@meganL@mas.to
Because we have almost no consumer protections in this country

#uspol

@meganL@mas.to I've gotten three of these in three days, too.

@meganL@mas.to

indeed... unless you've fully completed sith lord training, you don't get to unilaterally change terms.

@meganL@mas.to I was very disappointed to learn that the television I purchased from Costco (an LG) isn’t really all mine, since LG feels it owns the “glass” and it mines my data by watching what I watch, even when it’s from connected devices, like a Blu-ray player from a different manufacturer. I’ve communicated this to the Costco buyers, through the technical editor of the Costco Connection magazine and was surprised by that persons quick and helpful response to my complaint. Forcing a customer to accept new terms of service after a purchase and making an opt out nearly impossible should be illegal and I will surely never buy another LG device.

@meganL@mas.to IANAL, but in my opinion, contract law is completely bullshit. The pretense is that contracts are negotiated, but that's almost never possible. Contracts are coerced, which should invalidate them if law actually meant anything. I particularly resent the fact that contracts often specifically say that you waive your rights by agreeing to them. That shouldn't be possible, especially not when it's practically impossible to negotiate terms.

There's a writer who's gone on about how he routinely rejects contracts that include binding arbitration clauses. He sneers at his audience, as if we're all too lazy to hire lawyers and fight contracts, when that's an option only for the rich, and maybe if you're lucky and in a union that actually fights it out over contract terms.

@meganL@mas.to definitely using that the next time I quit with flare.

"My terms of service have changed! The updates to section 1e, salary, and 4c, hours of availability have been put into simplified language here (link). Here's a link to my old terms of service. If you continue requesting tasks of me, you consent to my new salary of: "

@meganL@mas.to we let them. ToS are designed to protect the service provider and the service providers are the ones that set the terms we agree to. If we violate them they can terminate our service.

When a service provider makes grandiose changes to their ToS that don’t favor me, I quit or cancel their service.

You could tell your boss or loan servicer that you no longer agree to their terms but that would be risky since you need both a job and a mortgage.

It sucks 😤

@meganL@mas.to sounds like the "variable interest loan", where if rates go up, so does your mortgage. In the beginning, they promised that if rates went down, but for some reason, that never happens. The worst part, because of citizens United, they were able to avoid lowering the rates because that would negatively impact their right to profit, regardless of the ethics.

@meganL@mas.to

If a company changes the contract then they should be required by law to give a refund if the product/service is no longer what you paid for.

Otherwise (currently) it's just legalized fraud.

@meganL@mas.to they all gotta add that arbitration clause.

@meganL@mas.to I mean usually it works along the lines of if you want to keep using the thing you have to agree to the new terms or by continuing to use it, it is taken as you agreeing to the terms. You can always try to renegotiate terms in any contractual relationship, but the problem is you have no leverage. If I tell my boss I have updated my terms to be compensated +$5 an hour, they are probably going to say they are terminating the contract...

@meganL@mas.to I mean... Yes? You can refi most mortgages or pay them off whenever you want and you can always demand a raise from your boss or terminate the contract.

So it is logically consistent. Its just peak "The law, in its majestic equality, forbids the rich as well as the poor to sleep under bridges, to beg in the streets, and to steal bread".

Is there a word for that? It feels like a concept the Germans would have a word for.

@meganL@mas.to

I often think sooner or later these contracts should be defeated in court. Not holding my breath tho.

@meganL@mas.to Yes, the effectively unlimited power to update terms is an insult to contract law.

Most contracts are written by lawyers who do everything to protect their corporate clients and extend that protection in perpetuity.

But there are non-corporate contracts that do similar things - such as having auto-upgrade or unilateral-option upgrade provisions. I know I'll get flamed for mentioning it, but one of those is the open source/free-source GPL.

@meganL@mas.to
PREACH

@meganL@mas.to One of the clauses in the original contract started that they can change the contract, and you agreed to it. Probably without reading it because the T&C's will have been many thousands of lawyerly words with the important bits well hidden.

@meganL@mas.to

I’ve noticed the most common change is arbitration regarding lawsuits to stave off class action lawsuits.

But either way it seems the end ‘client’ gets extremely little, or must give up info to claim, which is hilariously ironic when the class action involved privacy violations.

The law firms get it all.

@meganL@mas.to There’s often a clause that says something akin to “we reserve the right to change TOS with zero notice and also you give us your first born” somewhere.

@meganL@mas.to I also want to know, let me know if you find answers