The whole point was charging people high prices for something they were misled into thinking they were getting, but actually were not. Not about sound quality, it's about getting what you are paying premium prices for. 

Misrepresentation in inducing a purchase is actionable. I would not have purchased any of my MoFi Step 1 albums--for which I paid a premium-- had I known there was a digital step. It matters not that some of them sound very good. It's a matter of  misrepresentation of provenance.

Now let's say you buy your wife a $100 replica of a $2,500 Louis Vuitton bag for Christmas and tell her it's real. She and her friends think it's real. Then one day she walks into a Louis Vuitton store and finds out that the only way the experts can tell the difference between the real and this particular fake is that there are 8 stitches inside of an interior pocket of the fake and 10 in the real version. She empties the bag and counts 8 stitches in hers.  Your defense--wifey couldn't tell the difference and none of wifey's friends will ever be able to tell the difference.

What are the odds that wifey says--"I'm good with that --I forgive you."

 

gpgr4blu

I would not have purchased any of my MoFi Step 1 albums--for which I paid a premium-- had I known there was a digital step.

Will you be returning the LPs for a refund under the terms of the settlement?

I have not had time to read the terms of the settlement other than a brief summary-- but I will certainly consider returns.