# Station Logo Burn-in Class Action Lawsuit



## Doc (Nov 26, 2002)

IT IS TIME TO ACT AND STOP STATION LOGO BURN-IN!!!!!

I have contacted a law firm specializing in class action lawsuits. The attorney Sam Hirsch was very interested in this issue.

At this we need everyone who has logo burn-in, or service technicians who have knowledge of instances of logo burn-in to contact the attorneys at this e-mail address:

[email protected]

The next course of action will be based upon the responses received.

Let's step up and end this logo insanity.


----------



## mainedish (Mar 25, 2003)

Good one.


----------



## Cyclone (Jul 1, 2002)

Ha. I went down to the ESPN Zone resteurant the other night to see the premier of ESPN-HD (which they didn't have). They have a ton of TVs all over the place showing all kinds of sports. There was a TV with the ESPN2 logo burned in hard on it. It was bad.


----------



## Neil Derryberry (Mar 23, 2002)

He must be an accomplished lawyer, considering that he has an aol.com address.


----------



## Doc (Nov 26, 2002)

Contact the restaurant owner and tell him to e-mail the attorneys. These are the people who are most likely to have logo burn-in. They have their tvs on for extended periods of time on the same station. The attorneys need evidence of logo burn-in.

Even if those who have logo burn-in do not receive compenstaion, if we can at least get an injunction to stop or modify the current station practices it will be a victory.


----------



## Richard King (Mar 25, 2002)

Yea, those attorneys really need the bucks I guess. Jump in so that the attorney can make millions and you get a coupon for a free DVD.


----------



## Doc (Nov 26, 2002)

Several clarifications about the purpose and status of the class action lawsuit since many forum readers have misinterpreted my reasons and intentions.

1. I am addamently opposed to frivolous lawsuits and I support tort reform on the federal and state levels. I am a physician in private practice for 23 yrs and over my career I have paid approximately $750,000.00 in malapractice insurance premiums (standard rate for my community). I am currently paying $40,000.00 per year for coverage. I have never filed a suit against anyone and prefer to avoid lawsuits at all costs. In my opinion this is not a frivolous lawsuit.

2. The purpose of this class action lawsuit is not to make me rich or to receive compensation. As best as I can tell I personally do not have station logo burn-in but I am very concerned about it. The main purpose of this suit is an injunction to either stop the current policy of stationery, station logos, or to modify it to make the practice safer for all viewers. If possible those viewers who have documented permanent damage to their tv sets should be compensated for their damage.

3. Several forum members have contacted the FCC and they were told that the FCC had no jurisdiction is this issue. They were also told to contact the equipment manufacturers. As everyone already knows there are already warnings in your tv manual concerning fixed images and burn-in (or "uneven wear"). That is specifically excluded from warranty. The following appears in my manual for my Mitsubishi WS-65907

Warning: To avoid permanently imprinting a fixed image onto your TV screen, please do not display the
same stationary images on the screen for more that 15% of your total TV viewing in one week. Examples
of stationary images are letterbox top/bottom bars from DVD disk or other video sources, side bars when
showing standard TV pictures on widescreen TV’s, stock market reports, video game patterns, station
logos, web sites or stationary computer images. Such patterns can unevenly age the picture tubes causing
permanent damage to the TV.

Warning: Do not leave stationary, toolbar, or partial images on-screen
for extended periods of time. Mix the types of pictures shown.
Uneven picture tube aging is NOT covered by your warranty.

During regular tv broadcasts the station logo will be present approximately 60% of the time (absent only during commercials) well above the manufacturers' recommendation of 15%. The logos also appear to always remain in the same location and in some cases are bright rather than transparent.

4. Several members have contacted stations with their concerns and were told that they were just following what other stations were doing. I personally contacted a station engineer who stated that he would pass my concerns on to others at the station and they would get back to me. On another forum there is a listing of all the e-mail addresses for the stations to e-mail complaints about station logos. None of this seems to have had any effect in changing the stations' policies.

5. I considered legislative remedy but I am opposed in principal to increasing governmental regulation. Sometimes it is necessary but I felt it would be much too difficult to achieve, and too time consuming to get any results.

