I disagree: the forced arbitration+indemity makes Bird relevant, the city-Bird agreement similarly, and in addition, Bird's arguments in the case make it specif

I disagree: the forced arbitration+indemity makes Bird relevant, the city-Bird agreement similarly, and in addition, Bird's arguments in the case make it specific & relevant. Were the defendant on his own scooter or bike, none of that would have come into play. (The city would still have the other arguments it is making, of course, but many of those seem substantially weaker.)