Wacky Legal Idea: Using Class-Action Lawsuits To Gather CRM Data

Written by Mark Rasch
May 2nd, 2012

Attorney Mark D. Rasch is the former head of the U.S. Justice Department’s computer crime unit and today serves as Director of Cybersecurity and Privacy Consulting at CSC in Virginia.

Here’s your wacky legal strategy idea of the month: Settling a mostly frivolous multimillion-dollar lawsuit can be such a great CRM data generation mechanism that companies might consider filing such class-action suits against themselves. One recent class-action settlement delivered more marketing value to the defendant than it could have ever hoped for.

That defendant is using the litigation to collect consumer information. It is learning the names, addresses, E-mail addresses and some purchasing habits of not only actual consumers but, presumably, about people who never bought the product and yet are interested enough (in either the product or the $20) to lie about having bought the product. There doesn’t appear to be any limitation on how that information can later be used for marketing (haven’t reviewed the full settlement yet).

Here’s what happened: A class-action lawsuit against the makers of Nutella for falsely insinuating that its hazelnut spread is “healthy” was recently settled, and consumers who had bought Nutella within a specified timeframe can log onto a Web page and get a coupon for up to $20 off Nutella—$4 off for as many as five jars of Nutella purchased in the past. The company has set aside $3.05 million for settlement and is reportedly worried that this won’t be enough. All consumers have to do to receive the coupon is log into the class-action settlement Web site and provide their name, address, telephone number, where and when they bought the product (don’t worry, they don’t check and they don’t require receipts), and how many jars of the product they purchased (up to five). “I bought five—pinky swear!”

At first glance, this sounds like a public relations nightmare for Ferraro, the maker of Nutella. It seems even worse when you see the “deceptive” ad in question. So if you were Ferraro, would you settle? My answer is absolutely! But not for the reason you may think.

There are always vexatious lawsuits out there. Sure, Ferraro was implying that you could use Nutella (which, after all, is nothing more than a semi-liquid Snickers bar) to get kids to eat “healthy” foods. But the “settlement” and the payout achieve more than just getting rid of pesky litigation. First, brand awareness is increased—and this time not really in a bad way. OK, Nutella isn’t “healthy,” but—hmmm—it does sound tasty. Second, the class-action plaintiffs’ lawyers are reaching out to both Ferraro’s customers and non-customers alike and telling them about the product. Newspaper articles are talking about the product, and many of them are praising the company and the product.

Finally, of course, the coupons can be used to purchase more product. Presumably some portion of those who lied about having bought the product will get the $20 coupon, buy a jar of Nutella, put it on some Belgian waffles and decide to become consumers! A marketing wolf in a lawsuit’s sheep’s clothing.

Now, I am not really saying that companies should arrange for sham class-action lawsuits as a ruse to collect information about customers. That would be wrong. But when deciding what to do if such a lawsuit is filed, remember that you might be able to use it to your advantage. And that would be sweet and healthy for the bottom line.

If you disagree with me, I’ll see you in court, buddy. If you agree with me, however, I would love to hear from you.


2 Comments | Read Wacky Legal Idea: Using Class-Action Lawsuits To Gather CRM Data

  1. danjahRoss Says:

    the ever true “bad publicity, good publicity – still publicity” right?

  2. Marketer in Toronto Says:

    Mark, I wholly subscribe to your theory.

    In fact, many car manufacturers will orchestrate ‘recalls’ as a measure for getting people to attend at their local dealership to complete the recall work, and anything else that can be suggested or done at the time. (We all have minor maintenance matters that need to be done but are not important enough to create a priority)

    The recall notice turns everything into a priority. (We don’t want the flux capacitator to blow up and catch fire!)

    Of course, prima facie, a recall notice may suggest that the manufacturer’s workman ship was shoddy, or it’s product inferior, however most people actually perceive a recall notice as the company putting customers ahead of profits.

    Turning a positive into a negative should be every marketers goal.


StorefrontBacktalk delivers the latest retail technology news & analysis. Join more than 60,000 retail IT leaders who subscribe to our free weekly email. Sign up today!

Most Recent Comments

Why Did Gonzales Hackers Like European Cards So Much Better?

I am still unclear about the core point here-- why higher value of European cards. Supply and demand, yes, makes sense. But the fact that the cards were chip and pin (EMV) should make them less valuable because that demonstrably reduces the ability to use them fraudulently. Did the author mean that the chip and pin cards could be used in a country where EMV is not implemented--the US--and this mis-match make it easier to us them since the issuing banks may not have as robust anti-fraud controls as non-EMV banks because they assumed EMV would do the fraud prevention for them Read more...
Two possible reasons that I can think of and have seen in the past - 1) Cards issued by European banks when used online cross border don't usually support AVS checks. So, when a European card is used with a billing address that's in the US, an ecom merchant wouldn't necessarily know that the shipping zip code doesn't match the billing code. 2) Also, in offline chip countries the card determines whether or not a transaction is approved, not the issuer. In my experience, European issuers haven't developed the same checks on authorization requests as US issuers. So, these cards might be more valuable because they are more likely to get approved. Read more...
A smart card slot in terminals doesn't mean there is a reader or that the reader is activated. Then, activated reader or not, the U.S. processors don't have apps certified or ready to load into those terminals to accept and process smart card transactions just yet. Don't get your card(t) before the terminal (horse). Read more...
The marketplace does speak. More fraud capacity translates to higher value for the stolen data. Because nearly 100% of all US transactions are authorized online in real time, we have less fraud regardless of whether the card is Magstripe only or chip and PIn. Hence, $10 prices for US cards vs $25 for the European counterparts. Read more...
@David True. The European cards have both an EMV chip AND a mag stripe. Europeans may generally use the chip for their transactions, but the insecure stripe remains vulnerable to skimming, whether it be from a false front on an ATM or a dishonest waiter with a handheld skimmer. If their stripe is skimmed, the track data can still be cloned and used fraudulently in the United States. If European banks only detect fraud from 9-5 GMT, that might explain why American criminals prefer them over American bank issued cards, who have fraud detection in place 24x7. Read more...

Our apologies. Due to legal and security copyright issues, we can't facilitate the printing of Premium Content. If you absolutely need a hard copy, please contact customer service.