Politics

373 readers

187 users here now

For civil discussion of US politics. Be excellent to each other.

Rule 1: Posts have the following requirements:
▪️ Post articles about the US only

▪️ Title must match the article headline

▪️ Recent (Past 30 Days)

▪️ No Screenshots/links to other social media sites or link shorteners

Rule 2: Do not copy the entire article into your post. One or two small paragraphs are okay.

Rule 3: Articles based on opinion (unless clearly marked and from a serious publication-No Fox News or equal), misinformation or propaganda will be removed.

Rule 4: Posts or comments that are homophobic, transphobic, racist, sexist, ableist, will be removed.

Rule 5: Keep it civil. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a jerk. It’s not acceptable to say another user is a jerk. Cussing is fine.

Rule 6: Memes, spam, other low effort posting, reposts, advocating violence, off-topic, trolling, offensive, regarding the moderators or meta in content may be removed at any time.

USAfacts.org

The Alt-Right Playbook

Media owners, CEOs and/or board members

founded 2 years ago

MODERATORS

kersploosh

pelespirit

US couple blocked from suing Uber after crash say daughter agreed to Uber Eats terms (www.theguardian.com)

submitted 3 months ago by pelespirit to c/politics

8 comments fedilink hide all child comments

The couple added that they were “horrified” that a large corporation like Uber could “avoid being sued in a court of law by injured consumers because of contractual language buried in a dozen-page-long user agreement concerning services unrelated to the one that caused the consumers’ injuries.”

After several days and countless news stories surrounding Disney’s bid to use Disney+ terms to shield itself from a lawsuit tied to Disney World, the Hollywood giant later backtracked and dropped the legal claim, allowing the matter to proceed in court instead of through arbitration.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] pelespirit 11 points 3 months ago (1 children)

This does not seem like it could or should be legal.

[–] [email protected] 8 points 3 months ago (1 children)

It really shouldn't be. I was hoping Disney wan't going to back down so it could be dealt with in court (and ideally struck down). As it stands, it's still untested, legally, since Disney agreed to drop their fight. I'm almost positive that's why Disney backed down so that they could keep that umbrella binding arbitration clause and still hopefully use it later.

Hopefully the couple here is able to get legal help in suing and the umbrella binding arbitration clause they signed in an unrelated ToS can be struck down. That would very likely nullify Disney's as well.

[–] pelespirit 5 points 3 months ago

Last month, a New Jersey court of appeals sided with Uber against the McGintys, allowing the ride-hailing and delivery company to enforce an arbitration agreement requiring the couple to arbitrate their personal injury claims, rather than litigating them in court.

If it was a different SCOTUS, I'd say take it all the way. It's a crap shoot right now though.