Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Arbitration Everywhere, Stacking the Deck of Justice

nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 139 posts

Re: Arbitration Everywhere, Stacking the Deck of Justice

#71

Post by lobster_johnson »

djcapelis wrote: post #40
makecheck wrote: post #13

It's not just the length of the initial contract, it's the lack of a sane "diff" system. Even if someone is willing and able to read a 44 page contract the first time, the next time version 1.0.1 of something comes out you are generally given a 44.5 page contract to re-agree to. "Somewhere" in there, they changed something; good luck figuring it out. So even if the version you read gave you permission to sue, the ame…

I get to have this experience with one of my banks. And all I need to do to stay updated with the terms is click watch on the github repo. It's the way things should be. https://github.com/SimpleFinance/policies

Simple looks incredible. Is it as great as it looks?

Re: Arbitration Everywhere, Stacking the Deck of Justice

#72

Post by nitrogen »

jcfrei wrote: post #41
makecheck wrote: post #13

It's not just the length of the initial contract, it's the lack of a sane "diff" system. Even if someone is willing and able to read a 44 page contract the first time, the next time version 1.0.1 of something comes out you are generally given a 44.5 page contract to re-agree to. "Somewhere" in there, they changed something; good luck figuring it out. So even if the version you read gave you permission to sue, the ame…

Why doesn't somebody just create a git repository with contracts from major companies and push changes whenever they appear? Link to a subreddit that discusses said changes and voilà you get a little more transparency. Or am I missing something?

Contracts are probably subject to copyright, which means the DMCA could shut down such a repo.

Re: Arbitration Everywhere, Stacking the Deck of Justice

#73

Post by marcosdumay »

nickff wrote: post #51
makecheck wrote: post #13

It's not just the length of the initial contract, it's the lack of a sane "diff" system. Even if someone is willing and able to read a 44 page contract the first time, the next time version 1.0.1 of something comes out you are generally given a 44.5 page contract to re-agree to. "Somewhere" in there, they changed something; good luck figuring it out. So even if the version you read gave you permission to sue, the ame…

What if arbitration clauses are not a problem at all? There is a great deal of contradictory evidence with respect to whether arbitration is more or less favorable to consumers and employees (though it is definitely very bad for class-action lawyers). But even if we assume for the purpose of argument that consumers always lose disputes which are arbitrated, they may be willing to make that trade in exchange for reduc…

Well, no, society can no accept that people wave their basic rights away on a contract, even if those people think it's a good deal.

Slavery waits on the end of this route.

Re: Arbitration Everywhere, Stacking the Deck of Justice

#74

Post by icebraining »

ende wrote: post #59
thrownaway2424 wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Some states have this. In Texas for example there is a statewide standard residential lease contract. When you rent property in Texas you know what you're getting into.

Ive been trying to think of an effective way of regulating these sorts of contacts through legislation, and what you're describing seems like the simplest route. Simply have the public draft the standard contractual templates on behalf of consumers/employees/tenants that companies/employers/landlords are constrained to use.

Unless there's any reason to think the corps would have any less influence on that than they have on the laws that allow them to get people to waive their rights to sue - and why would they? - that sounds like a great way to prevent customers from escaping abusive conditions.

As a good example, the aforementioned Texas agreement seems to have a clause that states that the landlord can enter the property at any time without previous notice. Preventing the landlord from giving up that right is not a good thing.

Re: Arbitration Everywhere, Stacking the Deck of Justice

#75

Post by morninj »

BlackFly wrote: post #26
m_fayer wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Most consumers... They simply sign without reading... You seem to be implying that many people on HN do read them, and if that's the case, I would be very surprised. I certainly don't. There's frequently a new EULA I have to consent to when I update iOS, or iTunes, or some app, or sign into a cloud console, and the list goes on. If I read all of them it would probably add up to a good workday every week. I'm willing…

I edit the HTML on most end user agreements I sign to read, "I disagree and waive no rights," then I click that button. I wonder in what sense these agreements are enforceable when they cannot prove that people actually agreed with them? Hard copies of contracts are kept for a reason, I always assumed.

Unfortunately, changing the text on your end has no legal effect. It's not a contract unless the other party agrees to your change.

Re: Arbitration Everywhere, Stacking the Deck of Justice

#77

Post by mikeash »

morninj wrote: post #75
BlackFly wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I edit the HTML on most end user agreements I sign to read, "I disagree and waive no rights," then I click that button. I wonder in what sense these agreements are enforceable when they cannot prove that people actually agreed with them? Hard copies of contracts are kept for a reason, I always assumed.

Unfortunately, changing the text on your end has no legal effect. It's not a contract unless the other party agrees to your change.

Turning into "not a contract" is a legal effect, though, and typically it's the desired one.

When there's a EULA or similar, the company is trying to form a contract with you, usually with lots of unfair terms.

If replacing the text with your own and clicking a button that you renamed from Agree to Disagree voids the whole thing, well, mission accomplished.

There would only be a problem if the law says that not only does your modification not form a contract, but that you acted in such bad faith that you actually still somehow agreed to the original contract.

Re: Arbitration Everywhere, Stacking the Deck of Justice

#78

Post by Imagenuity »

lobster_johnson wrote: post #71
djcapelis wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I get to have this experience with one of my banks. And all I need to do to stay updated with the terms is click watch on the github repo. It's the way things should be. https://github.com/SimpleFinance/policies

Simple looks incredible. Is it as great as it looks?

Simple is terrific. I've been using it for about a year and 1/2. If you are already used to paying all your bills online, then this is right for you.

Re: Arbitration Everywhere, Stacking the Deck of Justice

#79

Post by vinceguidry »

Dispute resolution is a problem where there are always more disputes to resolve than there are resources to do them adequately. There's a reason lawsuits are the exclusive domain of the wealthy, because if we let everyone use the system, it would collapse under its own weight.

The right way to solve resource allocation problems is through the market which inevitably makes tradeoffs. Arbitration is just such a market solution. What's nice about market solutions is that we can regulate them. But it takes a long time to know what the regulations should be. Until then it's buyer beware.

Re: Arbitration Everywhere, Stacking the Deck of Justice

#80

Post by jellicle »

makecheck wrote: post #13

It's not just the length of the initial contract, it's the lack of a sane "diff" system. Even if someone is willing and able to read a 44 page contract the first time, the next time version 1.0.1 of something comes out you are generally given a 44.5 page contract to re-agree to. "Somewhere" in there, they changed something; good luck figuring it out. So even if the version you read gave you permission to sue, the ame…

Or we could just regulate sane minimums and then not have to worry about it at all.
Post reply on HN