Is this actually meaningful in any way or is it just the corporate equivalent of positive manifestation? Surely no court would take seriously an after the fact imposition of you waiving your rights by default unless you send a physical letter to them informing them you disagree with losing your right to sue (for no gain on your part).
Why not? Arbitration clauses work in the US. The funnier things that happen is when something is so bad, thousands of people go in for arbitration and the company cannot afford that. Then it backfires hard on them since you need to get every person to arbitrate and there is tens of thousands of them.
The whole forced arbitration is bad enough, but retroactively enforcing it on something you already own while deliberately making it difficult to opt out just seems like its begging to fall foul of anti-consumer rules. The whole “this applies to the extent that its not really fucking illegal” clause just makes it seem like an intimidation tactic rather than actually something they think they have any chance of enforcing if it came to it.
It’s also illegal (in writing) to have a random sticker on a screw of an appliance, stating “Warranty void if removed”.
Doesn’t stop anyone from using it to escape warrantying user stuff, simply because it is not enforced well enough.
This is a rough post because neither did you provide alt text for these non mobile friendly pictures nor did you put any emphasis or mention what you actually are trying to say or ask.
From what I have gathered after readin through it, US citizens are being asked to waive their rights to class actions or any form of jury trial for any reason whatsoever.
This absolutely is reason to boycott them and make a giant fuss about it but I would ask that you or someone makes this a lot easier to grasp in like 15 seconds so peeps dont just scroll over it.
Yeah, I miserably failed at that part. Tried to add the alt text, but looks like I did it the wrong way so it didn’t work.
mention what you actually are trying to say or ask
Just wanting to let people know about another instance of Mandatory Arbitration. After hitting Post, I did realise that I should have included the game’s name, which I missed because I first posted this to an XCOM2 sub.
US citizens are being asked to waive their rights to class actions or any form
You don’t need to be in the US for that.
I am not.
I fail to understand why they feel the need to do this, considering people are not just suing these companies willy-nilly.
But if you look closely, they don’t mention anywhere that this Mandate is only with regards to this specific product (XCOM2 in this case), which makes me think, all of these companies are planning to do some problematic thing separately and then use this to escape the consequences.
The EEA shows up in the list of places it does not apply. They worded it strangely, first calling out the US as a place where it does apply. Then they change it up and say it also applies to anywhere not on this specific list of places
Ah you’re right. Rereading it fixed the doubt. Guess I skipped a few words the first time. Mental note to not skip words in a legal document. Or any written document.
lemmy.kde.social
Gorące