3 ms·

i think the keyword is "forced". there's very little now that the consumer can do because it seems everything requires arbitration now and people still have to

• TZubiri 12d ago
  I agree that word is putting some work, and calling it forced is already partisan. To the extent that you believe it is forced, you can dispute it on a public court, and if you can prove you were forced, you wouldn't be subject to arbitration. Arbitration in private courts only exists if both parties agree prior to agreeing to the contract to that clause. If you believe that it's forced because you never read the Terms of Agreement, I feel that's more of a discussion of whether clickwrapped terms are valid or not, it would be a way more radical position to believe that they have absolutely no effect. And if they do have an effect, agreeing to private arbitration is no different.
  • ryandrake 12d ago
    I think we need to stop calling one-sided "terms documents" that are entirely written by one party, the party with 100x+ the monetary resources and power of the other party, with no input from that other party and not subject to any negotiation whatsoever, "agreements." They are not what any reasonable person would call an agreement. There is no meeting of the minds, and the terms are entirely controlled by one party.
    • anonymars 12d ago
      Don't forget that same party is also able to change them at any time, Darth Vader style!