3 ms·
Don't these both benefit mass arbitration? The point, as I understand it, is to have a lot of people submit claims about an issue so the company is forced to pa
by cmeacham98 4y ago
Don't these both benefit mass arbitration? The point, as I understand it, is to have a lot of people submit claims about an issue so the company is forced to pay for them all.
If, instead, claims could be combined then Adobe/PayPal/whoever could combine them all and presumably avoid paying to arbitrate each individually.
- dataflow 4y ago> Don't these both benefit mass arbitration? Well, I think it's safe to assume they don't, given companies started adding these terms after mass arbitration became popular. As to how/why they don't, I'm not sure. But if I had to take a guess, I imagine motivations could include: (a) clogging the arbitration system to slow claims down to a crawl (since they can't be handled en masse), (b) making it difficult for every individual to demonstrate damages (since many people will not be able to prove actual harm), (c) forcing every individual to contribute significant time and effort into the process (which will not be worth it for many people, and practically impossible for many others).
- buscoquadnary 4y ago"It's better than legal we're using the law to keep justice away" - The PHB