Murfman - 8:39 pm on May 22, 2006 (gmt 0)

Right. It's not for future click activity but rather for some date (I don't know the cut-off point) all the way back to the beginning. Essentially, Google is trying to close the books on it. Forget about suing, I'm not sure you could even ASK for a review for that activity. What if someone someday develops a new measuring system and applies it to some dusty old log files and comes up with something? At that point, if the person hasn't opted out, it's pointless.

It's pretty obvious which side of the fence I'm sitting on here, but I'm trying to see both sides here. I think there are a LOT of flaws and unanswered questions with this settlement. However if, as you say, most people aren't going to go back and see this as their best shot at getting ANY refund, then they should consider it.

One point I haven't seen mentioned here (maybe it has been and I missed it) is the size of the settlement and the ramifications it presents if the cap is realized. 90 million minus the 30 mil in legal fees. 60 mil left which a lot of people believe does not come close to reflecting a comprehensive number for 4 years of activity. What happens if the number gets hit? It's not first come, first serve. The credits start to break down to percentages and the more over the cap it goes, the smaller relative percentage you hold and the smaller credit you get back.