Netflix Sued Over Glitchy Paul v. Tyson Fight

Before the first class meeting of the week, I often ask my students if anybody did anything exciting over the weekend. They usually roll their eyes or just keep looking down to avoid eye contact. But recently I followed up. Exploiting my uncanny ability to gauge the Zeitgeist, I asked if any of them had watched the Paul v. Tyson fight. They erupted. They were not impressed, but they could not look away. The majority seemed persuaded that the fight was rigged — that Mike Tyson pocketed his payday and didn’t really put up the fight of which he was capable. Mike Tyson is my age. I don’t think my student appreciate what it feels like to inhabit a sixty-year old body, but I am not inclined to conjure conspiracies based on motive alone. Then again, I didn’t see the fight.

But neither did some who attempted to view it, or at least, their viewing experience was not 100% satisfactory. As Ariel Zilber reports in The New York Post, Florida man has filed a purported class action complaint against Netflix, alleging $50 million in damages. Oh, sorry, the plaintiff is not “Florida man,” but a Florida man named Ronald “Blue” Denton. The complaint is here (behind a firewall), and it is full of quotable quotes.

For example, it contrasts Mike Tyson’s reputation as “The Baddest Man on the Planet” with Netflix’s viewers experience of “The Baddest Streaming on the Planet.” Um, have you tried X? The complaint calls this bout the “most hyped fight in boxing history.” Perhaps, but why do I still remember the slogan “The Thrilla in Manilla” when this fight doesn’t even have a clever name? The Has Been v. The Never Was perhaps?

The complaint alleges that 60 million people attempted to watch the fight. The complaint is brought on behalf of a class of (potentially) 50 million members. Is this a concession that 1/6 of the viewers were happy with the experience? 

In any case, the first cause of action is for breach of contract. The plaintiff class is entitled to damages, the complaint alleges to recover charges for undelivered services, as well as for “inconvenience and frustration.” That’s confusing language in a claim for breach of contract. More confusingly still, the breach claim also seeks restitution damages and an order requiring Netflix to provide promised streaming services. I really don’t understand what that means at all. I see the fight still featured on Netflix. A subscriber can view it to their hearts’ content, and presumably without glitches, as very few of the 60 million people who tried to watch it live want to repeat the experience under any circumstances.  There are additional claims under Florida statutes covering unfair trade practices and consumer protection.

It is not clear where the $50 million figure comes from. I did not see a dollar amount in the complaint, but even so, I’m not sure what the damages would be. If you have a Netflix subscription, this fight was effectively free. If you bought your subscription just to watch this fight, well that’s a much smaller class, and there’s always the defense that the fight was so boring, you were better off using your time for other pursuits. I guess they think the breach was worth $1/class member. I’m not sure why that’s the right figure.

We’ll see how this one fares. Watch this space.