> Keep in mind that Slack is a B2B service, though; its clients are companies, not individuals.
Class actions really exist for economy of justice, particularly with diffuse harms across a large group (regardless of the resources of the individual members of the group), not specifically to deal with access-to-counsel issues.
Any time the number of similarly situated parties (customers, in this case) is large on one side, its conceivable that a class action makes sense.
This is "pro-consumer" only in that in that it addresses an essential asymmetry of resources-at-stake that disfavors action by the "many" side in any many to one transaction. "Consumers" are an example of this, but not a unique example.
Class actions really exist for economy of justice, particularly with diffuse harms across a large group (regardless of the resources of the individual members of the group), not specifically to deal with access-to-counsel issues.
Any time the number of similarly situated parties (customers, in this case) is large on one side, its conceivable that a class action makes sense.
This is "pro-consumer" only in that in that it addresses an essential asymmetry of resources-at-stake that disfavors action by the "many" side in any many to one transaction. "Consumers" are an example of this, but not a unique example.