2) Maybe I should have been more clear on how I actually went and looked at the back of my Spaceballs DVD case and the image was different than the one you posted. But since I was only looking at the actual dvd and not going by (apparently wrong) information that says they use that image on ALL their titles. If i had a scanner at home i would scan the back cover to show you the image on the back of my dvd. Either way, the only reason i brought that up, which maybe i should have made clear, is because had you read the thread that i posted it it talks about how they seemed to have just put all the titles that are presented in the 1.85:1 ratio (i think that was the ratio in question) into the list of 'problem' dvds.
3) I could give a rats ass what the plaintiffs are or are not claiming. and how smart or stupid they are as well, i dont know them so im not going to make judgements on their intelligences (especially if since anything it seems to be a lack of information on their part and not intelligence...)
As far as im concerened, I checked out 1 of the 3 dvds I had on the list. I found that the 'problem' for which they are being sued is either non existant or doesnt affect me. I did however find that the framing of the widescreen movie appears to be incorrect. Since no proper framing of a widescreen movie (open matte or whatever) should cause information from the sides to be cut.
4) please show sources for the $7.10 buyback/free exchange being the plaintiff's idea and not MGM's. As far as i understand the concept of a legal settlement
Quote
Main Entry: set·tle·ment
Function: noun
1 : the act or process of settling
2 a : an agreement reducing or resolving differences; especially : an agreement between litigants that concludes the litigation <the states finally agreed upon a settlement and a consent decree —W. J. Brennan, Junior> <entered into a property settlement prior to the divorce> b : a formal and permanent grant or conveyance c : the sum, estate, or income granted or paid under a settlement <if the monetary limits of a defendant's insurance policy can be discovered in order to obtain reasonable settlements —J. H. Friedenthal et al.>
3 : CLOSING <settlement costs>
4 : the transfer of funds between a payor bank and a collecting bank in order to complete transactions for customers
means that both sides agree to hit. so the only thing keeping this from being an actual settlement and not a proposed settlement is that a judge has not objectively ruled as to the fairness (to both sides) of this settlement.
now thats just how i interpret/understand the above (pretty straight forward) definition. im no legal expert so i could be wrong. so if anyone that is a legal expert (expert defined as lawyer, judge, law professor) wants to correct me if im wrong then they may go ahead and do so.
It's a long way of saying, yes, i beleive Spaceballs is miss-frame and I never said that this class action covers this issue...but if i can use this class action to replace/get money to replace my dvd then why not. And since i already stated that I will probably keep this version and buy the new version providing there is no framing errors (and/or there is enough new material on the disc to make it worthwhile) then it really doesnt matter if/how it applies to the current class action. Plus if i really cared (or more importantly wanted to spend insanely large amounts of time and money i dont have) i could start my own class action for just the Spaceballs dvd miss-frame.
My whole reason for the post was to try and inform people that I believe there is really nothing wrong with their dvds so not to waste your time/money/effort to send them back for exchange/refund unless you just want to take advantage of it to thin out your dvds a little, but thats a personal choice.
also, please stop trying to inform me about the opening matting used in some films, as if you had read the very simple yet informative link i had posted in two of my previous posts, then it would be obvious i am aware of said information http://www.rexer.com/cine/oar.htm
-Darth Simon