Outrage over ticking a checkbox? Was anything in the updated TOS worth being pissed about or are people just that fucking lazy? The article not having the exact wording of the changes but talking about the dispute resolution arbitration–that’s in every TOS for pretty much everything ever isn’t mandatory and doesn’t say you can’t sue–is a bit suspicious.
Dude already had to update the article because he misunderstood one thing already. This reads like the knee jerk reaction of a random person which belongs on a blog, and not a news article that belongs on a news outlet site.
If you can’t see that the issue is that the TOS could include anything the company wants and that disagreeing means the device I already paid for is intentionally bricked then I don’t know what to tell you.
I have a great business idea - sell a roku-like device for half the price and a .99 cent subscription fee. Then when I’ve captured the market I force them to accept draconian new terms that cost way more or I brick the device. By then it’s too late and I can suck all the money out of it from the people that can’t switch.
And if they don’t like it? Too bad; they signed away their rights to sue.
It’s a foolproof plan! As long as I don’t get shot in the street but justifiably angry customers.
They’ve always been able to do that; it’s often the very first fucking paragraph of a TOS. If you’re just now noticing it I don’t know what to tell you.
if there was actual choice involved you might have a point but it doesn’t really matter what changes when you don’t have the ability to decline.
but for the record I believe this update removed your right to legal recourse and forces you through binding arbitration, so yes, this one does have something worth being pissed about.
