Heavily Promoted Identity-Theft Protection Company, LifeLock, Sued for Misleading Consumers

Breitbart ^ | 03.28.08, 6:01 AM ET | PR Newswire - Press Release

[LearsFool]

We have let it become this complicated. In its essence, "identity theft" is nothing more than impersonation: me pretending to be you, for the purpose of fraud.

Time was when a business (i.e. credit reporting agency) could be sued for defamation of character for accusing you of loan default that was the result of my impersonation of you. Now the onus is, instead, on you to prove your innocence regarding the accusations on your credit report.

Frankly, it's a magnificent reversal of responsibility! We all play right along as though it made sense. I'm arguing that it doesn't.

[OB1kNOb]

Your probably right. I’ll listen to my earworm closer next time.;-)

[ansel12]

“I wish the International Star Registry would die a painful death. They just prey on the stupidity of people.”

---

A girlfriend bought me one of those papers naming a star after me......... so I got that going for me.

[EEDUDE]

“Why is there a need for Lifelock? Could it be McCains Illegals?”

Now don’t be talkin’ like that. They’re only here to do jobs Americans won’t do.

[ASOC]

Can you share the name of your service?

[Cecily]

It’s rapabilly.

[ops33]

I also live in a rural area where my mail box is far from the house. I have a PO box and everything involving bills or finance goes to the PO box. The blank checks on the credit statement get shredded.

[Swordfished]

So, they are suing because they didn’t read the fine print? Just the so called mortgage meltdown today. People should be relieved of their mortgage oblibations because they are too stupid to read the fine print. Let them suffer.

No. They're suing for deceit in advertising, and I hope they win. It's about time some companies pay for the disjunction between their advertising and their exculpatory fine print.

[B4Ranch]

Your Annual Credit Report doesn’t have your credit score on it, does it?

[B4Ranch]

Stop in at the local bank and tell the manager what you want done. They can fix the problem.

[APRPEH]

you always have to pay for that separately.

[bert]

......If for no other reason than to stop that annoying white guy trying to rap jingle......

Too bad lynching is illegal.

[bt_dooftlook]

2nd line of 2nd stanza is “I would’ve seen this coming at me like an atom bomb” I think...

[caver]

“It’s about time some companies pay for the disjunction between their advertising and their exculpatory fine print.”

I know what you are saying but it is still up to the buyer to read the fine print. I for one don’t believe any advertising. The “miracles” that lots of products promise are just good to be true. If people believe what they see in all types of advertising, then they are fools.

[angkor]

http://www.identitymonitor.citi.com

[angkor]

Your Annual Credit Report doesn’t have your credit score on it, does it?

http://www.identitymonitor.citi.com

[SkyDancer]

I’ve always investigated AD’s anyway - products, stores, that sort of thing ....

[Swordfished]

I know what you are saying but it is still up to the buyer to read the fine print. I for one don’t believe any advertising. The “miracles” that lots of products promise are just good to be true. If people believe what they see in all types of advertising, then they are fools.

It's always 'buyer beware', and people are fools for buying into the ridiculous advertising, etc...but that doesn't change the fact that there are laws against untruthful advertising.

Also, I could be wrong, but I don't believe a company can totally indemnify itself in small print. And small print can't be totally unreasonable or contrary to laws on the books.

It also looks like this LifeLock company was engaged in outright violation of the law - performing services only individuals are supposed to do on their own.

[steveab]

I wonder if these boy would be willing to sue AL Gore and The Alliance for Climate Protection for false advertising when they start running their 300 million $$$$ ad campaign?
I bet that 25% of our population would would sign up for that class action lawsuit.
http://www.ncpa.org/pub/st/st308
NCPA’s Audit of IPCC
“Problems with Computer Models. Climate scientists now use computer models, but there is no evidence that modeling improves the accuracy of predictions. For example, according to the models, the Earth should be warmer than actual measurements show it to be. Furthermore:”

[caver]

“I wonder if these boy would be willing to sue AL Gore and The Alliance for Climate Protection for false advertising when they start running their 300 million $$$$ ad campaign?”

Very good point! I suspect Gore would be exempt from a suit because he’s a crazy lib.