Number 2, the scan I showed is what MGM uses on ALL their titles (except those few and far between without one at all). Sometimes there is actually a movie still inside their comparison, but it doesn't matter what matters is how the movie is actually framed.
Number 3, the plaintiffs (as stupid as they are) are not claiming/contesting miss-framing, they claim that the graphic displayed does not accurately depict the pan&scan comparison (which in many cases is true, however MGM certainly can't be sued over it). For instance, with the Princess Bride the movie was literally cropped straight to widescreen. As far as I know there was no vertical panning in use (since they watched what they filmed with cardboard covering the top and bottom of their TV, as far as they were concerned what was shot underneath the cardboard - or outside of the 1.85:1 area - didn't exist). So the full-screen version did not under-go a pan&scan conversion at all (since there was no panning required to keep all the action in frame, all they had to do was remove the crop boarders).
If you're with me so far, that's good. Now comes the home VHS release in 1.33:1. If the movie had instead been released widescreen, the picture would still have been the same size on the screen, the only difference would be the fact that you're missing picture on the top and bottom - you could achieve the same effect by covering your TV with cardboard on the top and bottom. This is picture that is supposed to be missing. It is not supposed to be in the movie. So yes, the theatrical version is cropped as far as the Film Frame is concerned, but no it isn't cropped as far as the movie is concerned - because the area inside the 1.85:1 theatrical run IS the movie!!
And Number 4. The "$7.10 buyback/free exchange" is the plaintiff’s idea, NOT MGM's! As far as MGM is concerned they will not buy back any of the titles, nor will they exchange them for free (except, obviously, where they are required to by law - which they do already).
It's a long way of saying that Spaceballs isn't miss-framed, and if it is then you'll have to wait for another class action to come along, because this one has nothing to do with it.