6. To date I have neither seen nor heard of any independent evaluations to test the safety of any particular station logo on various types of tvs including standard, rear projection, plasma, DLP etc. These tests should be over extended periods of time on the same station. I hear about screen logos burned into tvs in sports bars since they stay on same station indefinitely. The answer cannot be to limit my time watching a particular station. Unless the station can prove that their logo will not cause burn-in in the manner that they chose then they should change their method.

7. The issue of sidebars, letterbox etc was not considered at this time mainly because it would seem to confuse the issues. (i.e. Original aspect ratio, 4:3, 16:9 etc.) The station logo issue seems much simplier and easier to correct.

8. Legal liability issues. As I have said I am not a lawyer but I have spoken to several lawyers and I understand several principals. While I have control as to whether or not I watch a program in 4:3 with sidebars or expand to fill the screen to 16:9, I have no control over station logos other than not watching tv.

When you plug your refrigerator into an electric outlet, there is an implied warranty from your electric power company that the electricity that they supply will not be harmful to your refrigerator. If they supply the wrong voltage and burn out your refrigerator, they are responsible and will pay for damages.

By the same token, there is an implied warranty from the broadcasting stations that their signal will not be harmful to your tv and cause permanent damage. When their station logo,over which they have complete control causes permant damage to your set, they are liable. In addition, the tv manufacturers have a disclaimer in their manuals warning of the problem. The stations have none. 

Can anyone imagine a station disclaimer to this effect:

WARNING : This station employs a stationery station logo which can cause permanent burn-in and damage to your set if you watch this station for extended periods of time. You are advised to watch other stations frequently and limit your time viewing this station to no more than 15% of your total viewing time per week. If you choose instead to not follow these recommendations this station is not responsible for damage to your tv set.

You will never see anything like it.

Unfortunately, a class action lawsuit seems to be the only way to get the attention of the stations and networks concerning this issue. 

Personally, I hope that the stations and networks get drift of the lawsuit, and become more responsible and change their policies before we have to get into legal wranglings. If they showed a little more concern for the viewers and their equipment we wouldn't be heading down this path.


----------



## hojni (Feb 6, 2003)

With more and more shows going letterbox, I am starting to get concerned about burn-in along the top and bottom of my 4:3 50" Mitsubishi. I already have had burn in issue with the built-in closed captioning.

But I guess that's one way to get us to move to Widescreen TVs - which I really hate. (I know that I may be a very small minority on this board, but really I enjoy the visual experience of my 4:3 50" very much.)


----------



## johntoto11 (Aug 1, 2002)

Doc, do you want some cheese to go with your whine? Get up and change the channel.Variety is the spice of life.


----------



## Nick (Apr 23, 2002)

Doc, I get it and agree with you. Sometimes you have to take a stand. When the NGC launched, their logo (bug) was a bright yellow. Several of us emailed the new network and they evenrtually made some modifications. Of course, NGC was new and was striving for viewership. They actually replied to my email, asking my opinion of their changes. 

FOX made their bug rotate. 

CNN is, well, CNN.


----------



## Jerry 42 (Feb 25, 2003)

Doc, you have my vote and respect as I believe your underlying reasons are correct. 

Also - While I think every one on this or any forum has the right to express any opinion - I for one think the snide remarks reflect more on the maker than on the subject matter. I just do not understand what it gains for the person making them.


----------



## Richard King (Mar 25, 2002)

> In my opinion this is not a frivolous lawsuit.


THe problem is that one man's "frivolous lawsuit" is another man's quest for justice. The only one who wins in lawsuits is the lawyer. Might I suggest a publicity campaign against the most offensive and take them down one at a time until the bugs are acceptable. Start a grassroots campaign. Contact Consumer's Union (the Consumer Reports people) as a start. Contact newspapers. Do press releases. Contact some of the consumer protection agencies. Start boycotts of offending stations. Contact advertisers and inform them of the intended boycott. Going through a lawyer is simply a waste of time.


----------



## Nick (Apr 23, 2002)

When copies of the lawsuit reach the network lawyers' desks, they will call the VP of programming asking "What the hell is 'BURN-IN'?"


