Yes, I have been defending the class action suit as a possible solution to corporations that go too far.
Those kind of cases and the way they are put together is beyond my resumes, but not beyond my responsibility where I feel there has been wrong doing.
I think a law firm that practices and has some experience with class action law suits should take a long look at the Rovi/TiVo history. If only to see if there is a pattern of behavior that has misrepresented this new Rovi/TiVo company as being a tech company when they were never more a corporate raider who feeds on the carcasses of smaller companies. Could certain resent behavior show and intent to misrepresented themselves to consumers going back to Rovi's takeover. Is Rovi just a miserable little corporate lech, poaching the TiVo brand?
It's not entirely improbable.
Is there enough questions of behavior to prove intent to misrepresent? Possibly. They don't really act like a tech company. They act like draconian blood suckers with no technology solutions to their problems. They don't solve problems like a tech company if they wind up solving them at all. System Designers, you could have fooled me and maybe they have just fooled us. It's not impossible that a company that takes one of its strongest pillars, no ads, and Chews through it like a bunch of insect termites and acts like it's a great business plan is beyond ever lying or misrepresentation.
What's to lose as the customer here? Why not see if in a class action suit by a good law firm if they can connect some dots that could led to a Courtroom and judge seeing a pattern of misrepresentation, which I believe might lead to fraud.
Who knows, if you don't do something, you'll never really know what would happen if you ever did