revk, 22 days ago

@jik is that valid.

I mean lots of companies say they can change terms.

But this is two changes.

1. A requirement that opting out of changes needs a letter.
2. The arbitration clause.

Surely, for the first one, you have been forced in to, with no opt out, and no notice (unless that was in original terms?).

Can you email to say I opt out of the new term requiring opt outs to be posted to you. And as such I also hereby opt out of arbitration.

?

jik, 22 days ago

@revk I'm 100% certain that the previous version of the terms said they could amend them whenever they wanted, and that continuing to use the service after being notified about the change in terms indicates acceptance of the new terms.
What they're doing here is slimy but not likely to be illegal. They have an army of lawyers that made sure of that. People who don't like the new terms can delete their accounts like I did. The company doesn't care if that's inconvenient.

revk, 22 days ago

@jik yeh I mean were you notified of the change to require a posted opt out? In advance of that coming in. I mean if that was there terms why even allow and opt out?

grumpybozo, 22 days ago

@revk @jik Obviously the enforceability of those terms is jurisdiction-specific. It would be unsurprising if different places saw such machinations differently. No one will know until someone tests it.

Schrödinger’s ToS.

jik, 22 days ago

@grumpybozo @revk These are specifically the U.S. terms and they're probably enforceable in the U.S. based on current law and precedent, because our Congress is too chickenshit to ban binding arbitration clauses.