4 ms·

Why should McDonalds be individually saved from a shitty contract that they signed? How about we fix the crappy DMCA anti-circumvention clause that has been cau

Why should McDonalds be individually saved from a shitty contract that they signed? How about we fix the crappy DMCA anti-circumvention clause that has been causing problems for tons of people since 1999? Oh, because this will provide press coverage and notoriety for somebody who's probably up for reelection soon.

dylan604 3y ago
Sometimes a contract is a bad contract, but it's not known how bad at first reading. There should absolutely be a mechanism for nullifying in whole or in part contracts that are this way. Especially if the contract forces you to purchase equipment that does not work. After all, a contract is just a piece of paper than can easily be torn up. You're trying to make it some magical binding spell type of thing instead
- LoganDark 3y ago
  > After all, a contract is just a piece of paper than can easily be torn up. The piece of paper just represents the contract, other forms of contracts exist (such as digital, verbal). I agree there should be an easier way to get out of shitty ones. But make it too easy and you make contracts too weak. It's a balancing act.
- treyd 3y ago
  There is a mechanism, a judge can decide to unilaterally annul a contract and order the parties involve to form a new one that they mediate the negotiation and terms of.
  - dylan604 3y ago
    including if there's an arbitration clause?
deleted 3y ago
[deleted]
connicpu 3y ago
McDonald's the corporation is not being hurt by this contract, in fact they are heavily profiting from it. Independently owned individual franchises are the ones suffering from this machine that corporate forces them to use.
- s1artibartfast 3y ago
  I don't understand what the public problem is here. People are free not to operate a franchise. Why should I, John Q. Public, care if some restaurant owner enters into a shitty contract with McDonald corporation or a ice cream machine vendor. Ice cream isn't exactly a human right.

dylan604 3y ago

Sometimes a contract is a bad contract, but it's not known how bad at first reading. There should absolutely be a mechanism for nullifying in whole or in part contracts that are this way. Especially if the contract forces you to purchase equipment that does not work. After all, a contract is just a piece of paper than can easily be torn up. You're trying to make it some magical binding spell type of thing instead

LoganDark 3y ago
> After all, a contract is just a piece of paper than can easily be torn up. The piece of paper just represents the contract, other forms of contracts exist (such as digital, verbal). I agree there should be an easier way to get out of shitty ones. But make it too easy and you make contracts too weak. It's a balancing act.
treyd 3y ago
There is a mechanism, a judge can decide to unilaterally annul a contract and order the parties involve to form a new one that they mediate the negotiation and terms of.
- dylan604 3y ago
  including if there's an arbitration clause?

deleted 3y ago

[deleted]

connicpu 3y ago

McDonald's the corporation is not being hurt by this contract, in fact they are heavily profiting from it. Independently owned individual franchises are the ones suffering from this machine that corporate forces them to use.

s1artibartfast 3y ago
I don't understand what the public problem is here. People are free not to operate a franchise. Why should I, John Q. Public, care if some restaurant owner enters into a shitty contract with McDonald corporation or a ice cream machine vendor. Ice cream isn't exactly a human right.