Live data from Hacker News

23andMe updates their TOS to force binding arbitration

stackdiary.com

111–120 of 252 posts

Re: 23andMe updates their TOS to force binding arbitration

#111
post #25

Have terms of service ever successfully been challenged for failing to meet the requirements of a contract? Like if I make an Uber account for my mom, and she uses it, at what point is she bound by the ToS?

Not that I'm aware, but happy to stand corrected. They pretend they are enforceable, we pretend to abide by them.

Re: 23andMe updates their TOS to force binding arbitration

#112
post #110
post #7

The more TOS I read through, the more it seems we need a "common law" solution. (I use the term "common law" loosely here) Something like a couple of pre-defined categories for software services (e.g. info provider, social network, real-world interface) with pre-set rules (e.g. the client cannot attempt to break the social network; the owner of the social network cannot re-sell data to a third party). We have somethi…

Until your country actually implements laws like these and Hacker News starts complaining that it is "business hostile" and "stifling innovation". There are plenty of European countries which already have some laws like these. When I buy something on the internet, I have 14 days to return it if I don't like it. I am guaranteed to have a reasonable warranty. Companies cannot abuse my personal data without explicit con…

> There are plenty of European countries which already have some laws like these. When I buy something on the internet, I have 14 days to return it if I don't like it. I am guaranteed to have a reasonable warranty. Companies cannot abuse my personal data without explicit consent. And indeed, forced binding arbitrage is also not allowed.

This is because of EU laws. A lot of the best laws we have in European countries are because of EU laws.

I also suspect that this clause isn't valid in most of Europe.

Re: 23andMe updates their TOS to force binding arbitration

#113

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I fully agree with everything you say, but until legislation is enforced you can hardly blame a company for capitalizing on the lack of privacy laws (you can still hate them). Point is, start demanding legislation around data privacy and security to anyone who will listen.

You can absolutely blame a company for unethical but legal actions.

Exactly what will that achieve?

Re: 23andMe updates their TOS to force binding arbitration

#114
post #110
post #7

The more TOS I read through, the more it seems we need a "common law" solution. (I use the term "common law" loosely here) Something like a couple of pre-defined categories for software services (e.g. info provider, social network, real-world interface) with pre-set rules (e.g. the client cannot attempt to break the social network; the owner of the social network cannot re-sell data to a third party). We have somethi…

Until your country actually implements laws like these and Hacker News starts complaining that it is "business hostile" and "stifling innovation". There are plenty of European countries which already have some laws like these. When I buy something on the internet, I have 14 days to return it if I don't like it. I am guaranteed to have a reasonable warranty. Companies cannot abuse my personal data without explicit con…

Australia also has very strong consumer protection laws. I'm not an Aussie, but many come here and tell us about it. It doesn't seem to scare companies away from doing B2C business in Australia.

Re: 23andMe updates their TOS to force binding arbitration

#115
Can someone please confirm: Is forced binding arbitrage allowed in EU/EEA/EFTA?

If no, what happens if you are a customer from France or Germany? It seems like this contract is totally unenforceable!

A bit deeper, I really wish it was illegal to create intentionally unenforceable contracts. Too many companies create these incredibly scary contracts that no mortal human can understand, let alone know if unenforceable.

Re: 23andMe updates their TOS to force binding arbitration

#116
post #86
post #7

The more TOS I read through, the more it seems we need a "common law" solution. (I use the term "common law" loosely here) Something like a couple of pre-defined categories for software services (e.g. info provider, social network, real-world interface) with pre-set rules (e.g. the client cannot attempt to break the social network; the owner of the social network cannot re-sell data to a third party). We have somethi…

by law in california you can opt-out of binding arbitration in any contract for a short time after signing it. (30? 60? days? i am not a lawyer)

This is interesting. Can anyone provide more details?

Re: 23andMe updates their TOS to force binding arbitration

#117
post #110
post #7

The more TOS I read through, the more it seems we need a "common law" solution. (I use the term "common law" loosely here) Something like a couple of pre-defined categories for software services (e.g. info provider, social network, real-world interface) with pre-set rules (e.g. the client cannot attempt to break the social network; the owner of the social network cannot re-sell data to a third party). We have somethi…

Until your country actually implements laws like these and Hacker News starts complaining that it is "business hostile" and "stifling innovation". There are plenty of European countries which already have some laws like these. When I buy something on the internet, I have 14 days to return it if I don't like it. I am guaranteed to have a reasonable warranty. Companies cannot abuse my personal data without explicit con…

> When I buy something on the internet, I have 14 days to return it if I don't like it

One (unintended?) consequence of this is that as a consumer, you cannot buy an annual digital motorway toll pass in Austria with immediate validity. The earliest your pass can start from is 18 days from the date of purchase.

"Customers can withdraw from the online purchase of a digital vignette within 14 days. Taking into account a further three-day period for mail, your digital 2-months and annual vignette is only valid from the 18th day after purchase."

https://www.asfinag.at/en/toll/vignette/digital-vignette/

How glorious that it's necessary to include 3 extra days to cover the potential delivery time of postal mail in the event of a return for an entirely digital product :/

The workaround for this - which I discovered last time I drove a rental car in Austria - is to tick the box that says "I'm a business, not a consumer". You don't need to prove you're a business, just to tick the box. Consumer protection nullified, can purchase product valid immediately....

Re: 23andMe updates their TOS to force binding arbitration

#118

Can someone please confirm: Is forced binding arbitrage allowed in EU/EEA/EFTA? If no, what happens if you are a customer from France or Germany? It seems like this contract is totally unenforceable! A bit deeper, I really wish it was illegal to create intentionally unenforceable contracts. Too many companies create these incredibly scary contracts that no mortal human can understand, let alone know if unenforceable.

No, not if the customer is a individual ("consumer").

Directive 2013/11/EU, article 10 states "Member States shall ensure that an agreement between a consumer and a trader to submit complaints to an ADR entity is not binding on the consumer if it was concluded before the dispute has materialised and if it has the effect of depriving the consumer of his right to bring an action before the courts for the settlement of the dispute." https://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=OJ:L:...

This does not preclude the customer signing away their rights after the dispute arose, as part of a settlement agreement for instance.

Re: 23andMe updates their TOS to force binding arbitration

#119

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Where did you get the arbitrationoptout@23andme from? The email I get says to "please notify us", and the link is a mail-to legal@23andme.com. That's the email I used yesterday to say I do not agree with the new terms.

The article points out that the mass-sent email used a different email address than that of the ToS. arbitrationoptout@23andme is the email in the ToS. Jury is out whether this hyperlink mix-up was intentional...

Confirm here: https://www.theverge.com/2023/12/6/23991132/warning-23andmes...

    23andMe is only giving users 30 days from when they receive the email to opt out of the new policy, which you can do by contacting arbitrationoptout@23andme.com.

Re: 23andMe updates their TOS to force binding arbitration

#120
post #26

My mother innocently used this service, and filled out the form identifying all relatives by name. The results she received were entirely unenlightening, 50% of my DNA is now in their sketchy database, and I have no way to opt-out of anything. I truly despise this organization.

This 2021 New Yorker article: How Your Family Tree Could Catch a Killer ( https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2021/11/22/how-your-famil... ) was incredibly illuminating and changed my perspective on our sense of privacy. With a surprisingly small fraction of the world's population sequenced, we can still match a sample to a person whose sequence we don't have . To quote the article: "Genetic genealogy, it turned out,…

This is essentially how the Golden State Killer[1] was caught.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joseph_James_DeAngelo

Post reply on HN