2 ms·

I know binding arbitration is the new hotness, but it seems unlikely this is the first time a company has tried to link a generic “absolved-from-everything” cla

I know binding arbitration is the new hotness, but it seems unlikely this is the first time a company has tried to link a generic “absolved-from-everything” clause to an unrelated incident.

bawolff 2y ago
IANAL but seems like a text book example of https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unconscionability https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unconscionability
- throwaway2037 2y ago
  Wow, the example on that page is brilliant. To quote: > For instance, in Uber Technologies Inc v Heller (2020) the Supreme Court of Canada found an arbitration clause requiring gig workers in Ontario to litigate before the Dutch International Chamber of Commerce was unconscionable and so void. LOL. Uber, again.
  - actionfromafar 2y ago
    “Inventing”!
- ozim 2y ago
  Not everything you sign will hold in a court. That is why we have courts and judges for.
ggm 2y ago
Binding arbitration WAS the new hotness. Some companies have learned that at scale it's a nightmare. Works for one case, falls over for 10,000 who refuse to bind to a single case and pursue the action, at your company cost.
- eadler 2y ago
  There is a growing trend of companies inserting "mass arbitration" or "coordinated filing" clauses into their contracts. It isn't clear if these will be enforceable. The arbitration providers (AAA, JAMS, etc.) have also started implementing their own "mass arbitration" provisions. In some cases even providing subscription bulk pricing. Other problems: https://arbitrationinformation.org/docs/problems/#mass-arbitration https://arbitrationinformation.org/docs/problems/#mass-arbit... (I should add the above + references at some point to the website)
  - cryptonector 2y ago
    Wow, that's an awesome site.
  - the_fed_hates_u 2y ago
    [dead]
Log_out_ 2y ago
Up next proof based automated arbitration. If input legal argument identifies case, automated verdict. Heard: only new arguments for viability on changing,creating a new proof.

I know binding arbitration is the new hotness, but it seems unlikely this is the first time a company has tried to link a generic “absolved-from-everything” clause to an unrelated incident.

bawolff 2y ago

IANAL but seems like a text book example of https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unconscionability https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unconscionability

throwaway2037 2y ago
Wow, the example on that page is brilliant. To quote: > For instance, in Uber Technologies Inc v Heller (2020) the Supreme Court of Canada found an arbitration clause requiring gig workers in Ontario to litigate before the Dutch International Chamber of Commerce was unconscionable and so void. LOL. Uber, again.
- actionfromafar 2y ago
  “Inventing”!
ozim 2y ago
Not everything you sign will hold in a court. That is why we have courts and judges for.

ggm 2y ago

Binding arbitration WAS the new hotness. Some companies have learned that at scale it's a nightmare. Works for one case, falls over for 10,000 who refuse to bind to a single case and pursue the action, at your company cost.

eadler 2y ago
There is a growing trend of companies inserting "mass arbitration" or "coordinated filing" clauses into their contracts. It isn't clear if these will be enforceable. The arbitration providers (AAA, JAMS, etc.) have also started implementing their own "mass arbitration" provisions. In some cases even providing subscription bulk pricing. Other problems: https://arbitrationinformation.org/docs/problems/#mass-arbitration https://arbitrationinformation.org/docs/problems/#mass-arbit... (I should add the above + references at some point to the website)
- cryptonector 2y ago
  Wow, that's an awesome site.
- the_fed_hates_u 2y ago
  [dead]

Log_out_ 2y ago

Up next proof based automated arbitration. If input legal argument identifies case, automated verdict. Heard: only new arguments for viability on changing,creating a new proof.