6 ms·

Small claims court, I once got n-times the money frozen in my paypal account. It works, because big cos almost universally settle. Attorneys cost many times mo

Small claims court, I once got n-times the money frozen in my paypal account. It works, because big cos almost universally settle. Attorneys cost many times more than your acc. And another moment, small claims court judges are rarely some ideological cranks.

Analemma_ 3y ago
[flagged]
- baybal2 3y ago
  To make the judge even read that contract, they need to send an attorney. And if the SCC judge will say arbitrate, then, why not for something so trivial, and clear cut?
- dharmab 3y ago
  Binding arbitration often does rule in favor of the users. Famously, Uber was buried with arbitration cases that went in favor of drivers.
- qwytw 3y ago
  I could only find this in the EULA: "this Agreement and the relationship between you and Apple shall be governed by the laws of the State of California, excluding its conflicts of law provisions. You and Apple agree to submit to the personal and exclusive jurisdiction of the courts located within the county of Santa Clara, California, to resolve any dispute or claim arising from this Agreement" Steam for instance seems to impose arbitration but also has this: "Disputes that can be resolved in small claims court or relate to the infringement of our intellectual property do not have to be arbitrated. You can opt out of arbitration within 30 days of accepting this EULA. (d) Exceptions. As limited exceptions to Section 22(b) above, the following Disputes can be resolved in court and need not be resolved through arbitration: (i) any Dispute that can be resolved in small claims court (if it qualifies); and (ii) any Dispute involving the infringement or misappropriation of our intellectual property rights."
  - m463 3y ago
    You can opt-out of arbitration in california but you must do it within a certain period after the agreement. I wonder if you agreed to an updated terms and conditions, if that is a new agreement.
- pasc1878 3y ago
  Not necessarily it could be in a sane Legal environment ie not USA. 'The EU requires Member States’ courts to presume that the arbitration agreement in consumer contracts is an unfair term, if it was not individually negotiated by the parties after the dispute arose (see Directive 93/13/EEC of 05/03/1993).'
cjboco 3y ago
Isn't that why most "license agreements" contain arbitration clauses now?
- lesuorac 3y ago
  Even if you go to arbitration Apple will still need to justify their actions to the arbitrator. Literally smalls claims / arbitration works.
  - brewdad 3y ago
    Except Apple is paying the arbitrator, so they are inclined to give them the benefit of any doubt. Not saying you can't win in arb, but it's an uphill battle.
    - lesuorac 3y ago
      Apple is paying the arbitrator because it's a requirement of arbitration. Apple is happy to do this because even when the arbitrator decides they're in the wrong it'll 1) be much faster than court 2) be much less than a jury awards. There are pretty much 2 arbitrators in the US and so they can afford to lose a single client. Its only uphill if you have an actually bad argument such as _just_ the statement "they broke our TOS.".
- rationalist 3y ago
  Wouldn't the company still need to show up and tell the judge that there is an arbitration clause? Additionally (I am not a lawyer) arbitration does not override any court or have any authority unless authorized by a court. If a party does not cooperate with the arbitration, the other party still has to go to court to convince a judge that the arbitration was good and get the judge to enter a judgement against the noncompliant party. If as a consumer, you agree to arbitration and it is grossly unfair, you can still go to court and the judge can decide whether or not to use the arbitrators ruling or make their own ruling. The other party would also have to convince a judge that their unfair arbitration was fair.

Analemma_ 3y ago

[flagged]

baybal2 3y ago
To make the judge even read that contract, they need to send an attorney. And if the SCC judge will say arbitrate, then, why not for something so trivial, and clear cut?
dharmab 3y ago
Binding arbitration often does rule in favor of the users. Famously, Uber was buried with arbitration cases that went in favor of drivers.
qwytw 3y ago
I could only find this in the EULA: "this Agreement and the relationship between you and Apple shall be governed by the laws of the State of California, excluding its conflicts of law provisions. You and Apple agree to submit to the personal and exclusive jurisdiction of the courts located within the county of Santa Clara, California, to resolve any dispute or claim arising from this Agreement" Steam for instance seems to impose arbitration but also has this: "Disputes that can be resolved in small claims court or relate to the infringement of our intellectual property do not have to be arbitrated. You can opt out of arbitration within 30 days of accepting this EULA. (d) Exceptions. As limited exceptions to Section 22(b) above, the following Disputes can be resolved in court and need not be resolved through arbitration: (i) any Dispute that can be resolved in small claims court (if it qualifies); and (ii) any Dispute involving the infringement or misappropriation of our intellectual property rights."
- m463 3y ago
  You can opt-out of arbitration in california but you must do it within a certain period after the agreement. I wonder if you agreed to an updated terms and conditions, if that is a new agreement.
pasc1878 3y ago
Not necessarily it could be in a sane Legal environment ie not USA. 'The EU requires Member States’ courts to presume that the arbitration agreement in consumer contracts is an unfair term, if it was not individually negotiated by the parties after the dispute arose (see Directive 93/13/EEC of 05/03/1993).'

cjboco 3y ago

Isn't that why most "license agreements" contain arbitration clauses now?

lesuorac 3y ago
Even if you go to arbitration Apple will still need to justify their actions to the arbitrator. Literally smalls claims / arbitration works.
- brewdad 3y ago
  Except Apple is paying the arbitrator, so they are inclined to give them the benefit of any doubt. Not saying you can't win in arb, but it's an uphill battle.
  - lesuorac 3y ago
    Apple is paying the arbitrator because it's a requirement of arbitration. Apple is happy to do this because even when the arbitrator decides they're in the wrong it'll 1) be much faster than court 2) be much less than a jury awards. There are pretty much 2 arbitrators in the US and so they can afford to lose a single client. Its only uphill if you have an actually bad argument such as _just_ the statement "they broke our TOS.".
rationalist 3y ago
Wouldn't the company still need to show up and tell the judge that there is an arbitration clause? Additionally (I am not a lawyer) arbitration does not override any court or have any authority unless authorized by a court. If a party does not cooperate with the arbitration, the other party still has to go to court to convince a judge that the arbitration was good and get the judge to enter a judgement against the noncompliant party. If as a consumer, you agree to arbitration and it is grossly unfair, you can still go to court and the judge can decide whether or not to use the arbitrators ruling or make their own ruling. The other party would also have to convince a judge that their unfair arbitration was fair.