Sometimes they even get rubes to pay for the privilege of being exploited and sold off in marketable pieces, such as 23andMe. 
Binding arbitration is the frontline of technofeudalism. You are in the digital manor of the House de Arcos Dorado and thus are subject to its private courts.
How long until we see the Hamburgler doing Corvée labor as punishment?
If I understand correctly that’s totally unenforceable but the lawyer that wrote it should be put in prison either way
should be put in prison
Walled more like
lawyers should be put in prison
Yeah it’s just a way to get suckers to settle. They’ll point at that, say theyll give you some paltry some anyways but if you take us to court they’ll throw it out etc, and wash their hands of it all
Yeah because the courts lately have really given a rat’s ass about “principles” “precedent” and “rules based order”
The thing about the legal system is it’s all, every bit of it, completely made up with no rationale behind it other than vibes and aesthetics they use their words to paint to effect. I have a lot of sympathy with people who fall into that sovereign citizen nonsense, from a certain angle it’s frequently real hard for me to tell the difference between our court system and Harry Potter.
Is this why every brand is trying to force you to use an app?
This and skimming all sorts of data off your phone
Yeah. They’re spying on you and either using the intel for their own r&d, or selling it, or both.
Don’t worry, tons of paid products also require you to agree to arbitration. I bought a hard drive that had one buried in fine text.
we may have to start making excuses for the lack of terror
is there an app for that?
Even coupons read as “it’s a trap!” :akbaryelling: to me these days. I wouldnt use the stupid grocery loyalty card if it didn’t knock like 30$ off my groceries and i absolutely screamed when i used it the first time and facebook was serving ads for things i just bought by the time i got to my car.
Wait, do they mean that as per the new updated terms and service that you’re agreeing to all this even when you don’t use the app, or solely when you use the app? They’re both bad, but I’d hate to think that if I agreed to some terms and service on a phone app that I give up my rights for life even when I stop using the app.
If it’s free, you’re the product
I hate this saying because foss stuff (like lemmy) is also free, plus there’s no guarantee that your data doesn’t get harvested when you’re a paid user in proprietary apps
Regarding the second point, conditionals don’t work like that in a formal sense, they are expressing a sufficient rather than a necessary condition. A -> B can allow you to deduce B from A, and implies ~B -> ~A, but that all does not mean that you can derive A from B, i.e. it does not mean B -> A.
Put more legibly, you can be the product even when it isn’t free, but if it is free, you can be sure you are the product.
Pushing my shoehorning of formal logic even further, this inference should be understood as being within the “domain of discourse” of things offered by private companies. Air is free, but that does not somehow make you a product. Your neighbor might do something nice for you out of the kindness of their heart, that does not make you a product. If Walmart wants to give you something, it’s because they want to sell you.
That’s quite honest of them to admit that’s in there up front like that, usually it’s just in there like it’s normal, and there’s nothing you can do
Some courts see arbitration provisions as an usurpation of the court’s jurisdiction and will refuse to enforce them against consumers if the corporation is seem to be hiding them in general terms and conditions.
In other words, McDs would bury the shit out of that clause if it’s lawyers felt like if could.
An Imgur link was detected in your post. Here are links to the same location on alternative frontends that protect your privacy.
Is that in every region for McDonalds or is this only applies to their North American branches?
Whichever app gets me more free coffee it’s the one i usually use but shit i never even considered they could get me like that.
If this is even a legal contact, would it only apply to lawsuits about transactions that took place with the app involved? Or if I slip walking into one am i no longer allowed to sue because of the app on my phone
It’s a libertarian’s wet dream
How does this effect it’s workers?
Say someone who works at McDonald’s also has the app, and then the company does something illegal. Does that mean the worker can’t sue them?
Probably not. I’d be surprised if working there doesn’t have some built in “independent arbitration” clause already.
