Class Actions Against AOL in Washington, New York, Arizona and Oregon Joined by Similar Lawsuits in California; Class-actions claim Internet provider forces customers to use AOL

Business Wire, March 3, 2000

Business/High-Tech Editors, Legal Writers

SAN BERNADINO, Calif.--(BUSINESS WIRE)--March 3, 2000

A recent lawsuit filed against America Online (NYSE:AOL) by Washington, New York, Arizona, and Oregon residents has sparked such a deluge of additional complaints from other states, attorneys representing AOL users today filed several similar complaints in California.

The proposed class-action suit, filed in the Superior Court of California in San Bernadino County claims that AOL knowingly released a version of their software that, without warning, made major changes to users' computer operating systems rendering them unstable, and in some cases, inoperable. The suit also claims that AOL, the world's largest Internet software provider (ISP), effectively barred their customers from connecting with competing ISPs.

Attorney Steve Berman, known for his national expertise in class-action lawsuits, including negotiating the Big Tobacco settlement, filed a lawsuit on behalf of California residents who have installed AOL 5.0 and have experienced difficulty connecting to competing ISPs. The latest class-action filing against AOL comes on the heels of similar lawsuits filed in other states including Arizona, Washington, New York, New Jersey, and Oregon.

"After we filed our initial complaint in Washington, we immediately began receiving hundreds of calls and e-mails from disgruntled AOL users from all across the country asking how they could join the Washington state suit," Berman said. "We've filed complaints in Washington, Oregon, Arizona, and today, California and New York, but we could well continue to expand our efforts to other states."

The suit claims the Internet giant failed to divulge to its users that the AOL 5.0 upgrade would make dramatic changes to the users' operating systems and would interfere with the user's ability to connect to the competing ISP networks.

"AOL 5.0 promised users 500 free hours of faster, better Internet access," Berman said. "But in reality, many novice users found that once they installed AOL 5.0, removing the software was nearly impossible. This was a brazen attempt by AOL to hold these customers hostage as long as they wanted to connect to the Internet."

According to Berman, AOL 5.0 is perhaps the most insidious way the company could force consumers to use AOL. "Once the software was up and running, it changed so many of the systems configurations, the average user had no hope of connecting with anyone else other than AOL. Many who tried to unwind the installation found that it was almost impossible since it affected more than 2000 files."

The class, if approved, would represent all AOL users in California who subscribe to the service and installed AOL 5.0. According to Berman, the exact number of people affected by this is yet unknown, but could number in the tens of thousands.

Berman is managing partner of Hagens Berman. Berman's practice is focused on securities, antitrust, ERISA, and consumer and environmental matters, with a heavy emphasis on class actions. Berman represented 13 states in suits against Big Tobacco, and was one of the prime architects of the groundbreaking Liggett settlement. Other class actions the firm handled include matters involving The Boeing Company, the Exxon Valdez oil spill, Egghead, Nordstrom, Boston Chicken, Noah's Bagels, Louisiana Pacific and Washington Public Power Supply (WPPSS).

For more information about this lawsuit or to learn how to join the action, please visit www.hagens-berman.com.

EDITORS NOTE: Accredited media may request copies of the complaint or arrange interviews with plaintiffs or counsel by contacting Mark Firmani at 206/443-9357 or mark@firmani.com.