Welcome to UnSettlement 2.0

The settlement parties’ “minor” change was filed yesterday:

Shortly after the Court granted preliminary settlement approval, Plaintiffs learned for the first time that while the parties were still engaged in mediated settlement negotiations, one or more of the Settlement Databases sublicensed Subject Works to two new databases, Amazon.com and Highbeam Research. Plaintiffs sent those two entities cease-and-desist letters, and informed defendants that plaintiffs considered the licensing of the works to Amazon.com and Highbeam a violation of the Settlement Agreement. With the mediators’ assistance, the parties reached agreement on a resolution of the matter….

More on the specific provisions later, along with comment by your humble blogger. For now, simply note the following:

· The defendants “flatly refused” to improve the $10-to-$18-million settlement fund and the plaintiffs’ attorneys decided to take the amended settlement, with certain technical tweaks, rather than leave it.

· There are no details on the nature of the infringements by Amazon and HighBeam, or on their business and revenue models. And there’s total silence on another infringer, FindArticles -- target of a National Writers Union campaign -- which works with HighBeam and has content licensed by Thomson Corporation and other defendants.

· Judge Daniels will consider the amended settlement at the hearing this Thursday, the 28th (originally the date for the final fairness hearing). If he approves, there will be some additional notice to the class and an extension of the deadline for objecting or opting out (or opting back in).