The purpose of this website is to provide a brief summary of the claims asserted in the lawsuit described below, and your legal rights and options, including the benefit to which you may be entitled if you are a Settlement Class member.
The Court in charge of this case is the United States District Court for the Northern District of California, and the case is known as In re ATI Tech. HDCP Litigation, Case No. 5:06-CV-01303-JW. The people who sued are called Plaintiffs, and the companies they sued, ATI Technologies, Inc. (now known as ATI Technologies ULC), ATI Technologies Systems Corp., ATI Research Silicon Valley Inc., and ATI Research, Inc. are called the Defendants. Plaintiffs claim that the graphics cards listed in the class member definition below were marketed as “HDCP ready,†“HDCP compliant,†or “HDCP capable,†or otherwise conforming to High-bandwidth Digital Content Protection (“HDCPâ€) specifications for the transmission of HDCP content. Defendants deny the allegations and have asserted many defenses. The Court has not made any findings on this issue, and the settlement is not an admission of wrongdoing by any party.
The parties agreed to the proposed settlement to avoid the cost and risk of continued litigation. The class representatives and their attorneys think the settlement is in the best interests of the class members.
You are a class member if, while residing in the United States, you purchased for your own personal use and not for resale an ATI graphics card (that means a card built by or for ATI, not by or for another company such as Asus, Diamond, Gigabyte, Palit, Sapphire, or VisionTek) from one of the following series: Radeon® 9550; Radeon® 9800; Radeon® x700; Radeon® x800; Radeon® x850; Radeon® x1300; Radeon® x1600; Radeon® x1800; Radeon® x1900; All-in-Wonder® 9800; All-in-Wonder® 2006; All-in-Wonder® x600; All-in-Wonder® x800; All-in-Wonder® x1800; All-in-Wonder® x1900; or any FireGL® or FireMV® series of graphics cards. You must have made your purchase during the period from January 1, 2003 to March 31, 2006.
In Re ATI Tech. HDCP Litigation - Home Page
The Court in charge of this case is the United States District Court for the Northern District of California, and the case is known as In re ATI Tech. HDCP Litigation, Case No. 5:06-CV-01303-JW. The people who sued are called Plaintiffs, and the companies they sued, ATI Technologies, Inc. (now known as ATI Technologies ULC), ATI Technologies Systems Corp., ATI Research Silicon Valley Inc., and ATI Research, Inc. are called the Defendants. Plaintiffs claim that the graphics cards listed in the class member definition below were marketed as “HDCP ready,†“HDCP compliant,†or “HDCP capable,†or otherwise conforming to High-bandwidth Digital Content Protection (“HDCPâ€) specifications for the transmission of HDCP content. Defendants deny the allegations and have asserted many defenses. The Court has not made any findings on this issue, and the settlement is not an admission of wrongdoing by any party.
The parties agreed to the proposed settlement to avoid the cost and risk of continued litigation. The class representatives and their attorneys think the settlement is in the best interests of the class members.
You are a class member if, while residing in the United States, you purchased for your own personal use and not for resale an ATI graphics card (that means a card built by or for ATI, not by or for another company such as Asus, Diamond, Gigabyte, Palit, Sapphire, or VisionTek) from one of the following series: Radeon® 9550; Radeon® 9800; Radeon® x700; Radeon® x800; Radeon® x850; Radeon® x1300; Radeon® x1600; Radeon® x1800; Radeon® x1900; All-in-Wonder® 9800; All-in-Wonder® 2006; All-in-Wonder® x600; All-in-Wonder® x800; All-in-Wonder® x1800; All-in-Wonder® x1900; or any FireGL® or FireMV® series of graphics cards. You must have made your purchase during the period from January 1, 2003 to March 31, 2006.
In Re ATI Tech. HDCP Litigation - Home Page
