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.
I am not a lawyer, but:
Given the recent trend of corporations trying to force you to give up your legal rights, I strongly advise everyone here to check their local laws and see if this sort of forced arbitration is even legal where they live.
Just for the sake of example I’ll translate an excerpt of the local (Brazilian) Customers’ Defence Code, from 1990:
Section II. On abusive clauses.
Article 51. Contractual clauses referring to the supply of goods and services are void of full right (i.e. non-enforceable), when: […]
subsection VII - they determine the compulsory usage of arbitration.
I bet that most people around the world have similar laws protecting them. Use them or you’ll lose them.
This is true. Generally speaking, arbitration isn’t enforced (or enforceable at all) outside of the U.S. Discord knows this and explicitly states that the arbitration agreement will only apply if you are a US Resident; and any other conflicts will be subject to federal and California law. That said, they should still try to opt out if they can, if only to send a message.
That said, they should still try to opt out if they can, if only to send a message.
Yup - full agree. And I think that they should be nagging their lawmakers to actually defend their interests, instead of bowing to corporations in servitude.
(Note that my earlier comment was mostly a public service announcement, not disagreeing with you. Your point in the OP is sane and I agree with it.)
And I think that they should be nagging their lawmakers to actually defend their interests, instead of bowing to corporations in servitude.
(Above highlighted link is for US citizens.)
Edit: Just contacted my representative, and let them know my feelings about this issue.
Relevant instructions:
Opt-out. You can decline this agreement to arbitrate by emailing an opt-out notice to arbitration-opt-out<at>discord.com within 30 days of April 15, 2024 or when you first register your Discord account, whichever is later
I had to ask bing copilot how to write the opt out email. Here’s a template for everyone to use.
Subject: Opt-Out of Discord Arbitration Clause
Dear Discord Legal Team,
I am writing to formally opt out of the arbitration clause outlined in your Terms of Service. I do not wish to be bound by the arbitration provisions.
Please confirm my opt-out status via email.
Thank you for your attention to this matter.
Sincerely,
[Your Full Name]
[Your Discord Username]
Yes but No. For most people writing this kind of mail should not be a problem. However, for many different reasons it can become difficult to write such things: This mail is some kind of formal letter and alters a contract. Let’s imagine someone with a learning disability, they may be able to sign up for a online service, as they have done it many times. Writing a formal letter they may not have done many times and they cannot map past experiences the same way as a neurotypical person.
Depending on the local law this may be a reason why forced arbitration has to be opt-in: Typically the law should protect the weaker party. As the barrier for writing this letter is higher than the sign-up process, there is an argument that the chosen opt-out process of discord is targeted against some of their weakest customers.
In short, I don’t write formal documents often in my role as a software engineer.
There are any number of ways that an opt-out message could be too ambiguous to be legally interpreted. For example, if you just send the message saying “no thanks, I don’t want to use arbitration”, but forget to identify yourself in a way that is meaningful to the other party, it may not hold up in any proceedings.
For example, either your legal name or username may be required, or both, depending on whether you need to prove you are/were a user at the time of opt-out.
Specifying the confirmation is helpful as well in a normal document that someone reads.
Several other companies have made opt outs that you have to send paper mail for as a way to raise the barrier of rejection.
People are lazy. I am lazy. I asked a resource to do it for me and shared the results to help others like me. This helps reduce the barrier to people who would like to opt out but can’t be bothered to figure out how to write that email.
Citing the username alone should be enough. The email address is explicitly named for this use case only.
There is also a template on github. https://github.com/lynnpepin/arbitration-opt-out-templates/tree/main/Discord
This seems like an unreasonable provision that wouldn’t hold up in court. Companies put all kinds of unenforceable shit in their contracts.
It’s perfectly enforceable in the US. Almost every corporation uses arbitration now, because handpicked arbitrators rule in favor of the corporations 99% of the time. All completely outside of the public legal system, all completely secret, all completely legal and allowed.
Freest* country on earth baby!
* Free to fuck the working class, that is.
Sounds like something John Oliver ought to cover.
(And, yeah, I know he’s mentioned it in episodes dedicated to other things, but an episode specifically about forced arbitration would be cool.)
It’s also possible to use it against them though. The twist on arbitration is that the company has to pay for the arbiter win or lose. If a bunch of people opt to use it for a relatively minor issue, it’s more expensive for them than a regular lawsuit even if they do win.
Even for individual stuff, it can be nice. I had a car dealership try to fuck me over. I looked into the arbitration clause, found the arbiters they used, and found out it was going to cost the dealership $4,000 to go to the arbiter over a $1,500 dispute. If I won, I’d get my repair and they’d lose $4,000. If I lost, I wouldn’t get my repair, and they’d lose $4,000.
When I explained that they did the repair for free.
You will be happy to know that modern EULAs now have provisions against mass arbitration and bind you to a “class action” style arbitration.
I honestly don’t understand how any of this is legal considering they can’t prove you agreed to anything at all. I know my family members have agreed to junk while visiting my house and I don’t know what account and where.
My “you cannot sue me for anything illegal ive done” clause is making people ask a lot of questions about illegal things that ive done that are answered by my “you cannot zue me for anything illegal ive done” clause
Am I right in thinking this only applies to US users?
It wouldn’t surprise me if that were the case, US doesn’t seem to be very consumer-friendly.
