The desired class-action status of this suit feels like a stretch to me. Typically, in a class action, the defendant's alleged behavior unquestionably harms the

The desired class-action status of this suit feels like a stretch to me. Typically, in a class action, the defendant's alleged behavior unquestionably harms the members of the class, which is why it's okay to make them party to the suit without their consent. In this case, I suspect that only a minority of the members of the purported class actually believe they were harmed by the defendant's actions, and some class members are _paying customers_ of the defendant's product based on the conduct at issue. (Which surely creates some kind of estoppel issue, aside from the dubiousness of the class certification in the first place.) Could some enterprising attorney get a bunch of members of the purported class to sign on to a brief opposing class certification? (I don't know if that would be an amicus or what, but surely those people have some kind of standing here.) (Enterprising attorneys: my email address is in my profile.) I guess the problem here is with "enterprising" -- there's no money there, except to Microsoft, who I imagine might be barred by legal ethics from funding something like this...