----------



## AkShark (Jul 12, 2002)

Since this was posted yesterday, I am going to assume it is a April Fools Joke!


----------



## Big D (Aug 19, 2002)

I am in agreement that something has to be done about the bugs. I hate them, they are an affront to my intelligence. I know what station I am watching and I could care less about any perceived "service" they feel they are providing me by placing a bug so I always know what channel I am on. I paid large sums of money to get the best picture I can get on my TV and the stations go and stick a bug on the picture that I have to look at!! We need to fight this now or we will be seeing these things from now on, they will never go away. They may become translucence and less apparent, but they will be there. Hell, stations are starting to put little small commercials over the programming now, where will it stop.The FCC needs to look at the large picture here, logos/bugs/commercials, you name it, are being abused by the stations and since they are essentially a monopoly when taken as a group, we have no choice but to accept what they collectively what to subject us to.

Let everyone who will listen know you are not happy with station bugs.


----------



## firephoto (Sep 12, 2002)

Network icons as part of the program title bars???
Sort of like websites (except this one, hint) that have a unique icon when you are there. It even gets saved to your bookmarks (that would be a favorite for you MS types  ).


----------



## MMF (Mar 7, 2003)

I agree that somehting should be done but if I wanted to file a suit it would not be a class action. I have been involved in two class action suits and only the lawyers made anything, I got coupons!!!!!!!!!!!!


----------



## AJ2086 (Jun 1, 2002)

Anyone else think this is Roger??


----------



## Mike123abc (Jul 19, 2002)

Class action is probably not the way to go. I would think working through the FCC would be much better. The problem is that enough people would never bother to complain. If a few million were to write in to the FCC that their TVs were being damaged by the transmissions then they would probably do something like regulate the amount of time they could show the logo per hour.


----------



## davhol (Oct 29, 2002)

Unfortunately, the stations will counter back with the claim that they are only protecting their intellectual property with the logo. The "logos" (or stations bugs) were originally started to prevent one station from videotaping another's content and re-broadcasting it as their own. This was a "self-defense" move on the part of stations and it has evolved (devolved?) into a dog-marking-a-fire-hydrant sort of thing. There are other ways (steganography) to protect the content, but the broadcasters are "stuck in their rut" and only will change if appropriately convinced (threatened?) to change. The suggestion of a grassroots campaign to canvass the advertisers is probably an effective tool since advertisers' monies are PRIMARY to a broadcaster. At least email/snailmail is less expensive than a lawsuit. A lawsuit is necessary if there is "evil" intent, and, as one of my college professors used to say, "Never attribute as evil what can adequately be explained as stupidity."


----------



## Big D (Aug 19, 2002)

It is not just the possibility of damage to the TV, it is also the fact that they are infringing on my enjoyment of the picture as it was created. I am pretty sure the directer and producer of programming did not intend the viewers to have a bug plastered over their work. I want all of my screen showing the intended content, not part of it showing a station bug!

FCC, class-action, emails to the stations, whatever it takes, we need to voice our displeasure.


----------



## TNGTony (Mar 23, 2002)

Big D. I'm not sure if you've seen it, but one of the Simpson's openings after the family sits down at the couch, a Georing charicature come up from the bottom right of the screen where the Fox logo was and wiped it off the creen with a rag. Imediately afterwards, a hand from the other side comes in and draws it afain to a diappointer Georing face. It was quite telling as to what he thought of the bug. 

See ya
Tony


----------



## Guest (Apr 4, 2003)

Doc,

I agree with your concern and am equally annoyed. Why do they always make the logos the brightest thing on the screen (for that matter why do they make the commercials louder, luckily some TVs like my Sony have a volume leveling function which is meant to equal the volume between channels but seems to do a great job on commercials too)?

Take a closer look at CNN Headline News sometime. You may have seen the Generals and other military analysts pointing to graphics, maps or other video on the flat panel displays during their discussions. On closer inspection you will clearly see the words Headline News burned across the screen. Plasma displays are particularly susceptible to this, that's why the manufacturers spend money putting in screen savers and pixel orbiter/wobbler technology.

If you video tape one of those segments you will clearly have your evidence of burn in from static displays. Funny thing is this time the network did it to itself.


----------

