info at Business Insider: [http://www.businessinsider.com/linkedin-
settles-class-action...](http://www.businessinsider.com/linkedin-settles-
class-action-lawsuit-2015-10)

------
on_
All I could think about was how funny this would be if it turned out to be a
recruiting firm gathering user details and the lawsuit was fake.

------
rayiner
> If the pro rata amount is so small that it cannot be distributed in a way
> that is economically feasible, payments will be made, instead, to Cy Pres
> Recipients selected by the Parties and approved by the Court.

The _cy pres_ structure here is a clever twist, but it's still lame and might
be a solid ground for objection and appeal:
[http://www.forbes.com/sites/wlf/2014/11/26/seventh-
circuit-c...](http://www.forbes.com/sites/wlf/2014/11/26/seventh-circuit-
continues-scrutiny-of-class-action-settlements-and-cy-pres).

------
iamleppert
$3.2 million to the lawyers. The original plaintiff? $1,500.

As per usual, the lawyers get everything. How long and hard did it really take
to put forth this case? How many hours were spent on it?

~~~
x0x0
We outsourced law and privacy policy enforcement to private individuals.
Complaining private enforcers want to be paid, particularly when they
essentially take cases on spec, is ridiculous. Unless, of course, it's a
backdoor way to oppose enforcement of the laws at all.

------
gasull
It's down. Cached version:

[https://archive.is/amjVh](https://archive.is/amjVh)

------
SilasX
I would be more impressed if the massive form didn't "have an error" after I
filled out the whole thing.

------
kbody
So I got this email, so I'm probably eligible. But, I was wondering, do you
think being part of this settlement may affect my professional career? Like,
making companies avoid me since I may be a lawsuit-hunter?

------
CCs
Duplicate of
[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10321678](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10321678)

~~~
illuminated
The "duplicate" links to the LinkedIn's notice about the settlement, but there
are more resources on the address above.

------
_RPM
Can someone post a TL;DR

~~~
marme
LinkedIn allows you to auto invite your email contacts to join linkedIn and
they sort of ask you to confirm sending the invite but what they dont make
clear is that if the person does not accept they will send 2 follow up invite
emails that contain your name telling them to join linkedIn. This settlement
claims that it is violation of your likeness to use your name to invite new
users without your permission which you only gave for the first email.
LinkedIn has decided to settle the case instead of letting it go to trial.

Dont get too excited the payout seems to be set at minimum of $10. So if you
want to waste your time signing up for this class action you can get $10 from
linkedIn because almost certainly they will reach the max number of
complainants and end up only paying each person the minimum. Anyone with a
linkedIn account that has ever sent out and invite to join linkedIn qualifies
for this suit

~~~
somebodyother
> almost certainly they will reach the max number of complainants and end up
> only paying each person the minimum.

it's like some kind of crazy realized game theory problem.

------
jlgaddis
Those e-mails used to annoy the hell out of me. I tried unchecking every box I
could to get them to stop but they still came. I ultimately resorted to
blacklisting LinkedIn's IP ranges on my mail server to get them to stop.

~~~
mdaniel
Since you have your own mail server, I bet a Procmail recipe that forwards
said emails to either support or the CEO's email address would get their
attention.

------
username223
LinkedIn? Get with the times! Anyone who's anyone uses Peeeple for all their
opt-out social networking needs.

