Roku users around the country turned on their TVs this week to find an unpleasant surprise: The company required them to consent to new dispute resolution
Roku users around the country turned on their TVs this week to find an unpleasant surprise: The company required them to consent to new dispute resolution terms in order to access their device.
The terms, of course, include a forced arbitration agreement that prevents the user from suing or taking part in lawsuits against Roku.
This requires anyone with legal complaints to take them to Roku lawyers first, who will conduct a “Meet-and-Confer” call and then “make a fair, fact-based offer of resolution” that will no doubt be generous and thoughtful.
I try to opt out of these when I can, and after reading the terms (to which, of course, by “continuing to use” my TV, I had already agreed), I found that you could only do so by mailing a written notice to their lawyers — something I fully intended to do today.
Though in retrospect, I — and literally every single user of your company’s services — would have preferred a straightforward electronic opt-out instead of this dishonest ploy to increase friction and further coerce adoption of these terms.
Don’t delay; otherwise, when people sue them over how they held devices hostage in order to coerce them into consumer-hostile dispute resolution terms, you won’t be able to join in on the fun.
The original article contains 849 words, the summary contains 214 words. Saved 75%. I’m a bot and I’m open source!
This is the best summary I could come up with:
Roku users around the country turned on their TVs this week to find an unpleasant surprise: The company required them to consent to new dispute resolution terms in order to access their device.
The terms, of course, include a forced arbitration agreement that prevents the user from suing or taking part in lawsuits against Roku.
This requires anyone with legal complaints to take them to Roku lawyers first, who will conduct a “Meet-and-Confer” call and then “make a fair, fact-based offer of resolution” that will no doubt be generous and thoughtful.
I try to opt out of these when I can, and after reading the terms (to which, of course, by “continuing to use” my TV, I had already agreed), I found that you could only do so by mailing a written notice to their lawyers — something I fully intended to do today.
Though in retrospect, I — and literally every single user of your company’s services — would have preferred a straightforward electronic opt-out instead of this dishonest ploy to increase friction and further coerce adoption of these terms.
Don’t delay; otherwise, when people sue them over how they held devices hostage in order to coerce them into consumer-hostile dispute resolution terms, you won’t be able to join in on the fun.
The original article contains 849 words, the summary contains 214 words. Saved 75%. I’m a bot and I’m open source!