this post was submitted on 12 May 2024
1325 points (98.3% liked)

Games

39391 readers
1171 users here now

Welcome to the largest gaming community on Lemmy! Discussion for all kinds of games. Video games, tabletop games, card games etc.

Rules

1. Submissions have to be related to games

Video games, tabletop, or otherwise. Posts not related to games will be deleted.

This community is focused on games, of all kinds. Any news item or discussion should be related to gaming in some way.

2. No bigotry or harassment, be civil

No bigotry, hardline stance. Try not to get too heated when entering into a discussion or debate.

We are here to talk and discuss about one of our passions, not fight or be exposed to hate. Posts or responses that are hateful will be deleted to keep the atmosphere good. If repeatedly violated, not only will the comment be deleted but a ban will be handed out as well. We judge each case individually.

3. No excessive self-promotion

Try to keep it to 10% self-promotion / 90% other stuff in your post history.

This is to prevent people from posting for the sole purpose of promoting their own website or social media account.

4. Stay on-topic; no memes, funny videos, giveaways, reposts, or low-effort posts

This community is mostly for discussion and news. Remember to search for the thing you're submitting before posting to see if it's already been posted.

We want to keep the quality of posts high. Therefore, memes, funny videos, low-effort posts and reposts are not allowed. We prohibit giveaways because we cannot be sure that the person holding the giveaway will actually do what they promise.

5. Mark Spoilers and NSFW

Make sure to mark your stuff or it may be removed.

No one wants to be spoiled. Therefore, always mark spoilers. Similarly mark NSFW, in case anyone is browsing in a public space or at work.

6. No linking to piracy

Don't share it here, there are other places to find it. Discussion of piracy is fine.

We don't want us moderators or the admins of lemmy.world to get in trouble for linking to piracy. Therefore, any link to piracy will be removed. Discussion of it is of course allowed.

Authorized Regular Threads

Related communities

PM a mod to add your own

Video games

Generic

Help and suggestions

By platform

By type

By games

Language specific

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

On today's episode of "This shouldn't be legal"...

Source: https://twitter.com/A_Seagull/status/1789468582281400792

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Vespair@lemm.ee 311 points 1 year ago (51 children)

Fucking bonkers. Between this an McD's changing their ToS to say using their app waives any right to non-arbitration dispute, something needs to be done about companies trying to effectively write new laws into their ToS. This shit is beyond egregious

[–] brbposting@sh.itjust.works 81 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Number three combo, hold the freedom please

[–] Vespair@lemm.ee 19 points 1 year ago

Sincere thank you for providing what I was referencing 👍

[–] mriormro@lemmy.world 55 points 1 year ago (6 children)

They can write anything they want in a TOS, doesn't mean it's legally enforceable.

[–] reverendsteveii@lemm.ee 48 points 1 year ago (1 children)

even then, it's essentially paywalling your rights. you need to go to court, wait for the matter to be adjudicated, hope it works out in your favor, run out any potential appeals, all while paying attorneys and not being able to do something you're legally entitled to do. If you can't do all that, then your rights are moot.

[–] Sonicdemon86@lemmy.world 9 points 1 year ago (2 children)

That's what they want you to think, just start a class action lawsuit. Lawyer love those. Force the companies to respond to the class actions.

[–] DR_Hero@programming.dev 11 points 1 year ago

Collective mass arbitration is my favorite counter to this tactic, and is dramatically more costly for the company than a class action lawsuit.

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/04/06/business/arbitration-overload.html

A lot of companies got spooked a few years back and walked back their arbitration agreements. I wonder what changed for companies to decide it's worth it again. Maybe the lack of discovery in the arbitration process even with higher costs?

[–] catloaf@lemm.ee 2 points 1 year ago

You can't "just start" a class action suit. You need to sue, get other people to sue, coordinate, and apply for class action status. That's more time and effort than an individual suit.

[–] Imgonnatrythis@sh.itjust.works 16 points 1 year ago

Yeah, it's time to nip this on the front end though. ToS are such a part of daily life now. They should be regulated to be concise, use standardized consumer-friendly language, and have bounds against non-arbitration and other nonsense like this. This sort of legislation is well overdue.

[–] Potatos_are_not_friends@lemmy.world 5 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Bingo! It's written in a "cover my ass" but that ass can get kicked by the courts.

[–] PlainSimpleGarak@lemm.ee 1 points 1 year ago

Exactly. Anyone can put anything they want into a terms of service/contract. Doesn't mean it'll hold up in court.

[–] Buddahriffic@lemmy.world 4 points 1 year ago

Having unenforceable or illegal clauses in a legal contract means the contract wasn't written in good faith, which should void the whole thing. Regardless of any "if parts of this contract are deemed illegal, the rest still stands".

It would be nice to see more proactive involvement of the legal system with this, like have some people whose job it is to challenge these consumer contracts and standardize them kinda like how some open source licenses are standardized. Modularize it, so instead of writing out the whole "limited liability" section, they could refer to an established one by name. Then each module can be the subject of study and challenge, like if a more limiting one should come with other compromises elsewhere.

I think at that point, most honest companies would just pick a standard license or contract, plus maybe a few modifications and shady ones will have more trouble hiding shit like this in the middle of pages and pages of the same boring shit you've read hundreds of times before if you actually do read these things before signing or clicking agree.

At this point, most contracts should probably be unenforceable because few people actually do understand what they are agreeing to, which is supposed to be one of the essential parts of a contract. So many parts should probably have an "initial here to show you agreed to this" at the very least. But I'm no fool, this is likely considered a feature rather than a bug for most of the people involved in making and enforcing these things.

[–] xkforce@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago

If enough people believe that it is, they're not going to be as likely to fight things that they should be.

[–] Arbiter@lemmy.world 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Good luck getting it thrown out, that’ll be an expensive legal battle even if you do win.

[–] echodot@feddit.uk 3 points 1 year ago (1 children)

It's already been decided in Europe. Terms of service have about as much legal weight as toilet paper. Usually what's true in Europe is true in California as well so I assume something similar has happened over there.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] reverendsteveii@lemm.ee 17 points 1 year ago (2 children)

which tv manufacturer was it that updated their eula and if you didn't agree it bricked your tv?

[–] Randomocity@sh.itjust.works 30 points 1 year ago

Roku had a new agreement that if you didn't agree you couldn't access the TV

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] Emerald@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago

I really don't understand the point of a McD's app anyways. They have a drive thru

load more comments (46 replies)