4 ms·
> No, the GP has it right: for all practical purposes, customers have no rights, especially when their contracts include binding arbitration clauses, since arbi
by thanksgiving 10y ago
> No, the GP has it right: for all practical purposes, customers have no rights, especially when their contracts include binding arbitration clauses, since arbitration rules against the company essentially never.
I don't want to make it partisan but with all due respect TOS is not the law (oh btw, please keep pushing to repeal the CFAA in the US). We don't live in a libertarian "paradise".
I've heard of anecdotes where a judge throws a pre-nuptial agreement because it was too one-sided? I think the same should apply to terms of service and arbitration clauses. They cannot supersede the law or become the law.
Something people are not talking about is why isn't there a lawsuit against the police department? They're the ones who did the actual assaulting?
- techsupporter 10y agoIt doesn't matter what you think because the Supreme Court has ruled that the Federal Arbitration Act, and the arbitration clauses enabled by it, is sacrosanct and denies all but the most egregious (and that bar is very high) of court challenges. Virtually all actions in court are barred by those clauses. See, for just one example, AT&T v Concepcion.
- kevin_b_er 10y agoThey replace the law. Supreme court decided can and does permit a total severance of your connection to courts of law against a corporation. Your rights are replaced with a contract you didn't quite realize you agreed to. As such, you have no rights against a corporation. The arbitration kangaroo court is not required to observe the law. A meeting of the minds is not required where a contract with a corporation is concerned, as a human doesn't have to realize their rights were stripped by the contract. When everything is privatized, you will have no rights remaining.