this post was submitted on 31 Mar 2024

527 points (98.7% liked)

Technology

58712 readers

4121 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.

Our Rules

Follow the lemmy.world rules.
Only tech related content.
Be excellent to each another!
Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
Politics threads may be removed.
No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots

founded 1 year ago

MODERATORS

[email protected]

527

New Discord TOS binds you to forced arbitration - Opt-Out Now (discord.com)

submitted 6 months ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]

78 comments fedilink hide all child comments

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 [email protected] 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.

(page 2) 37 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old

[–] [email protected] 41 points 6 months ago (12 children)

Am I right in thinking this only applies to US users?

load more comments (12 replies)

[–] [email protected] 13 points 6 months ago

I smell Discord about to do a Reddit thing.

[–] [email protected] 24 points 6 months ago (5 children)

So Matrix exodus? Please?

load more comments (5 replies)

[–] [email protected] 55 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago) (3 children)

Relevant instructions:

Opt-out. You can decline this agreement to arbitrate by emailing an opt-out notice to arbitration-opt-outdiscord.com within 30 days of April 15, 2024 or when you first register your Discord account, whichever is later

I had to ask bing copilot how to write the opt out email. Here’s a template for everyone to use.

Subject: Opt-Out of Discord Arbitration Clause

Dear Discord Legal Team,

I am writing to formally opt out of the arbitration clause outlined in your Terms of Service. I do not wish to be bound by the arbitration provisions.

Please confirm my opt-out status via email.

Thank you for your attention to this matter.

Sincerely,
[Your Full Name]
[Your Discord Username]

[–] [email protected] 18 points 6 months ago (1 children)

Citing the username alone should be enough. The email address is explicitly named for this use case only.

load more comments (1 replies)

[–] [email protected] 26 points 6 months ago (3 children)

Why did you have to ask copilot to write that simple email...?

[–] [email protected] 12 points 6 months ago (1 children)

Yes but No. For most people writing this kind of mail should not be a problem. However, for many different reasons it can become difficult to write such things: This mail is some kind of formal letter and alters a contract. Let's imagine someone with a learning disability, they may be able to sign up for a online service, as they have done it many times. Writing a formal letter they may not have done many times and they cannot map past experiences the same way as a neurotypical person.

Depending on the local law this may be a reason why forced arbitration has to be opt-in: Typically the law should protect the weaker party. As the barrier for writing this letter is higher than the sign-up process, there is an argument that the chosen opt-out process of discord is targeted against some of their weakest customers.

load more comments (1 replies)

load more comments (2 replies)

load more comments (1 replies)

[–] [email protected] 4 points 6 months ago

Opting out may be the safe way. But I have to wonder if that clause would be binding. ToS can't overrule law.

[–] [email protected] 10 points 6 months ago (1 children)

When I opt out, do they delete or lock my account?

[–] [email protected] 17 points 6 months ago (1 children)

No, not according to the current wording of the ToS. It only removes you from the arbitration requirement, but still retains all other sections of the ToS and allows you to keep your account.

If they do choose to terminate you, it will make for a very interesting PR news cycle for them.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 6 months ago

Sounds like good motivation for me to check out Matrix if they do.

[–] [email protected] 35 points 6 months ago (1 children)

Is this opt-out applicable to EU/UK users?

[–] [email protected] 62 points 6 months ago (1 children)

No. United States citizens only. Because we don't have a functioning legal system here.

[–] [email protected] 24 points 6 months ago (2 children)

It would be wise to put in the post title whether a piece of news applies worldwide or US-wide, because some of us aren't good guessers.

load more comments (2 replies)

[–] [email protected] 88 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago) (2 children)

I am not a lawyer, but:

Given the recent trend of corporations trying to force you to give up your legal rights, I strongly advise everyone here to check their local laws and see if this sort of forced arbitration is even legal where they live.

Just for the sake of example I'll translate an excerpt of the local (Brazilian) Customers' Defence Code, from 1990:

Section II. On abusive clauses.

Article 51. Contractual clauses referring to the supply of goods and services are void of full right (i.e. non-enforceable), when: [...]

subsection VII - they determine the compulsory usage of arbitration.

I bet that most people around the world have similar laws protecting them. Use them or you'll lose them.

[–] [email protected] 39 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago) (1 children)

This is true. Generally speaking, arbitration isn't enforced (or enforceable at all) outside of the U.S. Discord knows this and explicitly states that the arbitration agreement will only apply if you are a US Resident; and any other conflicts will be subject to federal and California law. That said, they should still try to opt out if they can, if only to send a message.

[–] [email protected] 7 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago) (1 children)

That said, they should still try to opt out if they can, if only to send a message.

Yup - full agree. And I think that they should be nagging their lawmakers to actually defend their interests, instead of bowing to corporations in servitude.

(Note that my earlier comment was mostly a public service announcement, not disagreeing with you. Your point in the OP is sane and I agree with it.)

load more comments (1 replies)

[–] [email protected] 49 points 6 months ago (1 children)

This seems like an unreasonable provision that wouldn't hold up in court. Companies put all kinds of unenforceable shit in their contracts.

[–] [email protected] 30 points 6 months ago (9 children)

It's perfectly enforceable in the US. Almost every corporation uses arbitration now, because handpicked arbitrators rule in favor of the corporations 99% of the time. All completely outside of the public legal system, all completely secret, all completely legal and allowed.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 6 months ago

Citation?

[–] [email protected] 8 points 6 months ago (1 children)

Sounds like something John Oliver ought to cover.

(And, yeah, I know he's mentioned it in episodes dedicated to other things, but an episode specifically about forced arbitration would be cool.)

[–] [email protected] 9 points 6 months ago (1 children)

Something from Legal Eagle would be nice too.

[–] [email protected] -1 points 6 months ago (1 children)

Gotta be honest about my experience with Legal Eagle. One of the first videos I ever saw of his contained an error. (Sonny Bono had nothing to do with the Copyright Act of 1976. Bono wasn't in congress until 1995. Legal Eagle is confusing the Copyright Act of 1976 with the "Sonny Bono" Copyright Term Extension Act which was passed in 1998.)

And maybe it's just serendipitous that one of the first videos of his that I watched contained an error that I was able to identify immediately. And maybe the vast majority of his videos aren't riddled with errors. But I'm no expert on law and he's supposed to be an expert on law, and given that one of the first few facts I even heard him speak was one I could immediately identify as incorrect, it made me concerned.

Like if I had no expertise in Chemistry beyond my high-school class 20 years ago and was able to correct someone on YouTube who claims to hold a Ph.D. in Chemistry and claims to have worked as a chemical engineer at Dow Chemical for the last 20 years that "no, actually oxygen isn't a noble gas. Maybe you're thinking of neon? It's just two to the right on the periodic table from oxygen."