I don't understand how it's legal for a company to materially change their terms of service, but not allow you to cancel out of the contract if you disagree.
In europe, afair, whenever a contract is changed to be worse for a party, that party has the right to cancel it right then and there without additional fees.
It's definitely the case in Germany for all insurances, electricity and other utilities, etc - they have long cancellation periods, but if the contract changes to your detriment (usually any sort of price increase), you're allowed to cancel immediately. It's even required that they remind you of that right in the same notification as the price increase.
In Europe companies are obligated to intercept and scan images anyway, so you can't escape Adobe's new spyware terms by switching vendors; they'll all have the same ToS provision.
Are you talking about possible future regulations that have not yet come into force? Are you aware that many drafts are very unrealistic and will never come into force?
> Can I ask you to ask things more civilly please? HN is not a classless insult place like Reddit.
Please, I completely responded in your tone. Also, there was no personal attack, I merely called out that what you wrote was not correct.
Yes, trending. First, you don't refer to that, Secondly, as my sibling say, this is not in effect.
All in all, your comment was indeed ignorant and did not even make a note to support why you would say that. I would also ask you to please keep that commentary on reddit.
Edit: seems like I am not the only one who thinks you comment is indeed classless given the other answers and the very gray text color.
And lastly, please don't abuse the flagging system.
This is just a draft though, right? Not actual legislation. So while still worrying, I think your post was inaccurate - it may be the case in the future, if things go poorly. But it isn't the case right now.
Terms of service are full of terms that aren't legal in many jurisdiction, they're written brodadly and assuming that any ambiguity is in favor of the company so that they have the best possible position to argue from if anything has to be decided in court or arbitration.
The same is true in the US. The catch, of course, is that you’d have to sue if they don’t let you out, and most people don’t have the time, will, or means to do that.
Yep, so after a few years of litigation and hours of time filling out forms on your state’s awful judicial portal (hopefully correctly!) you might stand a chance at a judgement. Then you can spend more time going back to court when they don’t pay, talking about time payment plans, etc. Maybe they’ll pay some of it, maybe not. Then they move to another state and you need to get your judgement domesticated there (with an in-person visit). Also, remember to keep renewing that judgement or it goes bye-bye!
Remember that the goal of the defendant is to exhaust the plaintiff, and cause them to spend more time than the judgement is worth. This is how the small claims system works.
> Yep, so after a few years of litigation and hours of time filling out forms on your state’s awful judicial portal (hopefully correctly!) you might stand a chance at a judgement
Do you have any examples of states where it takes hours of filling out forms for a small claims case?
The ones I've seen have been pretty simple.
California asks for plaintiff contact information, defendant contact information, how much money plaintiff is asking for and why the plaintiff believes they are owed that, the date that happened and how they calculated the amount, whether or not you've asked the defendant to pay you, a multiple choice question on which geographical aspect of the case takes place within the territory covered by the particular courthouse where you are filing, the zip code of the place that aspect of the case took place if you know it, whether or not the case is about an attorney-client fee dispute, if you are suing a public entity, if you've files more than 12 other small claims with the last 12 months in California, and if you claim is for more than $2500 and if is if you understand that you cannot file more than two small claims above $2500 in a single year.
California's is one of the more involved ones that I've seen.
Washington is pretty just much name the parties, how much you think you are owed, what it is owed for (checklist with categories like faulty workmanship, merchandise, rent, property damage, and a line to write in something else), and explanation of the reason for the claim.
It is. And someone will certainly make it happen. But most people don’t even know where their local small claims courts are, much less how to make a case, and lawyers cost money, and that is where most people end the conversation.
Yes, you can represent yourself and win, but it’s a lot of time, effort, and money (because time is money).
Someone will do this, and it will be great precedent. But most people will simply accept it because they don’t have the time or means.
Avoid class action and take them to small claims court or simply backcharge them and let your credit card handle it. Either way, they lose a lot more than a class action that will take years and get you nothing.
