Best Buy attorney admits to tampering in racketeering case
When Best Buy (NYSE:BBY) agreed to sign up customers (with or without their knowledge) for MSN Internet service when selling a computer, little did the retailer know that this would come back to haunt it. The racketeering case against the retailer and Microsoft Corp. (NASDAQ:MSFT) has come up from the ashes recently again, and now an attorney from Best Buy actually admitted that he falsified documents in the case. Oh boy.
The case, which was brought in 2003, accused both the retailer and software manufacturer of signing up thousands of Best Buy PC customers for Microsoft's MSN Internet service -- without any consent from the customer that credit cards would be charged after the "trial" ended. Perhaps this was a way for Microsoft to inflate subscribers for its online unit at a time when Google, Inc. (NASDAQ:GOOG) was starting to become all-powerful in the Internet world (although through advertising, not service providing).
The Best Buy lawyer in question here has admitted to altering emails and a paper memo before turning them over to the suit's plaintiffs. Yikes. I'm not so sure I believe the attorney's claim that he "acted alone" without the consent of his law firm or client (Best Buy). What was his motive, then? This whole claim is questionable to me. What this attorney has done has now put the credibility of Best Buy into question; this is not a good thing. Although 2003 is ancient history, this case is far from over, and now it's become even more complicated.
The case, which was brought in 2003, accused both the retailer and software manufacturer of signing up thousands of Best Buy PC customers for Microsoft's MSN Internet service -- without any consent from the customer that credit cards would be charged after the "trial" ended. Perhaps this was a way for Microsoft to inflate subscribers for its online unit at a time when Google, Inc. (NASDAQ:GOOG) was starting to become all-powerful in the Internet world (although through advertising, not service providing).
The Best Buy lawyer in question here has admitted to altering emails and a paper memo before turning them over to the suit's plaintiffs. Yikes. I'm not so sure I believe the attorney's claim that he "acted alone" without the consent of his law firm or client (Best Buy). What was his motive, then? This whole claim is questionable to me. What this attorney has done has now put the credibility of Best Buy into question; this is not a good thing. Although 2003 is ancient history, this case is far from over, and now it's become even more complicated.











Add your comments