- cross-posted to:
- technology@beehaw.org
- cross-posted to:
- technology@beehaw.org
cross-posted from: https://lemmy.dbzer0.com/post/17618684
Forced arbitration means any legal disputes you may have with Discord must be resolved through a single third party mediator, who 99% of the time is chosen by, and will rule in favor of, the corporation/Discord. This effectively removes all your legal rights as a consumer, because arbitration decisions are legally binding and non-appealable.
The new ToS goes into effect April 15th, 2024.
YOU CAN OPT OUT OF ARBITRATION. You must email arbitration-opt-out@discord.com BEFORE MAY 15TH (30 days after ToS effective date) with your username stating that you wish to opt out of the arbitration clause. Once May 15th passes you are bound to arbitration with Discord forever.
Opt-out before it’s too late.
Do you have anything to prove that? I’m serious, This feels like it shouldn’t be binding but I can find no legal reasons or information that it wouldn’t be, and I would really like to find that.
Seems ludicrous that a company can be like “OK STARTING IN 30 DAYS NO SUING US ALLOWED. IF YOU DON’T SPECIFICALLY TELL US WITHIN THOSE 30 DAYS THAT YOU MIGHT SOMEDAY NEED TO SUE US THEN YOU NEVER CAN FOREVER.” But then a lot of stuff here is ludicrous.
It depends on where you live. In Germany, forced arbitration in general TOS is invalid and has to be separately negotiated and agreed to. In general, what you can put into your TOS is pretty restricted, anything you put in there that a consumer wouldn’t reasonably expect is not gonna be legally binding.
https://law.stackexchange.com/a/82748
That is the case for all of Europe and most of the rest of the world. That’s why that ToS change is only for US customers.
My country only considers electronic signatures made by our national ID cryptographic signature system to be legally binding in contracts. A ToS without that and just an agree button can only be used to set rules within that platform here. In a court a ToS is basically meaningless.
Fun fact: Our online voting system works on the same principle.
Ah ok I misunderstood your comment.
I had just read the thing and had that it only applied to US fresh in my head. Then I read your comment and assumed “here” referred to US also. My bad.