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 wonder how long until they inform us about a data breach.
A TOS isn’t legally binding.
That’s false.
Any contract is legally binding… except for the parts that go against the law.
I’d suggest consulting a lawyer knowledgeable of your particular jurisdiction, before deciding which part may or may not be binding.
Any contract is legally binding
Exactly. And a TOS is not a contract.
If you go to law definitions, contracts have a number of requirements to be such, of which to my knowledge a TOS fails two (Negotiability and Certainty).
IANAL, check with your local lawyer, but AFAIK…
ToS are a “generic contract”, where a single entity proposes the same contract to multiple parties.
Negotiability, or more precisely offer and acceptance, are achieved by the simple “take it or leave it”. The requirement is that there needs to be an option, it doesn’t need to be one to change parts of the document.
Certainty is usually achieved by adding a partial nullifying clause, so any ambiguous parts get automatically trimmed.
Thx for the reminder to get to deleting my discord accs
Another company wants to skip liability. https://odysee.com/@rossmanngroup:a/pixel-phones-come-w-forced-arbitration-a:9
deleted by creator
I think they’re only worried about U.S class action. Don’t think American companies really care about the legality anywhere else
They do. See what happened with EU’s GDPR and DMA, or how they bend over backwards to make China-only versions.
Companies operating in any “anywhere”, need to follow the law of the land, or close shop there.
Only reason Discord has “a shop” in EU is for tax evasion. It’s a P.O Box at Schipol airport. I really don’t think they care very much.
Rather the opposite.
Every business selling to EU citizens, is required to charge them the corresponding VAT, then forward it to the citizen’s country. Doing otherwise, would be tax evasion.
If they closed shop, they’d risk getting hit with import duties, or directly get blocked in the EU. Not following EU’s rules, would get them hit with fines, which they’d have to choose to either pay, or get their shop closed down, with the same consequences.
I know the US likes to tax its citizens even when they don’t reside in the US, but most countries like to tax anyone residing or doing business on their territory.
Yeah, good luck enforcing that contract in any country that has a legal concept of “automatically unfair contract terms”.
the arbitration terms are explicitly stated to be US only. unfortunately the US is not a country with a functioning legal system
What are you talking about, the US has the best legal system money can buy
You said it pal, not me ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
‘Money.exe’ not found. It may be corrupted or you don’t have administration right.
Can you include that in the title and description please? It’s a pretty important detail to leave out!
How are we supposed to opt out? By deleting our accounts?
If you read the post, it says you can opt out by emailing your username to discord
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
deleted by creator
Does that applies to accounts registered in the US but now I’m not physically lived in?
We need a Federated FOSS Discord alternative built to work with the activity pub protocol.
No we don’t. We need small instances, each with their own specific topics and communities that DO NOT share your information far and wide, like the fediverse does. I don’t think the fediverse model is the way forward.
Or… how about we just treat the fediverse like it is a…. public forum…. and use different tools for having more private conversations?
But by not sharing anything, you’d loose users who don’t want to sign up for each instance individually. I think it would be a good way to be able to sign up once on one instance and then being able to use all other instances available, but the chats etc of one instance being private to the instance itself.
True, and then there’s the other side of the coin. Federation exposes you to trolls, nazis, and doxxing.
Isn’t there already one? Thought that was what Revolt was
not federated
Is open source though, federation can always come later
That said I’m not sure why they didn’t use matrix from the start
Federation isn’t something that can be added later. This has to be part of the protocol from the start.
Anything “can” be added later… as for the effort required, that’s a separate matter.
I also wonder why they didn’t use Matrix from the start. Right now, with group chats, spaces, threads, and audio/video streaming, bridges, bots, etc. while allowing E2EE, Matrix already seems to be better than Discord.
I thought Lemmy started without federation?
Has anybody made a matrix app that looks like a discord clone? That sounds easier since the federated rich text chat is already made, the current clients don’t really appeal to the discord crowd.
Cinny is the closest to Discord in terms of UI, it even has a feature where you can show subspaces within a space as if they’re categories of a Discord server.
We welcome anyone back to IRC
A few years ago, wasn’t there a company (maybe it was uber?) that was being overwhelmed by arbitration fee’s for a large number of arbitration cases? I forget the outcome, but it may be due to their agreement stipulating they would cover arbitration fees. Either way, forced arbitration needs to go.
Do I need to worry about this not being in the US? I’m wary of the way I word my opt out incase it causes me some issues down the line
No, this is for US only. Where corporations are permitted to abuse the market and the law (or lack thereof).
