An Arizona company that sells services designed to prevent identity theft has agreed to pay $12m to settle charges it oversold their effectiveness and didn't adequately protect sensitive customer data. LifeLock, which since 2006 has run TV and print ads displaying the social security number of its CEO, agreed to stop …
So nothing for the victims/subscribers eh?
Why am I not surprised.
But fraud pays, doesn't it?
"Of the settlement amount, $11m will be paid to the FTC and the remaining $1m will go to the 35 states that were part of the action."
And how much will remain in the hands of the otherwise unpunished perp(s)?
If I wasn't a basically honest guy, I'd be filthy rich instead of just comfortable.
The US legal system needs a major overhaul ... and has for a LONG time.
Something I wondered about
that came up in President Obama's co-educational seminar on health care reform. One of the Republican guys made a point that a lot of health industry costs are in frauds, which seems to be what you just mentioned. That fraud consists of getting medical treatment when you aren't entitled.
Easy solution - make it so everyone's entitled.
Well, nearly. Problem one: presumably illegal immigrants won't get the same entitlement. Problem two: some fraud consists of "patients" getting drugs that they don't need medically, they just enjoy. Hospitals are full of stuff to get high on. And then there's selling drugs and treatments that don't work, and people claiming to be qualified doctors who are not, and other types of fraud.
But I still think it's a good idea.
If it looks like a duck...
One clear sign of a fraudster, is they say they'll protect you against fraudsters.
For a "small" fee of course.
- Vid Hubble 'scope snaps 200,000-ton chunky crumble conundrum
- Bugger the jetpack, where's my 21st-century Psion?
- Windows 8.1 Update 1 spewed online a MONTH early – by Microsoft
- Google offers up its own Googlers in cloud channel chumship trawl
- Something for the Weekend, Sir? Why can’t I walk past Maplin without buying stuff I don’t need?