3 ms·
Is there any precedent for arbitration clauses being thrown out? I didn't think there was (in fact, quite the opposite), and that that's why they've become so c
by click170 12y ago
Is there any precedent for arbitration clauses being thrown out? I didn't think there was (in fact, quite the opposite), and that that's why they've become so common in everyone's EULA.
If it had already been shown to be useless, why would they keep trying to use it?
- jsprogrammer 12y agoI'm not really considering having a single clause thrown out. The entire concept of someone providing assent through a checkbox is highly suspect. A company will be able to provide no evidence, which will stand up to even mild scrutiny, that I understood and assented to any language that they claim I did. For instance, Facebook is going to bring a database row where they have set `agreed_to_terms_xyz` to 1 into evidence? Maybe, but I will either destroy that argument real quick or I will have Facebook's entire codebase brought into evidence and then tear it apart line-by-line.
- click170 12y agoI agree that the idea of providing assent via a checkbox is highly suspect. But unfortunately I think the law is on their side on this one because: almost ever piece of software that I've seen that presents that checkbox refuses to continue with the installation unless it is selected. Therefor, if you have their software installed and are using it, you agreed to their terms or violated their copyright. I'm not saying I agree with that line of reasoning, I'm just saying that's what I would expect their argument to be. And in court, I think they might unfortunately win with it.