4 ms·

Forced arbitration is broken, but not entirely useless. The actual problem is vendor lock-in and the conflict of interest in those who choose the vendor. Ther

by iabacu 8y ago

Forced arbitration is broken, but not entirely useless. The actual problem is vendor lock-in and the conflict of interest in those who choose the vendor. There should be a law that allows you to pick whichever arbitrator you want (within limits, like picking court jurisdiction), rather than being forced into a single vendor.

techsupporter 8y ago
I argue that the actual problem is that mandatory, binding arbitration is viewed as a contractual "choice" when it is not a choice if included in a contract of adhesion (so-called take-it-or-leave-it contracts). If a contract can be negotiated on an individual basis between the contracting parties, fine, permit mandatory arbitration. However, mandatory arbitration should not be permitted otherwise because to do otherwise puts the lesser party at a distinct disadvantage, especially when all market participants include these clauses. For example, is it a "choice" about mandatory arbitration when both of the Internet providers serving my address have contracts of adhesion that include no-opt-out-clause mandatory arbitration? It is not. At the bare minimum, the law should state that contracts of adhesion must include a 60-day opt-out clause for mandatory arbitration, with notice of opting out being provided via some reasonable means (e.g. not via Telex to a disused closet in Boca Raton). If arbitration is so great, let it stand on its own legs without being imposed by one side of the contract.
- anticensor 8y ago
  Do not say that to MPs. They would make arbitration a precondition of lawsuit as they have done here in Turkey.
eesmith 8y ago
Here's an example of vendor lock-in. Many journal require that authors submit along with an "ORCID" - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ORCID https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ORCID . The ORCID terms of use have mandatory arbitration - https://orcid.org/content/orcid-terms-use https://orcid.org/content/orcid-terms-use , and they choose the arbiter. Thus, there's no way to publish in many journals without this agreement. Oh, and the ORCID says registration can be done in "three easy steps" which takes only "30 seconds". Yes, they basically say they don't expect people to read the terms of service as part of the registration!

by iabacu 8y ago

techsupporter 8y ago

I argue that the actual problem is that mandatory, binding arbitration is viewed as a contractual "choice" when it is not a choice if included in a contract of adhesion (so-called take-it-or-leave-it contracts). If a contract can be negotiated on an individual basis between the contracting parties, fine, permit mandatory arbitration. However, mandatory arbitration should not be permitted otherwise because to do otherwise puts the lesser party at a distinct disadvantage, especially when all market participants include these clauses. For example, is it a "choice" about mandatory arbitration when both of the Internet providers serving my address have contracts of adhesion that include no-opt-out-clause mandatory arbitration? It is not. At the bare minimum, the law should state that contracts of adhesion must include a 60-day opt-out clause for mandatory arbitration, with notice of opting out being provided via some reasonable means (e.g. not via Telex to a disused closet in Boca Raton). If arbitration is so great, let it stand on its own legs without being imposed by one side of the contract.

anticensor 8y ago
Do not say that to MPs. They would make arbitration a precondition of lawsuit as they have done here in Turkey.

eesmith 8y ago

Here's an example of vendor lock-in. Many journal require that authors submit along with an "ORCID" - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ORCID https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ORCID . The ORCID terms of use have mandatory arbitration - https://orcid.org/content/orcid-terms-use https://orcid.org/content/orcid-terms-use , and they choose the arbiter. Thus, there's no way to publish in many journals without this agreement. Oh, and the ORCID says registration can be done in "three easy steps" which takes only "30 seconds". Yes, they basically say they don't expect people to read the terms of service as part of the registration!